{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_14294/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_14294","id":"gutenberg_14294","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/14294","summary":null,"tags":["Category: History - British","Category: History - Modern (1750+)","Category: History - Other","Christianity and other religions","India -- Civilization","India -- Religion"],"text":"NEW IDEAS IN INDIA DURING THE NINETEENTH CENTURY\n\n_A Study of Social, Political, and Religious Developments_\n\n\nBY THE\nREV. JOHN MORRISON, M.A., D.D.\nLATE PRINCIPAL, THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY'S INSTITUTION,\nCHURCH OF SCOTLAND MISSION, CALCUTTA, AND\nMEMBER OF SENATE OF CALCUTTA UNIVERSITY\n\n\nLONDON\nMACMILLAN AND CO., LIMITED\nNEW YORK: THE MACMILLAN COMPANY\n1907\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE\n\n\nThe substance of the following volume was delivered in the form of\nlectures in the Universities of Glasgow and Edinburgh during Session\n1904-5. As \"Alexander Robertson\" lecturer in the University of Glasgow,\nthe writer dealt with the new religious ideas that have been impressing\nthemselves upon India during the British period of her history. As\n\"Gunning\" lecturer in the University of Edinburgh, the writer dwelt more\nupon the new social and political ideas. The popular belief of Hindu\nIndia is, that there are no new ideas in India, that nought in India\nsuffers change, and that as things are, so they have always been. Even\neducated Indians are reluctant to admit that things have changed and\nthat their community has had to submit to education and\nimprovement--that suttee, for example, was ever an honoured institution\nin the province now most advanced. But to the observant student of the\nIndian people, the _evolution_ of India is almost as noteworthy as the\nmore apparent rigidity. There is a flowering plant common in Northern\nIndia, and chiefly notable for the marvel of bearing flowers of\ndifferent colours upon the same root. The Hindus call it \"the sport of\nKrishna\"; Mahomedans, \"the flower of Abbas\"; for the plant is now\nincorporate with both the great religions of India, and even with their\nfar-back beginnings. Yet it is a comparatively recent importation into\nIndia; it is only the flower known in Britain as \"the marvel of Peru,\"\nand cannot have been introduced into India more than three hundred years\nago. It was then that the Portuguese of India and the Spaniards of Peru\nwere first in touch within the home lands in Europe. In our own day may\nbe seen the potato and the cauliflower from Europe establishing\nthemselves upon the dietary of Hindus in defiance of the punctiliously\northodox. _\u00c0 fortiori_--strange that we should reason thus from the\ntrifling to the fundamental, yet not strange to the Anglo-Indian and the\nIndian,--_\u00e0 fortiori_, we shall not be surprised to find novel and alien\nideas taking root in Indian soil.\n\nSeeds, we are told, may be transported to a new soil, either wind-borne\nor water-borne, carried in the stomachs of birds, or clinging by their\nburs to the fur of animals. In the cocoa-nut, botanists point out, the\ncocoa-nut palms possess a most serviceable ark wherein the seed may be\nfloated in safety over the sea to other shores. It is thus that the\ncocoa-nut palm is one of the first of the larger plants to show\nthemselves upon a new coral reef or a bare volcano-born island. Into\nIndia itself, it is declared, the cocoa-nut tree has thus come over-sea,\nnor is yet found growing freely much farther than seventy miles from the\nshore. One of the chief interests of the subject before us is that the\nseeds of the new ideas in India during the past century are so clearly\nwater-borne. They are the outcome of British influence, direct or\nindirect.\n\nHere are true test and evidence of the character of British influence\nand effort, if we can distil from modern India some of the new ideas\nprevailing, particularly in the new middle class. Where shall we find\nevidence reliable of what British influence has been? Government\nReports, largely statistical, of \"The Moral and Material Progress of\nIndia,\" are so far serviceable, but only as _crude_ material from which\nthe answer is to be distilled. Members of the Indian Civil Service, and\nothers belonging to the British Government of India, may volunteer as\nexpert witnesses regarding British influence, but they are interested\nparties; they really stand with others at the bar. The testimony of the\nmissionary is not infrequently heard, less exactly informed, perhaps,\nthan the Civil Servant's, but more sympathetic, and affording better\ntestimony where personal acquaintance with the life of the people is\nneeded. But of him too, like the Civil Servant, there is some suspicion\nthat in one sphere he holds a brief. This, indeed, may be said in favour\nof the missionary's testimony, that while the Anglo-Indian identifies\nthe missionary's standpoint with that of the native, the native\nidentifies him with the Anglo-Indian, so that probably enough he\noccupies the mean of impartiality and truth. The British merchant in\nIndia may also offer as evidence, and indeed is \"on the spot,\" and\napparently qualified by reason of his independence. But the interest of\nhis class is professedly limited to India's material progress; and of\nhis general views, we recall what Chaucer said of the politics of his\n\"merchant,\"\n\n  \"Sowninge alway th' encrees of his winning.\"\n\nAnd finally, in increasing numbers, natives of India themselves are\nclaiming to pronounce upon the effect of the British connection upon\nIndia; and yet again we feel that the proferred evidence must be\nregarded with suspicion. That Indian is exceptional indeed whose\ngeneralisations about India are based on observations and historical\nknowledge. If the Civil Servant's honour is bound up with a favourable\nverdict upon the question at issue, the educated native is as resolved\nupon the other side. Nay, truth requires one to say that at this time\nthe educated Indian is virtually pledged against acknowledging any\nindebtedness to Britain. For the reason why, we need not anticipate, but\nit is foolish to shut one's eyes to the unpleasant fact, or to hide it\nfrom the British public.\n\nWhere, then, is the testimony that is reliable? Is there nothing else\nthan the disputing, loud and long, of the six blind men of Indostan who\nwent to _see_ the Indian elephant and returned,\n\n  \"Each in his own opinion\n  Exceeding stiff and strong,\n  Though each was partly in the right,\n  And all were in the wrong!\"\n\nFrom preferred testimony of all kinds, from all affidavits, however\nhonestly sworn, we turn again to the ideas now prevailing as they\n_betray_ themselves in the lives of the people and the words that fall\nfrom their lips. Carefully studying earlier history, we ask ourselves\nwherein the new ideas differ from the ideas current in India a century\nago. Then as progress appears, or is absent, the forces at work stand\napproved or condemned. The exact historical comparison we may claim to\nbe a special feature of this book.\n\nThe writer is not ignorant of the delicacy of the historical task he has\nset himself. He claims that during the twenty years he spent in India he\nwas eager to know India and her sons, read the pamphlets and articles\nthey wrote, enjoyed constant intercourse with Indians of all classes and\nreligions, reckoned, as he still reckons, many Indians among his\nfriends. He claims that during these years it was his pleasure, as well\nas a part of his professional duty, to study the past history of India.\nIgnorance of Indian history vitiates much of the writing and oratory on\nIndian subjects. As a member of the staff of an Indian college, with six\nhundred University students, the writer claims to have had exceptional\nopportunities of entering into the thoughts of the new middle class, and\nof cross-questioning upon Indian problems. In India, students \"sit at\nthe feet\" of their professors, but let it not be assumed that the\nOriental phrase implies a stand-off superior and crouching inferior.\nNay, rather it implies the closest touch between teacher and taught. All\nseated tailor-fashion on the ground, the Indian teacher of former days\nand his disciples around him were literally as well as metaphorically in\ntouch. The modern professor, successor of the pandit or guru, enjoys\nintercourse with his students, as full and free, limited in truth only\nby his time and his temperament.\n\nJudging by the test of the new ideas in India, the writer has no\nhesitation in declaring that the British regime has been a great\nblessing to India. Likewise, whether directly inculcated or indirectly,\nsome of the best features of Christian civilisation and of the Christian\nreligion are taking hold in India and becoming naturalised. Called upon\nas \"Alexander Robertson\" lecturer in the University of Glasgow to\ndeliver a course of lectures \"in defence of the Christian faith,\" the\nwriter felt that no more effective defence could be offered than this\nhistorical survey of the naturalising in India of certain distinctive\nfeatures of the Christian religion and of the civilisation of western\nChristian lands.\n\nOf this also the writer is sure, whether he possess the qualifications\nfor the delicate task or lack them--there is a call for some one to\ninterpret Britain and India to each other. In their helpless ignorance,\nwhat wonder that Britons' views are often incomplete and distorted? On\nthe Indian side, on the other hand, the terrible anti-British feeling\nnow prevailing in India must surely be based on ignorance and\nmisunderstanding, and in part at least removable.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe Rev. Alexander Robertson, a probationer of the Free Church of\nScotland, although never in office, died at Glasgow in 1879, leaving the\nresidue of his estate for the endowment of a lectureship as aforesaid.\nAs trustees he nominated two personal friends--the Rev. J.B. Dalgety, of\nthe Abbey Church, Paisley, and James Lymburn, Esq., the librarian of\nGlasgow University. These two gentlemen made over the trust to the\nGlasgow University Court, and the writer had the honour of being\nappointed the first lecturer.\n\nThe Gunning Victoria Jubilee Lectureship in the University of Edinburgh\nwas founded by the late Dr. R.H. Gunning of Edinburgh and Rio de\nJaneiro, in the year 1889. The object of the lectureship was \"to promote\namong candidates for the ministry, and to bring out among ministers the\nfruits of study in Science, Philosophy, Languages, Antiquity, and\nSociology.\"\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\n    I. THE NEW ERA--SOME LEADING WITNESSES                             1\n\n   II. INDIAN CONSERVATISM                                            11\n\n  III. NEW SOCIAL IDEAS                                               21\n\n   IV. THE CHIEF SOLVENT OF THE OLD IDEAS                             39\n\n    V. WOMAN'S PLACE                                                  50\n\n   VI. THE TERMS WE EMPLOY                                            65\n\n  VII. NEW POLITICAL IDEAS--A UNITING INDIA                           72\n\n VIII. NEW POLITICAL IDEAS--FALSE PATRIOTISM                          88\n\n   IX. NEW RELIGIOUS IDEAS--ARE THERE ANY?                           103\n\n    X. THE NEW RELIGIOUS ORGANISATIONS OF INDIA IN THE NINETEENTH\n       CENTURY--INDIAN CHRISTIANS AND BRAHMAS                        120\n\n   XI. NEW RELIGIOUS ORGANISATIONS--[=A]RYAS AND THEOSOPHISTS        132\n\n  XII. THE NEW MAHOMEDANS                                            144\n\n XIII. HINDU DOCTRINES--HOW THEY CHANGE                              148\n\n  XIV. THE NEW THEISM                                                166\n\n   XV. JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF                                          184\n\n  XVI. JESUS CHRIST THE LODESTONE                                    194\n\n XVII. INDIAN PESSIMISM--ITS BEARING ON BELIEF IN THE HERE AND\n       HEREAFTER                                                     213\n\nXVIII. INDIAN TRANSMIGRATION AND THE CHRISTIAN HERE AND HEREAFTER    223\n\n  XIX. THE IDEAS OF SIN AND SALVATION                                239\n\n   XX. THE IDEA OF SALVATION                                         254\n\n  XXI. CONCLUSION                                                    269\n\n\n\n\nNEW IDEAS IN INDIA\n\n\nCHAPTER I\n\nTHE NEW ERA--SOME LEADING WITNESSES\n\n  \"The epoch ends, the world is still,\n  The age has talked and worked its fill;\n\n  The famous men of war have fought,\n  The famous speculators thought.\n\n    See on the cumbered plain,\n    Clearing a stage,\n    Scattering the past about,\n    Comes the New Age.\n    Bards make new poems;\n    Thinkers, new schools;\n    Statesmen, new systems;\n    Critics, new rules.\"\n\n    MATTHEW ARNOLD.\n\n\nIndia is a land of manifold interest. For the visitors who crowd thither\nevery cold season, and for the still larger number who will never see\nIndia, but have felt the glamour of the ancient land whose destiny is\nnow so strangely linked to that of our far-off and latter-day islands,\nIndia has not one but many interests. There is the interest of the\narchitectural glories of the Moghul emperors, in whose grand halls of\naudience, now deserted and merely places of show, a solitary British\nsoldier stands sentry over a visitors' book. For the great capitals of\nIndia have moved from Delhi and Agra, the old strategic points in the\ncentre of the great northern plain, to Calcutta, Bombay, Madras, and\nRangoon, new cities on the sea, to suit the later over-sea rulers of\nIndia. There is the interest of the grand organisation of the British\nGovernment, holding in its strong paternal grasp that vast continent of\nthree hundred million souls. Sometimes the sight of the letters V.R.I,\nor E.R.I. (Edwardus Rex Imperator) makes one think of the imperial\nS.P.Q.R.[1] once not unfamiliar in Britain. But this interest rather I\nwould emphasise--the penetration into the remotest jungle of the great\norganisation of the British Government is a wonderful thing. By the\ncoinage, the post-office, the railways, the administration of justice,\nthe encouragement of education, the relief of famine,--by such ways the\ngreat organisation has penetrated everywhere,--in spite of faults, the\ngreatest blessing that has come to India in her long history. Travelling\nby rail from Calcutta to Benares, the metropolis of Hinduism, situated\nupon the north bank of the sacred Ganges, we see the British rule, in\nsymbol, in the great railway bridge spanning the river. By it old India,\nself-centred, exclusive, introspective, was brought into the modern\nworld; compelled, one might say, by these great spans to admit the\nmodern world and its conveniences, in spite of protest that the railway\nbridge would pollute the sacred stream. Crossing the bridge, our eyes\nare fixed on the outstanding feature of Benares--city of hundreds of\nHindu temples. What is it? Not a Hindu temple, but a splendid Mahomedan\nmosque whose minarets overlook the Hindu city, calling the city of\nHindus to the worship of Allah. For the site of that mosque, the Moghul\nemperor Aurangzeb ruthlessly cleared away a magnificent temple most\nsacred to the Hindus. Concerning another famous Hindu temple in the same\ncity, listen to the Autobiography of another earlier Moghul emperor,\nJahangir. \"It was the belief of these people of hell [the Hindus] that a\ndead Hindu laid before the idol would be restored to life, if in his\nlife he had been a worshipper there.... I employed a confidential person\nto ascertain the truth, and as I justly supposed, the whole was detected\nto be an impudent imposture.... Throwing down the temple which was the\nscene of this imposture, with the very same materials I erected on the\nspot the great mosque, because the very name of Islam was proscribed at\nBenares, and with God's blessing it is my desire ... to fill it full of\ntrue believers.\" These things I write, not to hold up to condemnation\nthese Moghul rulers, but to point out by contrast the voluntary\ncharacter of the influence during the British and Christian period. For\nthere is in India a grander interest still than that of the British\npolitical organisation, namely, the peaceful gradual transformation of\nthe thoughts and feelings, the hopes and fears, of each individual of\nthe millions of India.\n\n[Sidenote: The nineteenth century in India--a conflict of ideas]\n\nThe real history of the past century in India has been the conflict and\ncommingling of ideas, a Homeric struggle, renewed in the nineteenth\ncentury, between the gods of Asia and Europe. Sometimes the shock of\ncollision has been heard, as when by Act of Legislature, in 1829, Suttee\nor widow-burning was put down, and, in 1891, the marriage of girls under\ntwelve; or when by order of the Executive, the sacred privacy of Indian\nhouses was violated in well-meant endeavours to stay the plague [1895-],\ngreat riots ensuing; or when an Indian of social standing has joined the\nChristian Church. At other times, like the tumbling in, unnoticed, of\nslice upon slice of the bank of a great Indian river flowing through an\nalluvial plain, opinion has silently altered, and only later observers\ndiscover that the old idea has changed. Not a hundred years ago,\nstudents of Kayasth (clerk) caste were excluded from the Sanscrit\nCollege in Calcutta. Now, without any new ordinance, they are admitted,\nas among the privileged castes, and the idea of the brotherhood of man\nhas thus made way. The silent invasion is strikingly illustrated in the\nofficial _Report on Female Education in India_, 1892 to 1897. On a map\nof India within the _Report_, the places where female education was most\nadvanced were coloured greener according to the degree of\nadvance--surely most inappropriate colouring, though that is not our\nbusiness. The map showed a strip of the greenest green all round the\nsea-coast. There the unobserved new influence came in. The _Census\nReport_ for 1901 showed the same silently obtruding influence from over\nthe sea in the case of the education of males. Many such silent changes\nmight be noted. And yet again, the most diverse ideas may be observed\nside by side in a strange chequer. In the closing years of the\nnineteenth century, the University of Calcutta accepted an endowment of\na lectureship \"to promote Sanscrit learning and Vedantic studies,\" any\nHindus without distinction of caste being eligible as lecturers; and\nthen, shortly after, agreed to the request of the first lecturer that\nnone but Hindus be admitted to the exposition of the sacred texts, thus\nexcluding the European heads of the university from a university\nlecture. Perhaps the lecturer thought himself liberal, for to men like\nhim at the beginning of the century it would have been an offence to\nread the sacred texts with Sudras or Hindus of humble castes. According\nto strict Hindu rule, only brahmans can read the sacred books.[2]\n\n[Sidenote: Indian ideas.]\n\nFor in all three spheres, social, political, and religious, the advent\nof the new age implied more or less of a conflict. India has still of\nher own a social system, political ideas, and religious ideas and\nideals. In the Indian social system, caste and the social inferiority of\nwomen stand opposed to the freedom of the individual and the equality of\nthe sexes that prevail in Great Britain, at least in greater degree. In\nthe sphere of politics, the absolutism, long familiar to the Indian\nmind, is the antithesis of the life of a citizen under a limited\nmonarchy, with party government and unfettered political criticism. In\nthe sphere of religion, the hereditary priesthood of India stands over\nagainst the British ideal of a clergy trained for their duties and\nproved in character. The Hindu conception of a religious life as a life\nof sacrificial offerings and penances, or of ecstasies, or of\nasceticism, or of sacred study, stands over against the British ideal of\nreligion in daily life and in practical philanthropies. To the Hindu,\nthe religious mood is that of ecstatic whole-hearted devotion; the\nBriton reverences as the religious mood a quiet staying intensity in\nnoble endurance or effort.\n\n[Sidenote: Testimony to the change in ideas]\n\nThe nineteenth century has witnessed a great transition in ideas and a\ngreat alteration in the social and political and religious standpoints.\nIt is easy to find manifold witness to the fact from all parts of India.\nThe biographer of the modern in ideas. Indian reformer, Malabari, a\nParsee[3] writing of a Parsee, and representing Western India, is\nimpressed by the singular fate that has destined the far-away British to\naffect India and her ideals so profoundly. Crossing to the east side of\nIndia, we seek a trustworthy witness. The well-known reformer, Keshub\nChunder Sen, a Bengali, and representative therefore of Eastern India,\ndeclares in a lecture published in 1883: \"Ever since the introduction of\nBritish power into India there has been going on a constant upheaval and\ndevelopment of the native mind,... whether we look at the mighty\npolitical changes which have been wrought by that ... wonderful\nadministrative machinery which the British Government has set in motion,\nor whether we analyse those deep national movements of _social_ and\n_moral_ reform which are being carried on by native reformers and\npatriots.\" All Indian current opinion is unanimous with the Parsee and\nthe Bengali that a great movement is in progress. The drift from the old\nmoorings is a constant theme of discourse. Let Sir Alfred Lyall, once\nhead of the United Provinces, speak for the most competent European\nobservers. \"There may be grounds for anticipating,\" he says, \"that a\nsolid universal peace and the impetus given by Europe must together\ncause such rapid intellectual expansion that India will now be carried\nswiftly through phases which have occupied long stages in the lifetime\nof other nations.\"[4] In another essay, in a more positive mood, he\nwrites of British responsibility for \"great non-Christian populations\n[in India] whose religious ideas and institutions are being rapidly\ntransformed by English law and morality.\"[5] In a third passage he even\nprophesies rashly: \"The end of simple paganism is not far distant in\nIndia.\"\n\nSir George Bird wood has also had a long Indian career, and no one\nsuspects him of pro-British bias--rather the reverse. Yet we find him\nwriting to the _Times_ in 1895 about one of the Indian provinces, as\nfollows: \"The new Bengali language and literature,\" he says, \"are the\ndirect products of our Law Courts, particularly the High Court at\nCalcutta, of Mission schools and newspaper presses and Education\nDepartments, the agents which are everywhere, not in Bengal only, giving\nif not absolute unity yet community in diversity to the peoples of\nBritish India.\" The modern literature of Bengal, he goes on to say, is\nChristian in its teaching; if not the Christianity of creed and dogma,\nyet of the mind of Christ.\n\nIt is that transition in ideas, that alteration in social, political,\nand religious standpoint which we are going to trace and illustrate.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II\n\nINDIAN CONSERVATISM\n\n  \"By the well where the bullocks go,\n  Silent and blind and slow.\"\n\n    RUDYARD KIPLING.\n\n\n[Sidenote: Indian conservatism.]\n\n[Sidenote: Is mere inertia.]\n\nBut while acknowledging the potent influences at work, and accepting\nthese representative utterances, it may yet be asked by the\nincredulous--What of the inherent conservatism, the proverbial tenacity\nof India? Is there really any perceptible and significant change to\nrecord as the outcome of the influences of the nineteenth century? Well,\nthe expression \"Indian conservatism\" is misleading. There is no Indian\nconservatism in the sense of a philosophy of politics, of society, or of\nreligion. Indian conservatism--what is it? To some extent an idealising\nof the past, the golden age of great law-givers and philosophers and\nsaints. But very much more--mere inertia and torpidity in mind and body,\na reluctance to take stock of things, and an instinctive treading in the\nold paths. \"Via trita, via tuta.\" In the path from one Indian village to\nanother may often be observed an inexplicable deviation from the\nbeeline, and then a return to the line again. It is where in some past\nyear some dead animal or some offensive thing has fallen in the path and\nlain there. Year after year, long after the cause has disappeared, the\nfeet of the villagers continue in that same deviating track. That is in\nperfect keeping with India. Or--to permit ourselves to follow up another\nnatural sequence--things may quickly begin to fit in with the deviation.\nPerhaps the first rainy season after the feet of the villagers had been\nmade to step aside, some plant was found in possession of the avoided\nspot. India-like, its right of possession was unconsciously deferred to.\nAnd then the year following, may be, one or other of the sacred fig\ntrees appeared behind the plant, and in a few years starved it out. Ten\nyears will make a banyan sapling, or a pipal, into a sturdy trunk, and\nlo, by that time, in some visitation of drought or cholera or smallpox,\nor because some housewife was childless, coloured threads are being tied\nupon the tree or some rude symbolic painting put upon it. Then an\nascetic comes along and seats himself in its shade, and now, already, a\nsacred institution has been established that it would raise a riot to\ntry to remove.\n\nVisitors to Allahabad go to see the great fort erected upon the bank of\nthe River Jumna by the Mahomedan emperor, Akbar. One of the sights of\nthe fort, strange to tell, is the underground Hindu temple of \"The\nUndying Banyan Tree,\" to which we descend by a long flight of steps.\nSuch a sacred banyan tree as we have imagined, Akbar found growing there\nupon the slope of the river bank when he was requiring the ground for\nhis fort. The undying banyan tree is now a stump or log, but it or a\npredecessor was visited by a Chinese pilgrim to Allahabad in the seventh\ncentury A.D. Being very tolerant, instead of cutting down the tree,\nAkbar built a roof over it and filled up the ground all round to the\nlevel he required. And still through the gateway of the fort and down\nunderground, the train of pilgrims passes as of old to where the banyan\ntree is still declared to grow. Such is Indian conservatism, undeterred\nby any thought of incongruity. Benares is crowded with examples of the\nsame unconscious tenacity. I have spoken of the ruthless levelling of\nHindu temples in Benares in former days to make way for Mahomedan\nmosques. Near the gate of Aurangzeb's mosque a strange scene meets the\neye. Where the road leads to the mosque, and with no Hindu temple\nnowadays in sight, are seated a number of Hindu ashes-clad ascetics.\nWhat are they doing at the entrance to a Mahomedan mosque? That is where\ntheir predecessors used to sit two hundred years ago, before Aurangzeb\ntore down the holy Hindu temple of Siva and erected the mosque in its\nstead.\n\n[Sidenote: Yields before a persistent obtruding influence.]\n\n[Sidenote: _E.g._ British influence.]\n\nBut Indian conservatism is more than an indisposition to effort and\nchange; for the same reason, it is also an easy adaptation to things as\nthey are found. When a new disturbing influence obtrudes from without,\nand persistently, it may be easier to give way than to resist. British\ninfluence is such a persistent obtrusion. In English literature as\ntaught and read, in Christian standards of conduct, in the English\nlanguage, and in the modern ideas of government and society, ever\npresented to the school-going section of the people of India within\ntheir own land, there is such a continuous influence from without. The\nimpression of works like Tennyson's _In Memoriam_ or _Idylls of the\nKing_, common text-books in colleges, the steady pressure of Acts of the\nBritish Government in India, like that raising the marriage age of\ngirls; the example of men in authority like Lord Curzon, during whose\nvice-regal tour in South India there were no nautch entertainments; the\nnecessity of understanding expressions like \"general election\" and\n\"public spirit,\" and of comprehending in some measure the working of\nlocal self-government--all such constant pressure must effect a change\nin the mental standpoint. The army of Britain in India, representative\nof the imperial sceptre, has now for many years been gathered into\ncantonments, and its work is no longer to quell hostilities within\nIndia, but only to repel invaders from without. Other British forces,\nhowever, penetrating far deeper, working silently and for the most part\nunobserved, are still in the field all over India, effecting a grander\nchange than the change of outward sovereignty. \"Ideas rule the world,\"\nand he who impresses his ideas is the real ruler of men.\n\n[Sidenote: Indian conservatism overpowered otherwise.]\n\nTelling against Indian conservatism or inertia are other things also\nbesides persistent Western influences. Many things Western appeal to the\nnatural desire for advancement and comfort, and the adoption of these\nhas often as corollary a change of idea. To take examples without\nfurther explanation. The desire for education, the key to advancement in\nlife, has quietly ignored the old orthodox idea that education in\nSanscrit and the Sacred Scriptures, _i.e._ higher education as formerly\nunderstood, is the exclusive privilege of certain castes. The very\nexpression \"higher education\" has come to mean a modern English\neducation, not as formerly an education in Sanscrit lore. Had the\nBritish Government allowed things to take their course, the still\nsurviving institutions of the old kind for Oriental learning would have\nbeen transformed, one and all, into modern schools and colleges. Even in\n1824, when Government, then under \"Orientalist\" influence, founded the\nSanscrit College in Calcutta for the encouragement of Sanscrit learning,\na numerous body of native gentlemen, with the famous Raja Rammohan Roy\nat their head, petitioned that a college for the study of Western\nlearning might be established instead. For a number of years now, the\nSanscrit College, then founded, has actually had fewer pupils on its\nrolls than it is permitted to admit at a greatly reduced fee.[6]\n\nAgain, the idea of _public questions_, the idea of the common welfare,\nhas come into being with the nineteenth century, and is quietly\nrepudiating caste and giving to the community a solidarity and a feeling\nof solidarity unknown hitherto. Upon one platform now meet, as a matter\nof course, the native gentlemen of all the castes, when any general\ngrievance is felt or any great occasion falls to be celebrated. The\nWestern custom of public meetings for the discussion of public questions\nis now an established Indian institution, and daily gives the lie to the\nidea that there is pollution in bodily contact with a person of lower\ncaste. That a special seat should be reserved for a man because he is a\nbrahman would be scouted. The convenience of travelling by rail or in\ntram-cars has been even more widely effective in dissolving the idea.\nAnd if the advantage or convenience of the new ways can overcome the\nforce of custom, so can the unprofitableness of the old. For\nillustrations, I pass from the gentlemen who attend public meetings\nwhere the speeches are in English, to the less educated and more\nsuperstitious and more blindly conservative people. In the Mahratta\ndistricts of the Central Provinces, says the _Census Report_ for 1901,\nin recent years an unavoidable scepticism as to his efficiency has\ntended to reduce the earnings of the Garpagari or averter of hail from\nthe crops. In Calcutta the same influence has extinguished the trade of\nsupplier of Ganges water. The water taps in the house or on the street\nare too convenient, and the quality of the water is too manifestly\nsuperior for the desecration from the iron pipes to outweigh the\nadvantages. A few years ago, in Darjeeling, north of Bengal, the brahman\nnames upon the signs of the liquor shops were distinctly in the\nmajority. The sacerdotal caste, new style, had appreciated the chances\nof big profits and shut their eyes to the regulations of caste, which\nhave relegated drink-sellers to a very low place in the scale. Brahmans\nare even said to figure among the contractors who supply beef, flesh of\nthe sacred animal, to the British army in India. \"A curious sign of the\nchanging time,\" says Mr. Lockwood Kipling (_Beast and Man in India_),\n\"is the fact that Hindus of good caste, seeing the profit that may be\nmade from leather, are quietly creeping into a business from which they\nare levitically barred. Money prevails against caste more potently than\nmissionary preaching.\"\n\nIn this region, where convenience or comfort or personal advancement are\nconcerned, it may safely be asserted that the so-called Indian\nconservatism has not much resisting power. There, at least, it is found\nthat where there is a will there is a way.[7]\n\n[Sidenote: The Indian mind awakened.]\n\nAnd there is a higher influence at work dissolving and reconstituting\nthe whole framework of ideas. Upon the Indian mind, long lain fallow,\nmodern civilisation and modern thought and the fellowship with the world\nare acting as the quickening rain and sunshine upon the fertile Indian\nsoil. That these and similar obtruding influences have had a\ntransforming effect has already been alleged. But far beyond, in promise\nat least, is the revived activity of the Indian mind itself. If the age\nof Elizabeth be the outcome of the stirring of the minds of Englishmen\nthrough the discovery of a new world, the multiplication of books, the\nrevival of learning, and the reformation of religion, how shall we\nmeasure the effect upon the acute Indian mind of the far more\nstimulating influences of this Indian Renaissance! What comparison, for\nexample, can be made between the stimulus of the new learning of the\nsixteenth century and the stimulus of the first introduction to a modern\nlibrary? It would be an exaggeration to say that the Indian mind is now\nshowing all its power in response to the stimulus. But it is everywhere\nactive, and in some spheres, as in Religion and Philanthropy, in\nHistory, in Arch\u00e6ology, in Law, in certain Natural Sciences, individuals\nhave already done service to India and contributed to knowledge.\nGlimpses of great regions, unexplored, in these domains are rousing\nstudents to secure for themselves a province. \"More copies of books of\npoetry, philosophy, law, and religion now issue every year from the\npress of British India than during any century of native rule.\"[8] Of\ncourse it would be misleading to ignore the fact that reaction as well\nas progress has its apostles among the awakened minds of India. Much of\nthe awakened mental activity, also, is spent--much wasted--on political\nwriting and discussion, which is often uninformed by knowledge of\npresent facts and of Indian history. The general poverty also, and the\nso-called Western desire to \"get on,\" prevent many from becoming in any\nreal sense students or thinkers or men of public spirit.\n\nIndian conservatism, therefore, we contend, is not the insurmountable\nobstacle to new ideas that many superficially deem it to be.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III\n\nNEW SOCIAL IDEAS\n\n  [_Purusha, the One Spirit, embodied,_]\n\n  \"Whom gods and holy men made their oblation.\n  With Purusha as victim, they performed\n  A sacrifice. When they divided him,\n  How did they cut him up? What was his mouth?\n  What were his arms? And what, his thighs and feet?\n  The Brahman was his mouth; the kingly soldier\n  Was made his arms; the husbandman, his thighs;\n  The servile Sudra issued from his feet.\"\n\n    From the _Rigveda_, Mandala x. 90,\n    translated by Sir M. MONIER WILLIAMS.\n\n\n[Sidenote: Caste represses individuality.]\n\nNew ideas in the social sphere first claim our attention. The individual\nand the community, each have rights, says a writer on the philosophy of\nhistory, and it is hurtful when the balance is not preserved. If the\ncommunity be not securely established, the individuals will have no\nopportunity to develop; if the individual be not free, the community can\nhave no real greatness. Speaking broadly, when Western social ideas meet\nIndian, the conflict is between the rights of the individual as in\nWestern civilisation, and the rights of the community or society as in\nthe Indian. India stands for the statical _social_ forces, modern Europe\nfor the dynamical and _individualistic_. In India, as in France before\nthe Revolution, certain established usages are prejudicially affecting\nthe progress of the individual, fettering him in many ways. I refer to\ncaste, the denial of the brotherhood of mankind, the artificial\nbarricading of class from class, the sacrifice of the individual to his\nclass--condemned by native reformers like Ramananda, Kabir, Nanak, and\nChaitanya long before the advent of European ideas. Whatever the origin\nor original advantages of the caste system, it has long operated to\nrepress individuality.[9] It is a vast boycotting agency ready to hand\nto crush social non-conformity.[10] One can easily understand that if\nsociety is rigidly organised for certain social necessities (marriage\nfor example) into a number of mutually exclusive sets or circles,\nadmission to all of which is by birth only, an individual cast out from\nany set must perish. No one will eat with him, no one will intermarry\nwith him or his sons and daughters. It is into such a society that\nmodern social ideas have been sown, the ideas let us say of John Stuart\nMill's book, _On Liberty_--the _individual's_ liberty, that is to\nsay--which used to be a common university text-book in India.\n\n[Sidenote: Caste suggests an imperfect idea of the community.]\n\n[Sidenote: Nevertheless, a practical solidarity in Hinduism.]\n\nBesides setting the community too much above the individual, the caste\nsystem is faulty in presenting to the Indian mind an imperfect idea of\nthe community. The caste is the natural limit to one's interest and\nconsciousness of fellowship, to the exclusion of the larger community.\nAccording to Raja Rammohan Roy, writing in 1824, the caste divisions are\n\"_as_ destructive of national union as of social enjoyment.\" In _Modern\nIndia_, Sir Monier Williams expresses himself similarly. Caste \"tends to\nsplit up the social fabric into numerous independent communities, and to\nprevent all national and patriotic combinations.\" Too much, however, may\nbe made of this, for the practical solidarity of Hinduism, in spite of\ncaste divisions, is one of the most striking of social phenomena in\nIndia. Whatever may have brought it about, the solidarity of Hinduism is\nan undeniable fact. The supremacy of the priestly caste over all may\nhave been a bond of union, as likewise the necessity of all castes to\nemploy the priests, for the Jewish ritual and the tribe of Levi were the\nbonds of union among the twelve tribes of Israel. Sir Alfred Lyall\nvirtually defines Hinduism as _the employment of brahman priests_, and\nit is the adoption of brahmans as celebrants in social and religious\nceremonies that marks the passing over of a non-Hindu community into\nHinduism. It is thus it becomes a new Hindu caste.[11] Then, uniting\nfurther the mutually exclusive castes, many are the common heritages,\nactual or adopted, of traditions and sacred books, and the common\nnational epics of the Ramayan and the Mahabharat. The cause of the\nsolidarity is not a common creed, as we shall see when we reach the\nconsideration of new religious ideas, ideas.\n\n[Sidenote: New ideas opposed to caste, namely, individual liberty and\nnationality.]\n\nIf Hinduism as a social system is to be moved by the modern spirit, we\nmay look for movement in the direction of freedom of individual action,\nthat is, the loosening of caste; we may look for larger ideas of\nnationality and citizenship, superseding to some extent the idea of\ncaste. As is not infrequent in India, Government pointed out the way for\npublic opinion. In 1831 the Governor-General, Lord William Bentinck,\nissued his fiat that no native be debarred from office on account of\ncaste, creed, or race, and that a son who had left his father's religion\ndid not thereby forfeit his inheritance.\n\n[Sidenote: Loosening of caste.]\n\nTo any observer it is now plain that while caste is still a very\npowerful force, and even while new castes, new social rings, are being\nformed through the working of the spirit of exclusiveness, the general\nideas of caste are undergoing change. In these latter days one can\nhardly credit the account given of the consternation in Calcutta in\n1775, when the equality of men before the law was asserted, and the\n_brahman_, Nanda-kumar, was hanged for forgery. Many of the orthodox\nbrahmans shook off the dust of the polluted city from their feet and\nquitted Calcutta for a new residence across the Hooghly. In 1904, we\nfind conservative Hindus only writing to the newspapers to complain that\neven in the Hindu College at Benares, the metropolis of Hinduism, some\nof the members of the College Committee were openly violating the rules\nof caste. In the same year a Calcutta Hindu newspaper, the _Amrita\nB[=a]z[=a]r Patrik[=a]_, declared, \"Caste is losing its hold on the\nHindu mind.\"[12] The recent denunciation of caste by an enlightened\nHindu ruler, the Gaekwar of Baroda, is a further significant sign of the\ntimes.\n\n[Sidenote: Offences against caste.]\n\nWhat does caste forbid and punish? Freedom of thought, if not translated\ninto social act, has not been an offence against caste at any time in\nthe period under review, neither has caste taken cognisance of sins\nagainst morality as such. The sins that caste has punished have been\nchiefly five, as follows: Eating forbidden food, eating with persons of\nlower caste, crossing the sea, desertion of Hinduism for another\nreligion, marrying with a person of a lower caste, and, in many\ncommunities also, marrying a widow. The Hindustani proverb, \"Eight\nbrahmans, nine cooking-places,\" hits off with a spice of _proverbial_\nexaggeration the old punctiliousness about food. The sin of eating\nforbidden food is thus described by Raja Rammohan Roy in 1816: \"The\nchief part of the theory and practice of Hinduism, I am sorry to say,\"\nwrites the Raja, \"is made to consist in the adoption of a peculiar mode\nof diet; the least aberration from which (even though the conduct of the\noffender may in other respects be pure and blameless) is not only\nvisited with the severest censure, but actually punished by exclusion\nfrom the society of his family and friends. In a word, he is doomed to\nundergo what is commonly called loss of caste.\"[13] Now, in respect of\nthe first three of these offences, in all large centres of population\nthe general attitude is rapidly changing. In the light of modern ideas,\nthese prohibitions of certain food and of certain company at food, and\nof sea voyages, are fading like ghosts at dawn. An actual incident of a\nfew years ago reveals the prevailing conflict of opinion, especially\nwith regard to the serfdom which ties down Indians to India.\n\n[Sidenote: An actual case.]\n\nTwo scions of a leading family in a certain provincial town of Bengal,\nbrave heretics, made a voyage to Britain and the Continent, and while\naway from home, it was believed, flung caste restrictions to the winds.\nOn their return, the head of the family gave a feast to all of the caste\nin the district, and no one objected to the presence of the two voyagers\nat the feast. This was virtually their re-admission into caste. But\nshortly after, a document was circulated among the caste complaining,\nwithout naming names, of the readmission of such offenders. The tactics\nemployed by the family of the offenders are noteworthy. The demon of\ncaste had raised his head, and they dared not openly defy him. So the\ndefence set up was the marvellous one that, while on board ship and in\nEurope, the young men had never eaten any forbidden or polluted food.\nThey had lived upon fruit, it was said, which no hand except their own\nhad cut. The old caste sentiment was so strong that the family of the\nvoyagers felt compelled to bring an action for libel against the\npublishers of the circular. They lost their case, as no offender had\nbeen mentioned by name, and the tyranny of caste thus indirectly\nreceived the support of the courts.\n\nOf course it would still be easier to discover instances of the tyranny\nof caste than the assertion of liberty, even among highly educated men.\nIn this matter of emancipation also, North India is far ahead of the\nSouth. While minister at the court of Indore, 1872-75, the late Sir T.\nMadhava Rao, a native of South India, was invited to go to England to\ngive evidence on Indian Finance before a Committee of the House of\nCommons. _On religious grounds_ he was not able to accept the\ninvitation.[14] Nor is it generally known that the Bengali nobleman who\nrepresented his country at the King's coronation in London belongs to a\nfamily that is out of caste. If the newspapers are to be believed, an\northodox Bengali Hindu was first invited to attend the coronation, and\nwas \"unable to accept.\" Had that gentleman accepted and gone, his\nexample might at once have emancipated his countrymen. But he did not\nknow his hour. \"There is a venial as well as a damning sin,\" we may\nnote, in regard to this crossing of the sea. \"A man may cross the Indian\nOcean to Africa and still remain an orthodox Hindu. The sanctity of\ncaste is not affected. But let him go to Europe, and his caste as well\nas his creed is lost in the sea.\"[15] An orthodox Hindu has never been\nseen in Britain.\n\nIt is worth noting also, that in earlier times it involved loss of caste\nto go away South, even within India itself, among the Dravidean peoples\nbeyond the known Aryan pale in the North. Thus, slowly the cords of\nserfdom lengthen.\n\nTowards the fourth of the offences against caste, namely, the adoption\nof a new religion, the general attitude has likewise changed, although\nto a less degree. In large towns, at least, the convert to Christianity\nis not so rigidly or so instantaneously excluded from society as he used\nto be, and the Indian Christian community, although small, is now in\nmany places one of the recognised sections of the community.\n\nThis certainly may be asserted, that the modern Hindus are being\nfamiliarised as never before with non-brahman leaders, religious and\nsocial. Neither of the recent Br[=a]hma (Theistic) leaders, the late\nKeshub Chunder Sen and the late Protap Chunder Mozumdar, was brahman by\ncaste. The great Bombay reformer, the Parsee, Malabari, is not even a\nHindu. The founder of the Arya sect, the late Dyanand Saraswati, was out\nof caste altogether, being the son of a brahman father and a low-caste\nmother. The late Swami Vivekananda (Narendranath _Dutt_, B.A.), who\nrepresented Hinduism at the Parliament of Religions in Chicago in 1893,\nwas not a brahman, as his real surname plainly declares. While, most\nwonderful of all, the accepted leaders of the pro-Hindu Theosophists,\nchampions of Hinduism more Hindu than the Hindus, after whom the\neducated Hindus flock, are not even Indians; alas, they belong, the most\nprominent of them, to the inferior female sex! I mean the Russian lady,\nthe late Madame Blavatsky, the English ladies Mrs. Annie Besant and Miss\nNoble [Sister Nivedita], and the American, Colonel Olcott. Which side of\nthat glaring incongruity is to give way--brahman and caste ideas, or the\nbuttressing of caste ideas by outcastes, Feringees, like Mrs. Besant?\nIt would be interesting to hear an orthodox brahman upon Mrs. Besant's\nclaim to have had a previous Hindu existence as a Sanscrit pandit. What\nsin did the pandit commit, would be his natural reflection, that he was\nborn again a Feringee, and a woman?\n\n[Sidenote: Unpardonable offences.]\n\nBut the offence of the fifth sin, marrying below one's caste, or the\nmarriage of widows, seems as rank as ever. Upon these points, rather,\nthe force of caste seems concentrating. The marriage of widows will be\nconsidered when we come to discuss the social inferiority of woman in\nIndia. To marry within one's caste promises to be the most persistent of\nall the caste ideas. The official observation is that \"whatever may have\nbeen the origin and the earlier developments of caste, this prohibition\nof mixed marriages stands forth now as its essential and most prominent\ncharacteristic. The feeling against such unions is deeply engrained.\"\nAnd again, a second pronouncement on caste: \"The regulations regarding\nfood and drink are comparatively fluid and transitory, while those\nrelating to marriage are remarkably stable and absolute.\"[16] The\npro-Hindu lady, already referred to, also agrees. \"Of hereditary caste,\"\nshe says, \"the essential characteristic is the refusal of\nintermarriage.\"[17] Even Indian Christians are reluctant to marry below\ntheir old caste, and value a matrimonial alliance with a higher. To that\nresiduum of caste, when it becomes the residuum, one could not object.\nThe Aryan purity of the stock may be a fiction, as authorities declare\nit to be in the great majority of castes and in by far the greater part\nof India; but given the belief in the purity of blood, the desire to\npreserve it is a natural desire. If one may prophesy, then, regarding\nthe fate of the caste system under the prevailing modern influences,\ncastes will survive longest simply as a number of in-marrying social\ngroups. To that hard core the caste idea is being visibly worn down.\n\n[Sidenote: Support of caste by British authorities.]\n\nWith strange obliviousness surely, the British officials are lending\nsupport to caste ideas in various ways, while many of the best minds in\nIndia are groaning under the tyranny. The compilers of the _Report of\nthe Census of India for_ 1901, gentlemen to whom every student of India\nis deeply indebted, in their enumeration of castes, give the imprimatur\nof government to such Cimmerian notions as that the touch of certain low\ncastes is defiling to the higher. The writer and condoner of the\nfollowing paragraph surely need a lengthy furlough to Britain or the\nStates. We read that \"the table of social precedence attached to the\n_Cochin Report_ shows that while a Nayar can pollute a man of a higher\ncaste only by touching him, people of the Kammalan group, including\nmasons, blacksmiths, carpenters, and workers in leather, pollute at a\ndistance of 24 feet, toddy drawers at 36 feet, Palayan or Cheruman\ncultivators at 48 feet; while in the case of the Paraiyan (Pariahs) who\neat beef, the range of pollution is stated to be no less than 64 feet.\"\nSome consolation let us even here take from the fact that in an earlier\npublication the extreme range of the polluting X-rays of the pariah is\nstated to be 72 feet. So there has been 8 feet of progress for the\npariah. But our point is, that interesting as all that table of\nprecedence no doubt is, it is out of place in a Government report, which\nmay be quoted against a poor low-caste man as authoritative\npronouncement regarding his social position. Justice and humanity, good\ngrounds in the eyes of the Indian Government ere now for legislating\ncontrary to caste ideas, ought to have enjoined the ignoring of caste\nideas here. It is no mere fancy that after an accident one of these\nlow-caste masons in South India might be brought to the door of a\nGovernment hospital and be refused admission by a native medical officer\nbecause his presence polluted at a distance of 24 feet--has not the\nGovernment Report declared it so? It is no fancy, for a year or two ago\nthe Post Office reported that in one village the Post Office was found\nlocated where low castes were not allowed to approach. In some\nprovinces, also, teachers will object to the admission of low-caste\nchildren in their schools; or \"if they admit them make them sit outside\nin the verandah.\"[18] What now of the dignity of manual labour which\nmany a high official has expounded to native youth? Or to take another\ninstance of un-British countenancing of the caste idea. The Shahas of\n_Bengal_ are a humble caste, and the members of higher castes will not,\nas a rule, take water at their hands, so the Government Report tells us.\nOn the other hand, the Shahas of _Assam_, immigrants from Bengal, have\nmanaged to raise themselves high in the social scale. Why, when an Assam\nShaha takes up his residence again in his motherland, Bengal, should\nthis Blue-book be casting up to him his humble origin? Why this\nun-British weighting of those who are behind in the race? Again, at the\nvery time of the Census, the Maratha caste was in conflict with the\nbrahman in two Native States of Western India, Kohlapur and Baroda, over\na matter of religious privileges. The brahman contention is that the\nMahratta pretensions to high-caste blood [kshatriya] are groundless, and\nnow we have the very same statement in the _Census Report_, backing \"the\nking of the castle\" against \"the dirty rascal.\" Not a century ago,\nstudents of kayasth [clerk] caste were excluded from the Sanscrit\nCollege in Calcutta; they are now within the privileged circle, but\ntheir claim might not yet have been made good had a Government Blue-book\nof these earlier days been allowed to brand them as debarred from the\nCollege by their caste. At a public meeting the writer heard one of the\nmost learned and respected Hindus of Calcutta respectfully protest to\nthe Lieutenant-Governor against the public recognition in the _Census\nReport_ of such irrational social grading.[19]\n\nSimilarly in the provision by Government of Caste Hostels for students.\nAccording to the first rule of the Hindu Hostel in connection with the\nGovernment College in Calcutta, \"none but respectable Hindu students ...\nshall be admitted,... and such inmates shall observe the rules and\nusages of Hindu Society.\" In that rule, \"respectable\" simply means\n_other than low caste_. Now for the _reductio ad absurdum_. A certain\nBengali gentleman of low caste was some years ago entitled to be\naddressed as \"Honourable,\" from the high public office he held, yet by\ndepartmental orders the Principal of the Government College would shut\nthe door of the College Hostel in the face of the Honourable's son.\n\n[Sidenote: New religious organisations repudiate caste.]\n\nOf the new religious organisations of educated India, three repudiate\ncaste, namely, the Protestant Christian community, the Br[=a]hma\nSam[=a]j or Theistic Association, chiefly found in Bengal, and the\n[=A]rya Sam[=a]j or Vedic Association of the United Provinces and the\nPunjab. These forces of new religious feeling are marshalled against\ncaste as a social anomaly and a bar to progress. Mahomedanism in its day\nwas a powerful force arrayed against caste, but its regenerating power\nhas long ago evaporated, for in many districts of India caste ideas are\nfound flourishing among the Mahomedan converts from Hinduism. They have\ncarried over the caste ideas from their old to their new religion.[20]\nThe Sikhs in the Punjab also repudiate caste, but they too have\nforgotten their old reforming mission. Notwithstanding, we repeat,\nNorthern India owes an immense debt to these two religions, particularly\nto Mahomedanism. Let any one who doubts it observe the caste thraldom of\nSouthern India, where Mahomedan rule never established itself.\nIrrational as caste is in Northern India, it is tenfold more so in the\nSouth, as we have already seen. A noteworthy assertion of \"the rights of\nmen,\" or more literally of the rights of women, against caste may be\nnoted in that same caste-bound South India. In the Native State of\nTravancore, caste custom had prohibited the women of the lower castes\nfrom wearing clothing above the waist. But about the year 1827, the\nwomen who became Christians began to don a loose jacket as the women of\nhigher caste had been in the habit of doing. Bitter persecution of the\nChristian women followed, but in 1859 the right of these lower-caste\nwomen to wear an upper cloth was legally acknowledged.[21]\n\nBut the outstanding evidence of new ideas in regard to caste is\nfurnished by the Hindu revivalists who, under the leading of Mrs. Annie\nBesant and the Theosophists, have established the Hindu College,\nBenares, as a buttress of Hinduism. From the _Text-book of Hindu\nReligion_ prepared for the College, we learn that these representatives\nand champions of orthodoxy defend caste only to the extent of the\nancient fourfold division of society into brahmans, rulers, merchants\nand agriculturists (one caste), and servants. What, we may ask, is to\nbecome of the 1886 sub-divisions of the brahman caste alone, all\nmutually exclusive with regard to inter-marriage? The text-book actually\nquotes sacred texts to show that caste depends on conduct, not on birth,\nand refers to bygone cases of promotion of heroes to a higher caste\nwithout rebirth. Its final pronouncement on caste is that \"unless the\nabuses that are interwoven with it can be eliminated, its doom is\ncertain.\" So far has the opinion of orthodox conservative Hinduism\nprogressed with reference to its fundamental social feature, caste.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV\n\nTHE CHIEF SOLVENT OF THE OLD IDEAS\n\n  \"Let knowledge grow from more to more,\n  But more of reverence in us dwell;\n  That mind and soul according well,\n  May make one music as before.\"\n\n    TENNYSON, _In Memoriam_.\n\n\n[Sidenote: English education the chief solvent.]\n\nEnglish education is the chief solvent of old ideas in India and the\nchief source from which the new are supplied. English is the language of\nthe freest peoples in the world. It is only to be expected, therefore,\nthat with the spread of English education in India the idea of\nindividual freedom and the feeling of nationality should grow and the\ncaste idea decline. The beginning of the process is often witnessed\namong the boys in Secondary Schools in India. You lay your hand upon the\narm of a boy, a new-comer to the school, and you ask him in English,\n\"What class?\" He answers \"Brahman,\" giving you his caste instead of his\nclass in school. The boy will not be long in the English school before\nhe will classify himself differently. In a dozen ways each day he is\nmade to feel that the school and the modern world have another standard\nfor boys and men than the caste. Or take another example of the\neducative effect of a study of English--I can vouch for its genuineness.\nIn your house in India you get into friendly conversation with a\nhalf-educated shopkeeper or native tradesman. You ask in English how\nmany children he has, and his reply is, \"I have not any children, I have\nthree daughters.\" Just a little more reading in English literature would\nhave taught him that elsewhere the daughter is a child of the family\nequally with the son.\n\nThere, in these two examples, the great social problems of India present\nthemselves--caste and the social inferiority of women, and in the\nEnglish language we see India confronted with ideas different from her\nown. Take a third illustration from the socio-religious sphere. Few\nHindus think of Hinduism as a system of religious practices and\ndoctrines to be justified by reason or by spiritual intuition, or by the\nspiritual satisfaction it can afford to mankind. No, Hinduism is a thing\nfor Indians, and belongs to the Indian soil. The converse of the idea is\nthat Christianity is a foreign thing, the religion of the intruding\nruling race. It is not for Indians. A vigorous patriotic pamphlet,\npublished in 1903, entitled _The Future of India_, assumes plainly that\n_Hindus_ and _Indians_ mean the same thing. The pamphlet speaks of the\nrelations of Indians to \"other races, such as Mahomedans, Parsees, and\nChristians,\" as if these were less truly Indians than the Hindus. To the\nwriter, manifestly, Hinduism is a racial thing. To him, however, or to\nthe next generation after him, further study of modern history will make\nclear that only in a slight degree and a few instances is religion a\nracial thing, and that there are laws and a science of spiritual as of\nbodily health. Once more, how ill-fitting are, say, the Indian word\n_mukti_ (deliverance from further lives, the end of transmigrations) and\nthe English word _salvation_, although _mukti_ and _salvation_ are often\nregarded as equivalents.\n\nTo the man instructed in English, such contrasts are always being\npresented, tacitly inviting him to compare and to modify. We can put\nourselves in the place of many a youth of sixteen or seventeen, hope of\nthe village school, going up to enter a college in one of the larger\ntowns of India. He is entering the new world. Should he be of brahman\ncaste, it may profit him a little, for he will still meet with many\nnon-brahman householders ready to find him in food and lodging simply\nbecause he is a poor brahman student. Of course he is looking forward to\none of the new professions, Law, or Medicine, or Engineering, or\nTeaching, or Government Service. In _these_ it is patent to him that\ncaste is of no account. High caste or low, he and all his\nfellow-students are aware they must prove themselves and fight their way\nup. The leading place at the bar is no more a high-caste man's privilege\nthan it is his privilege to be exempted from standing in the dock or\nsuffering the extreme penalty of the law. We have already referred to\nthe effect of the assertion of the equality of men before the law in\n1775 in the hanging of the brahman, Nandakumar, for forgery. Now,\nlooking back at the dissolving of the old ideas of artificial rank and\nprivileges, we may reckon also the equality of men in the great modern\nprofessions, foremost in India being Law, as among the chief dissolving\nagencies.\n\n[Sidenote: Extent of English education.]\n\n[Sidenote: English words naturalised.]\n\nIt is easy to give _figures_ at least for the vast agency now at work in\nthe spread of English education in India. Higher English education for\nnatives began with the founding of the Hindu College in Calcutta in\n1817; in the year 1902 there were in India five Universities, the\nexaminations of which are conducted in English; and affiliated to these\nexamining Universities were 188 teaching colleges containing 23,009\nundergraduates; and preparing for the Matriculation Examination (in the\nyear 1896-97) were 5267 Secondary Schools, containing 535,155 pupils.\nFrom these Secondary Schools in the year 1901, 21,750 candidates\nappeared at the Matriculation Examinations of the Universities\nprofessing to be able to write their answers in English, and of these\nnearly 8000 passed. That figure is a measure of the process of leavening\nIndia with modern ideas through English education--8000 fresh recruits a\nyear. That is the measure of the confusion introduced into the old\nsocial organism. A small number, no doubt, compared with the ten million\nof unleavened youth born in the same year, and yet they are the pick of\nthe middle classes and must become the leaders of the masses. The masses\nin China, it is alleged, would not be anti-foreign were it not for the\ninfluence of their literati, and the thoughts of these Indian literati\nmust also become the thoughts of the Indian masses. It is the mind of\nthese literati, mainly, which we are trying to gauge. According to the\ncensus of 1901 their total number approached one million, being those\nwho could read and write English. Descending below the English-reading\nliterati, I have noted about three hundred English words naturalised in\ntwo of the chief vernaculars of India, an indication, if not a measure,\nof the new influence among the masses.\n\n[Sidenote: Too sanguine prophecies of progress.]\n\nYet having tabulated figures, once more, ere we proceed, we enjoin upon\nourselves and our readers a cautious estimate of the progress of ideas.\nThe European hood and gown of the Indian student may merely _drape_ an\n_unchanged_ being. Writing in 1823 about the encouragement of education\nand the teaching of English and the translation of English books, the\nGovernor of Bombay, Mountstuart Elphinstone, declared too confidently\nthat \"the conversion of the natives _must_ result from the diffusion of\nknowledge among them.\" Macaulay, similarly, writing from India in 1836\nto his father, the well-known philanthropist, declares: \"It is my firm\nbelief that if our plans of[English] education are followed up, there\nwill not be a single idolater among the respectable classes in Bengal\nthirty years hence.\" Omar Khayyam's words suggest themselves as the\nother extreme of opinion regarding English education in India, inside of\nwhich the truth will be found:\n\n  \"Myself when young did eagerly frequent\n  Doctor and saint, and heard great argument\n  About it and about, but evermore\n  Came out by that same door wherein I went.\"\n\nThe lines express the view of many Anglo-Indians. We may reply that\nanywhere only a few individuals are positively liberalised by a liberal\neducation. We must patiently wait while their standpoint becomes the\nlore and tradition of the community.\n\n[Sidenote: Reformers are English-speaking; reactionaries are ignorant of\nEnglish.]\n\nThe part played by English education in the introduction of new ideas is\napparent whenever we enumerate the leading reformers of the nineteenth\ncentury. One and all have received a modern English education, and\nseveral of them have made some name by addresses and publications in\nEnglish. Of Indian reformers, distinguished also as English scholars,\nmay be named with all honour:\n\n1. Rammohan Roy, a great opponent of Suttee and Idolatry, who also dared\nto make the voyage to England. He died at Bristol in 1833.\n\n2. Iswar Chunder Vidyasagar, a great upholder of the right of widows to\nremarry and an advocate of education, both elementary and higher. He\ndied at Calcutta in 1891.\n\n3. K.M. Banerjea, D.L., C.I.E., an opponent of the caste system, the\ngreatest scholar among Indian Christians. He died at Calcutta in 1885.\n\n4. Keshub Chunder Sen, religious reformer, an advocate of a higher\nmarriage age for girls. He died at Calcutta in 1884.\n\n5. Mr. Behramji Malabari, an advocate of a higher marriage age for\ngirls--of the Bombay side of India.\n\n6. The late Mr. Justice M.G. Ranade, a social reformer of Bombay.\n\n7. The late Mr. Justice K.T. Telang, C.I.E., an opponent of child\nmarriages and a social reformer of Bombay.\n\n8. The late Raja Sir T. Madhava Rao, K.C.S.I., a social reformer, of the\nMadras Presidency--died in 1891.\n\nPandita Ramabhai, it may be noted, had entered upon her career as a\nchampion of female education before she began the study of English.\n\n[Sidenote: Sanguine estimate of progress.]\n\nIn striking contrast with all these in this respect are the men who\nrepresent the extreme conservative or reactionary spirit, who as a rule\nare as ignorant of English as the great reformers are the reverse. We\nmay cite, in illustration:\n\n1. Dyanand Saraswati, founder of the new sect of [=A]ryas in the United\nProvinces and Punjab. Their chief doctrine, the infallibility of the\nVedas or earliest Hindu scriptures, is reactionary, although a number of\nreforms are inculcated in the name of a return to the Vedas.\n\n2. The late Ramkrishna Paramhansa, a famous Bengali ascetic of high\nspiritual tone, but of the old type.\n\n3. The gentleman already referred to, who as University lecturer on\nHindu Philosophy in Calcutta insisted that none but Hindus be admitted\nto the exposition of the sacred texts, shutting out the Chancellor, the\nVice-Chancellor, and many Fellows of the University.\n\n4. Sanscrit pundits, very conservative as a class, and generally\nunfamiliar with English.\n\nNew Hinduism in contact with the modern educational influences was most\ninterestingly manifest in the person of Swami Vivekananda (_Reverend\nRational-bliss_ we may render his adopted name), representative of\nHinduism at the Parliament of Religions in Chicago in 1893. The\nrepresentative Hindu was not even a member of the priestly caste, as we\nhave already told. It were tedious to analyse his Hinduism, as set forth\nat Chicago and elsewhere, into what was Christianity or modern thought,\nand what, on the other hand, was Hinduism. Suffice it to say that as\nNarendra Nath Dutt, B.A., he figures on the roll of graduates of the\nChurch of Scotland's College in Calcutta. While a student there, he sat\nat the feet of two teachers representing the new and the old, the West\nand the East. In the College classroom he received religious instruction\nfrom Dr. Hastie, the distinguished theologian who afterwards taught\nScottish students of theology in the University of Glasgow. At the same\ntime he was in the habit of visiting the famous Bengali ascetic,\nRamkrishna Paramhansa, already mentioned, and of communing with him.\nReturning from Chicago crowned with the honour which his earnestness,\nhis eloquence, his power of reasoning, his attractive manner, and his\nstriking physique and dress called forth, Young India lionised him; Old\nIndia met in Calcutta and resolved that Mr. Dutt of kayasth caste must\ndrop the brahman title _Swami_, which he had assumed, before _they_\ncould recognise him. In 1895, having gone to Dakhineswar, the old\nresidence of his Hindu master, Ramkrishna, Swami Vivekananda was\nactually expelled from the temple where his master had been wont to\nworship. The Chicago representative of Hinduism had been guilty of the\nsins of crossing the sea and of living like a European, and so he must\nbe disowned and the temple purged of his presence. After a few years,\nSwami Vivekananda bravely settled down to unobtrusive, philanthropic\nwork, one had almost said _Christian philanthropic work_, in a suburb of\nCalcutta, denouncing caste and idolatry and the outcasting of those who\nhad crossed the sea, and recommending the Hindus to take to\nflesh-eating. There, and while so engaged, in 1902 he died. How shall we\nticket that strange personage? Kayasth caste as he was born, or new\nbrahman? Swami or B.A. of a Mission College of the modern Calcutta\nUniversity? A conservative or a reformer? Hindu ascetic or Christian\nphilanthropist? He stands for India in transition, old and new ideas\ncommingling. He is a typical product of the English and Christian\neducation given to multitudes in India to-day.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V\n\nWOMAN'S PLACE\n\n  \"To lift the woman's fallen divinity\n  Upon an equal pedestal with man's.\"\n\n  \"The woman's cause is man's; they rise or sink\n  Together, dwarfed or godlike, bond or free.\"\n\n    TENNYSON, _The Princess_.\n\n\n[Sidenote: Social inferiority of women.]\n\nNext to caste, the chief social feature of India is the position of\nwomen in the community. Hindus and Mahomedans alike assign to the female\nsex an inferior position. In Mahomedan mosques, for example, no woman is\never seen at prayer; she would not be permitted to take part. Only by\nthe neglect of female children in India, and the special disadvantages\nfrom which women suffer there, can it be explained why in India in 1901\nthere were only 963 females to every 1000 males. In India, as in Europe\nand all the world over, more boys than girls are born, but in the course\nof life the balance is soon redressed, and in the whole population in\nevery country in Europe, except Italy[22] and Bulgaria, the females\nactually outnumber the males. Why are the Indian figures so different?\nPro-Hindu enthusiasts may glorify the Hindu social system, and wish to\ndeny the social inferiority of the female sex; average Anglo-Indians may\nbe suspected of being unsympathetic in their statements; but the Census\nfigures stand, and demand an explanation. Where are these 37 girls and\nwomen out of every 1000--over five million altogether? Common humanity\ndemands an answer of India, for we seem to hear a bitter cry of India's\nwomanhood. As infants, less cared for; as girls, less educated; married\ntoo early; ignorantly tended in their hour; as married ladies, shut out\nof the world; always more victimised by ignorance and superstition--in\nlife's race, India's women carry a heavy handicap, and 37 out of every\n1000 actually succumb.\n\nIn the matter of the social elevation of their sex, it appears to the\nwriter that Anglo-Indian ladies fall far short of what they might do. A\nfair number do interest themselves in their Indian sisters through the\nlady missionaries and lady doctors, but first-hand knowledge of the\nlives of Indian women is very rare indeed. Our late revered Queen's\ninterest in India and in the womanhood of India is well known, but her\nfeeling about the duty of Anglo-Indian ladies I have never seen\nrecorded. Speaking at Balmoral to an Indian Christian lady, a member of\none of the royal families of India--the only lady perhaps who ever\nconversed in Hindustani with Queen Victoria--she expressed her regret\nthat more Anglo-Indian ladies did not get up the native language,\nsufficiently at least to let them visit their Indian sisters. Than\nChristian sisterly sympathy thus expressed, what better link also could\nthere be between two communities which many things seem to be forcing\napart?\n\n[Sidenote: Suttee and female infanticide.]\n\nIt would be unjust to depreciate the influence of mother and wife among\nHindus, and we freely acknowledge that, after custom, the mainstay of\nthe zenana system is concern for the purity of the female members of the\nhousehold. Saying that, we must now also note that modern ideas of the\njust rights of the female sex have made little progress in India. Some\nprogress there has been, judging by the standard already applied; for\nalthough in 1901 there were only 963 females to every 1000 males, in the\nyear 1891 there were only 958, and in the year 1881 still fewer, namely,\n954. But it seems as if in India we had justification of the law of\nsocial progress that woman's rights will not be recognised until man's\nhave been. The brotherhood of man must be established before men\nrecognise that sister women too have rights. Translating into Indian\nterms, and without professing to have given positive proof--caste\nfeeling must still further decay before the position of women becomes\nmuch improved. At all events, judging by the past, it almost seems to\nhave been necessary for the Legislature to intervene to secure any\nprogress for the sex and give a foothold to the new ideas, glaringly\nunfair to the sex as the old ideas were. Thus in 1870 female\ninfanticide, earlier prohibited in single provinces, was put down by law\nthroughout India; although there are localities still in which the small\nproportion of female children justifies the belief that female\ninfanticide is not extinct.[23] Nevertheless, let the progress of the\nnew ideas regarding women be noted; we compare the hesitating\n_inference_ of the practice of female infanticide in the _Indian Census\nReport_ of 1901 with the voluminous evidence in the two volumes of\nParliamentary Papers on Infanticide in India published in 1824 and 1828.\nKathiawar and Cutch, Baroda and Rajputana, round Benares and parts of\nOude and Madras were the localities particularly infected with the\nbarbarous custom in the first quarter of the century. But to return to\nthe recognition of the rights of women in legislative enactments. In\n1829 an Act of the Supreme Government in Bengal made Suttee or the\nburning of a widow upon the dead husband's pyre an offence for all\nconcerned. In 1830 similar Acts were passed by the Governments of Madras\nand Bombay, and the abolition of Suttee is now universally approved.[24]\nSuch is the educative influence of a good law. Perhaps a would-be\npatriot may yet occasionally be heard so belauding the devotion of the\nwidows who burned themselves that his praise is tantamount to a lament\nover the abolition of Suttee. But the general sentiment has been\ncompletely changed since the first quarter of the nineteenth century,\nwhen the Missionaries and some outstanding Indians like the Bengali\nreformer Rammohan Roy agitated for the abolition of Suttee, and the\nGovernment, convinced, still hesitated to put down a custom so generally\napproved. In these changed times it will hardly be believed that\nRammohan Roy only ventured to argue against any form of compulsion being\nput upon the widow, and that the orthodox champions of the practice\nappealed against the abolition not only to the Governor-General, but\nalso to the King in Council,--the petition having been heard in the\nHouse of Lords in 1832. But once more to return to the emancipation of\nwomen by Acts of the Legislature. By another Act, in 1856, the Indian\nGovernment abolished the legal restrictions to widow marriage. Still\nanother Act, in 1891, forbade cohabitation before the age of twelve; and\nalthough fiercely opposed in the native press and in mass meetings, the\nAct, which expressed the views of many educated Hindus, is now\napparently acquiesced in by all, and must be educating the community\ninto a new idea of marriage.\n\nIn five aspects the social inferiority of the female sex is still\napparent--namely, in the illiteracy of females, in marriage before\nwomanhood, in polygamy, in the seclusion of women, and in the\nprohibition of the marriage of widows. Excepting the last, no one of\nthese customs is imposed by caste, nor is the last even in every caste.\n\n[Sidenote: Their lack of education.]\n\nThe inferior position still assigned to women in Indian society can best\nbe shown in figures. The indifference to their education is manifest\nwhen for all India, rich and poor, European and native, in 1901, there\nwere fourteen times as many men as women who could read and write. Only\none female in 144 was educated to that extent, and the movement for\nfemale education has practically been at a stand-still for some years,\nin spite of the increase of native Christians, Brahmas, and [=A]ryas, who\nall advocate the education of girls, and in spite of fostering by\nGovernments and missionaries. Taking _British_ India by itself, there\nwas a higher proportion of educated females, as we should of course\nexpect, although that only makes the proportion less elsewhere. In\nBritish India, about 1 in 100 [9 per 1000] could read and write; but\neven there, less than 1 per cent. The quickening of ideas in cities is\napparent. In the cities there are proportionally more than twice as many\neducated females as in the whole country.\n\n[Sidenote: Premature marriage.]\n\nThe injustice done to the sex by marriage before womanhood is apparent\nfrom another paragraph of the same Report, showing that out of every\n1000 girls of the age of 10 or under, 58 are already married, as against\n22 boys. Taking Hindus alone, the number of married girls of 10 years of\nage or under is 70 per 1000 as against 28 married boys. Even allowing\nfor those provinces where cohabitation is delayed, these figures mean in\nother provinces a cruel wrong to the children of the weaker sex, a\ndoubly cruel wrong when to premature marriage may be added girl\nwidowhood. The _Census Report_ declares that in the lower strata of\nHindu society there has been a rapid extension of child marriage and\nprohibition of the marriage of widows within the last two or three\ngenerations, although at the low age of 10, fewer girls are reported\nmarried than in 1881.[25] That is to say, the bad example of the higher\ncastes is lowering the marriage age in the humble castes, while modern\ninfluences are diminishing the number of marriages of mere children,--we\ncan see both forces in operation. Here again Indian Christians,\nBr[=a]hmas, and [=A]ryas are at one in setting a better example and\nadvocating reform. The educative Act of 1891 for British India has also\nbeen noted above. Native States too are following up. In Rajputana,\nthrough the influence of the Agent of the Governor-General, Colonel\nWalter, an association was formed in 1888 which fixed the marriage age\nfor two of the chief castes at eighteen for the bridegroom and fourteen\nfor the bride. In the Native State of Baroda, in the extreme West of\nIndia, a new Marriage Act has just been passed by the enlightened ruler\n[1904]. In Baroda, except in special cases, the minimum marriage age of\ngirls is henceforward to be twelve, and of the bridegrooms sixteen.\nExceptional cases had to be provided for, because of the custom in\ncertain communities within the state of Baroda to celebrate marriages\nonly once every twelve years, female infants and girls of ten and twelve\nbeing then \"happily despatched\" together. With that custom and with the\nnew Act together, it would necessarily happen that girls of eleven at\nthe general marrying time would have to wait twelve years more, or until\ntheir twenty-third year. Since in some parts of India there is a saying\nabout women \"Old at twenty,\" that delay would not do. All educated young\nmen may be said to hold the new ideas in these marriage matters.\nStudents now regard it with regret and some sense of a grievance when\ntheir guardians have married them in their school or college years. The\nonly alleviation to their minds is when the dowry which they bring into\nthe family at their marriage helps to endow a sister who has reached the\nmarriage age, or to educate a brother or pay off the family debts. Among\neducated people too, the idea that the other world is closed to\nbachelors and childless men has died, although a daughter unmarried\nafter the age of puberty is still a stigma on the family. Do British\nreaders realise that in an Indian novel of the middle and upper classes\nthere can hardly be a bride older than twelve; there can be no love\nstory of the long wooing and waiting of the lovers?\n\n[Sidenote: Polygamy.]\n\nAs regards polygamy, the Census shows 1011 married women for every 1000\nmarried men, so that apparently not more than 11 married men in every\n1000 are polygamists. But polygamy is still an Indian institution, in\nthe sense that it is at the option of any man to have more than one\nwife; in the matter of marriage, the rights of man alone are regarded.\nAll over India, however, among the educated classes, Mahomedans\nexcepted, public opinion is now requiring a justification for a second\nmarriage, as, for example, the barrenness, insanity, infirmity, or\nmisconduct of the first spouse. The temptation of a second dowry is\nstill, however, operative with men of certain high castes in which\nbridegrooms require to be paid for. The writer well remembers the\npitiful comic tale of a struggling brahman student of Bengal, whose home\nhad been made unhappy by the advent of two stepmothers in succession\nalongside of his own mother. The young man did not blame his father, for\nhis father disapproved of polygamy, and was a polygamist only because he\ncould not help himself. It had come about in an evil hour when he was\ndesperate for a dowry for his eldest daughter, now come of marriageable\nage. He had listened to the village money-lender's advice that he might\ntake a second wife himself and transfer to the daughter the dowry that\nthe second wife would bring. Then in like manner the lapse of time had\nbrought a second daughter to the marriage age, the necessity for another\ndowry, and a third mother into the student's home. The poor fellow\nhimself was married too, and one could not resist the conjecture that\n_his_ marriage was another sacrifice for the family, and that his\nmarriage had saved his father from bringing home yet another stepmother.\nThe redeeming feature of the story--the strength of Indian family\nties--let us not be blind to.\n\nPolygamy in India is certainly now hiding itself. A couple of\ngenerations ago it was practised wholesale by the kulin brahmans of\nBengal. Several middle-aged kulins are known to have had more than 100\nwives, and to have spent their lives in a round of visits to their\nnumerous fathers-in-law. For each wife they had received a handsome\nbridegroom-price. So declares the last _Census Report_. Except among\nIndian Mahomedans, who have the sanction of the Koran and the example of\nthe Prophet himself, there are now few upholders of polygamy in India.\nIn a meeting of educated gentlemen in Calcutta a Mahomedan lately\nprotested against some passing condemnatory reference to polygamy, on\nthe ground that in a general meeting he expected that his religion would\nbe free from attack. A learned Mahomedan judge, on the other hand,\nwrites that among Indian Mahomedans \"the feeling against polygamy is\nbecoming a strong social if not a moral conviction.\" \"Ninety-five out of\nevery 100 are either by conviction or necessity monogamists.\" \"It has\nbecome customary,\" he tells us, \"to insert in the marriage deed a clause\nby which the intending husband formally renounces his supposed right to\ncontract a second union.\"[26]\n\n[Sidenote: Seclusion of women.]\n\nWith regard to the seclusion of women, at some points the custom seems\nto be slowly yielding to Western ideas, although it is still practically\ntrue that Indian ladies are never seen in society and in the streets of\nIndian cities.[27] A different evolution, however, is still more\nmanifest at this present time. It almost seems as if at first modern\nlife were to bend to the custom of the seclusion of women rather than\nbend the custom to itself. The Lady Dufferin Association for Medical Aid\nto Indian Women is bringing trained medical women _into_ the zenanas and\nharems, and every year is also seeing a larger number of Indian\nChristian and Br[=a]hma ladies set up as independent practitioners, able\nto treat patients _within_ the women's quarters. In the year 1905 a lady\nlawyer, Miss Cornelia Sorabjee, a Parsee Christian lady, was appointed\nby the Government of Bengal to be a legal adviser to the Bengal Court of\n_Wards_, or landowning minors. Zenana or harem ladies, e.g. the widowed\nmothers of the minors, would thus be able to consult a trained lawyer at\nfirst hand _within_ the zenana or harem. Missionaries are discussing the\npropriety of authorising certain Christian women to baptize women\nconverts _within_ the zenanas.[28] Long ago missions organised zenana\nschools, and now native associations have begun to follow in their\nsteps. In all Indian Christian churches, women of course are present at\npublic worship, but they always sit _apart_ from the men, a segregation\neven more strictly followed by the Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j or Indian Theistic\nAssociation. For the sake of zenana women, the Indian Museum in Calcutta\nis closed one day each week to the male sex, and in some native theatres\nthere is a ladies gallery in which ladies may see and not be seen behind\na curtain of thin lawn. Movement even towards a compromise, it is good\nto observe.\n\n[Sidenote: Prohibition of the marriage of widows.]\n\nThe prohibition of the marriage of widows has already been referred to\nas bound up with caste ideas of marriage and with social standing, and\nas the most deeply rooted part of the social inferiority of women. By\nsome at least the injustice has been acknowledged since many years. At\nCalcutta, between 1840 and 1850, Babu Mati Lal Seal promised Rs10,000 to\nany Hindu, poor or rich, who would marry a widow of his own faith, but\nno one came forward.[29] The late Pandit Iswar Chander Vidyasagar of\nCalcutta has also already been mentioned as a champion of the widow's\nrights. But though legalised in 1856, the cases of re-marriage among the\nhigher castes of Hindus in any year can still be counted on the fingers\nof one hand. The _Report of the Census of India_, 1901, takes a gloomy\nview regarding the province of Bengal, the most forward in many\nrespects, but the most backward in respect of child-marriage and\nprohibition of the marriage of widows. The latter custom, we are told,\n\"shows signs of extending itself far beyond its present limits, and\nfinally of suppressing widow marriage throughout the entire Hindu\ncommunity of Bengal.\"[30] The actual number of widows in all India in\n1901 was 25,891,936, or about 2 out of every 11 of the female\npopulation, more than twice the proportion [1 in 13] in Great Britain.\nAs in the matters of the repudiation of caste and the raising of the\nmarriage age, the three new religious bodies, namely, the Indian\nChristians, the Brahmas, and the [=A]ryas, stand side by side for the\nright of the widow.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI\n\nTHE TERMS WE EMPLOY\n\n    \"Precise ideas and precisely defined words are the wealth and\n    the currency of the mind.\"\n\n    --Introduction to _The Pilgrim's Progress,_ Macmillan's\n    Edition.\n\n\n[Sidenote: No _Indian_ race or religion.]\n\nExperience teaches the necessity of explaining to Western readers\ncertain terms which even long residence in India often fails to make\nclear to Anglo-Indians. Let it be remembered then that the terms _India,\nIndian_, have only a geographical reference: they do not signify any\nparticular race or religion. India is the great triangular continent\nbounded on the south-west and south-east by the sea, and shut in on the\nnorth by the Himalayan Mountains. Self-contained though it be, and\neasily thought of as a geographical unit, we must not think of India as\na racial, linguistic, or religious unit. We may much more correctly\nspeak of _the_ European race, language, or religion, than of _the_\nIndian.\n\n[Sidenote: A Hindu religion.]\n\nThe term _Hindu_ refers to one of the Indian religions, the religion of\nthe great majority no doubt. It is not now a national or geographical\nterm. Practically every Hindu is an Indian, and almost necessarily must\nbe so, but every Indian is not a Hindu. There are Indian Mahomedans,\nsixty-two million of them; Indian Buddhists, a few--the great majority\nof the Buddhists in the \"Indian Empire\" being in Burmah, not in India\nproper; there are Indian Christians, about three million in number; and\nthere are Indian Parsees. A Hindu is the man who professes Hinduism.[31]\n\n[Sidenote: Where is Hindustan?]\n\n_Hindustan_, or the land of the Hindus, is a term that never had any\ngeographical definiteness. In the mouths of Indians it meant the central\nportion of the plain of North India; in English writers of half a\ncentury ago it was often used when all India was meant. In exact writing\nof the present time, the term is practically obsolete.\n\n[Sidenote: Who speak Hindustani?]\n\nUnfortunately for clearness, the term _Hindustani_ not only survives,\nbut survives in a variety of significations. The word is an adjective,\n_pertaining to Hindustan_, and in English it has become the name either\nof the people of Hindustan or of their language. It is in the latter\nsense that the name is particularly confusing. The way out of the\ndifficulty lies in first associating _Hindustani_ clearly with the\ncentral region of Hindustan, the country to the north-east of Agra and\nDelhi. These were the old imperial capitals, be it remembered. Then from\nthat centre, the Hindustani language spread--a central, imperial,\nPersianised language not necessarily superseding the other\nvernaculars--wherever the authority of the empire went. Thus throughout\nIndia, Hindustani became a _lingua franca_, the imperial language. In\nthe Moghul Empire of Northern India it was exactly what \"King's English\"\nwas in the Anglo-Norman kingdom in England in the thirteenth and\nfourteenth centuries. French was the language of the Anglo-Norman court\nof London, as Persian of the court of Delhi or Agra; the Frenchified\nKing's English was the court form of the vernacular in England, as the\nPersianised Hindustani in North India. It was this _lingua franca_ that\nEuropeans in India set themselves to acquire.\n\n[Sidenote: Urdu literature]\n\nContinuing the English parallel--the Hindustani of Delhi, the capital,\nPersianised as the English of London was Frenchified, became the\nrecognised literary medium for North India. The special name _Urdu_,\nhowever, has now superseded the term _Hindustani_, when we think of the\nlanguage as a literary medium. _Urdu_ is the name for literary\nHindustani; in the Calcutta University Calendar, for example, the name\n_Hindustani_ never occurs.\n\n[Sidenote: Hindi language and literature]\n\nAbout the beginning of the nineteenth century another dialect of\nHindustani, called _Hindi_, also gained a literary standing. It contains\nmuch less of Persian than Urdu does, leaning rather to Sanscrit; it is\nwritten in the deva-nagari or Sanscrit character; is associated with\nHindus and with the eastern half of Hindustan; whereas Urdu is written\nin the Persian character, and is associated with Mahomedans and the\nwestern half of Hindustan.[32]\n\n[Sidenote: The Brahmans]\n\nAnother series of terms are likewise a puzzle to the uninitiated. To\nWesterns, the _brahmans_[33] are best known as the priests of the\nHindus; more correctly, however, the name _brahman_ signifies not the\nperformer of priestly duties, but the caste that possesses a monopoly of\nthe performance. The brahman caste is the Hindu _Tribe of Levi_. Every\naccepted Hindu priest is a brahman, although it is far from being the\ncase that every brahman is a priest. As a matter of fact, at the Census\nof 1901 it was found that the great majority of brahmans have turned\naside from their traditional calling. In Bengal proper, only about 16\nper cent. of the brahmans were following priestly pursuits; in the\nMadras Presidency, 11.4 per cent.; and in the Bombay Presidency, 22 per\ncent.\n\n[Sidenote: Brahmanism.]\n\n_Brahmanism_ is being employed by a number of recent writers in place of\nthe older _Hinduism_. Sir Alfred Lyall uses _Brahmanism_ in that sense;\nlikewise Professor Menzies in his recent book, _Brahmanism and\nBuddhism_. Sir Alfred Lyall's employment of the term _Brahmanism_ rather\nthan _Hinduism_, is in keeping with his description of Hinduism, which\nhe defines as the congeries of diverse local beliefs and practices that\nare held together by the employment of brahmans as priests. The\ndescription is a true one; the term Brahmanism represents what is common\nto the Hindu castes and sects; it is their greatest common measure, as\nit were. But yet the fact remains that _Hindus_ speak of themselves as\nsuch, not as _Brahmanists_, and it is hopeless to try to supersede a\ncurrent name. Sir M. Monier Williams employs the term _Brahmanism_ in a\nmore limited and more legitimate sense. Dividing the history of the\nHindu religion into three periods, he calls them the stages of Vedism,\nBrahmanism, and Hinduism respectively. The first is the period of the\nVedas, or earliest sacred books; the second, of the Brahman philosophy,\nfundamentally pantheistic; the third is the period of \"a confused tangle\nof divine personalities and incarnations.\" Sir M. Monier Williams'\nstandard work on the religion of the Hindus is \"_Brahmanism and\nHinduism.\"_ \"Hinduism,\" he tells us, \"is Brahmanism modified by the\ncreeds and superstitions of Buddhists and non-Aryans of all kinds.\"\n\n[Sidenote: Brahm[=a], Brahma.]\n\n[Sidenote: Br[=a]hmas]\n\nWe are not done with this confusing set of terms. _Brahm[=a]_ is the\nfirst person of the Hindu divine triad--the Creator--who along with the\nother two persons of the triad, has proceeded from a divine essence,\n_Brahma_ or _Brahm_. Brahma is Godhead or Deity: Brahm[=a], is _a_\nDeity, a divine _person_ who has emanated from the Godhead, Brahma.\n_Br[=a]hmas_ or theists, believers in Brahma, are a religious body that\noriginated in Bengal in the nineteenth century. Repudiating caste,\nidolatry, and transmigration, they are necessarily cut off from\nHinduism. The body is called the Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j, that is, the\nTheistic Association. Enough for the present; in their respective places\nthese distinctions can be more fully gone into.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII\n\nNEW POLITICAL IDEAS\n\nI. A UNITING INDIA\n\n    \"There are many nations of the Indians, and they do not speak\n    the same language.\"\n\n    --HERODOTUS.[34]\n\n\n[Sidenote: The ideas of citizenship and public questions.]\n\nWith modern education and the awakening of the Indian mind have come\nentirely new political ideas. That there are public questions has in\nfact been discovered; for in India the idea of citizenship, the\nconsciousness of being a political unit, was itself a new idea. We may\nsay that it was made possible in 1835, when an Act of Legislature was\npassed declaring the press free. In 1823 an English editor had been\ndeported from Calcutta for free criticism of the authorities, but after\n1835 it was legal not merely to think but to speak on public questions.\nBefore we pass on, we note the strange inverted sequence of events which\nmay attend on fostered liberty. The right to criticise was bestowed\nbefore any right to be represented in the Legislature or Executive was\nenjoyed. In this freedom to criticise the acts of Government, the India\nof to-day is far ahead of countries like Germany and Russia.\n\n[Sidenote: Government exists for the good of the governed.]\n\nThe new idea of citizenship, thus made possible by a free press, is\nlargely the outcome of three great influences. Christian philanthropic\nideas, disseminated both by precept and example, could not but be\nproducing some sense of brotherhood, and what Burke calls a \"civil\nsociety.\" Then again, the free and often democratic spirit of English\nliterature was being imbibed by thousands; and in the third place,\nthrough the newspapers, English and vernacular, the people were being\nbrought into actual contact with the political life of Great Britain.\nDue particularly to the first of these influences, the noblest of the\nnew Indian political ideas is that tacitly assumed in many of the native\ncriticisms of the British Government in India--high tribute as well as\ncriticism--that Government exists for the good of the governed, and\nindeed responsible for the welfare of the masses. The British Government\nis indeed an amazing network covering the whole continent, ministering\nlife, like the network of the blood-vessels in our frame. At least, its\napologists declare it _to be doing so_, and its native critics declare\nthat it _ought to_. The native press, for example, is prompt to direct\nthe attention of the Government to famine and to summon the Government\nto its duty. In India a noble idea of the Commonwealth and its proper\ngovernment has thus come into being. Likewise, it ought to be added,\nexcept in times of political excitement, and in the case of professional\npoliticians, it is generally acknowledged that the conception of the\nBritish Government in India is noble, and that many officers of\nGovernment are truly the servants of the people. It is not suggested\nthat the policy or the methods should be radically altered. The\npolitician's theme is that the Government is more expensive and less\nsympathetic than it might be, because of the employment of alien\nEuropeans where natives might be employed.\n\n[Sidenote: The new national consciousness.]\n\n[Sidenote: English rule, a chief cause.]\n\n[Sidenote: The very name _Indian_ is English.]\n\nOther new political ideas follow the lines of social change. We have\nseen how in the modern school, the idea of caste gives way before the\nidea of rank in the school, to be followed in College by the idea of\nintellectual distinction, and still later in life by the idea of success\nin some modern career. In the political sphere, modern life is also busy\ndissolving the older and narrower conceptions of life. Atop of the\nsectarian consciousness of being a Hindu or the provincial consciousness\nof belonging to Bengal or Bombay, is coming the consciousness of being\nan Indian. This consciousness of a national unity is one of the\noutstanding features of the time in India, all the more striking because\nhitherto India has been so unwieldily large, and her people incoherent,\nlike dry sand. \"The Indian never knew the feeling of nationality,\" says\nMax M\u00fcller. \"The very name of India is a synonym for caste, as opposed\nto nationality,\" says Sister Nivedita, the pro-Hindu lady already\nreferred to, who likewise notes the emergence of the national idea.[35]\n\"Public spirit or patriotism, as we understand it, never existed among\nthe Hindus,\" writes Mr. Bose, himself an Indian, author of a recent work\non _Hindu Civilisation under British Rule_.[36] And Raja Rammohan Roy,\nthe famous Bengali reformer of the beginning of the nineteenth century,\nwe have already heard denouncing the caste system as \"destructive of\nnational union.\" From what then, during the nineteenth century, has the\nnational consciousness come forth? Many causes may be cited. The actual\nunification effected by the postal, the telegraph, and the railway\norganisation, has done much. The omnipresence of the foreign government,\nall-controlling, has also done much. The current coins and the postage\nstamps with King Edward's head upon them--the same all over India, a few\nnative states excepted--bring home the union of India to the most\nignorant. The constant criticism of the Government in the native press,\nthe meetings of the All-India political association called the Congress,\nand the fact that modern interests, stimulated by daily telegrams from\nall over the world, are international, not provincial or sectarian--all\nthese things combine to give to the modern educated Indian a new Indian\nnational consciousness in place of the old provincial and sectarian one.\nIn short, the British rule has united India, and the awakened mind of\nIndia is rejoicing in the consciousness of the larger existence, and is\nidentifying the ancient glories of certain centres in North India with\nthis new India created by Britain. Never before was there a united India\nin the modern political sense; never, indeed, could there be until\nmodern inventions brought distant places near each other. Two great\nIndian empires there certainly were in the third century B.C. and the\nfourth and fifth centuries A.D., and the paternal benevolence of Asoka,\nthe great Buddhist emperor of the third century B.C., deserves record\nand all honour. Let Indians know definitely who deserves to be called an\nancient Indian emperor, when they wish to lament a lost past; and\ndescending to historical fact and detail, let them compare that period\nwith the present. The later empire referred to was an empire only in the\nold sense of a collection of vassal states. Turning back to the hoary\npast, in which many Indians, even of education, imagine there was a\ngolden Indian empire, we can trace underneath the ancient epic, the\nRamayan, a conquering progress southward to Ceylon itself of a great\nAryan hero, Ram. But of any Indian empire founded by him, we know\nnothing. \"One who has carefully studied the Ramayan will be impressed\nwith the idea that the Aryan conquest had spread over parts of Northern\nIndia only, at the time of the great events which form its\nsubjects.\"[37] Coming down to the period of the greatest extent of the\nMoghul empire in India in the end of the seventeenth century, we find\nthe Emperor Aurangzeb with as extensive a military empire as that of\nAsoka, but with the Mahrattas rising behind him even while he was\nextending his empire southwards. That decadent military despotism cannot\nbe thought of as a union of India. In truth, the old Aryan conquest of\nIndia was not a political conquest, and never has been; it was a\nconquest, very complete in the greater part of India, of new social\nusages and certain new religious ideas. The first complete political\nconquest of India by Aryans was the British conquest, and the ideas\nwhich have come in or been awakened thereby, we are now engaged in\ntracing. As regards the new idea of nationality, we have noted that the\nnew national name _Indian_ now heard upon political platforms, is not a\nnative term, but an importation from Britain along with the English\nlanguage. How, indeed, could the educated Indian employ any other term\nwith the desired comprehensiveness? If he speak of _Hindus_, he excludes\nMahomedans and followers of other religions; if he use a Sanscrit term\nfor _Indians_, he still fails to touch the hearts of Mahomedans and\nothers who identify Sanscrit with Hindus. There is no course left but to\nuse the English language, even while criticising the British rulers. The\nEnglish language has been a prime factor in evoking the new national\nconsciousness, and in the English language the Indian must speak to his\nnew found fellow Indians.[38] Even a considerable portion of the\nliterature of the attempted Revival of Hinduism is in English, strange\nas the conjunction sounds.\n\nHow the thought of Indian unity over against the sovereignty of Britain\nmay reach down even to the humblest, the writer once observed in a\nhumble street in Calcutta. A working man was receiving his farthing's\nworth of entertainment from a peep-show. His eyes were glued to the\npeepholes, to secure his money's worth, for the farthing was no small\nsum to him; and the showman was standing by describing the successive\nscenes in a loud voice, with intent both to serve his customer and to\nstimulate the bystanders' curiosity. Three of the scenes were: \"This is\nthe house of the great Queen near London city,\" \"This is one of the\ngreat Queen's lords writing an order to the Viceroy of Calcutta,\" \"This\nis the great committee that sits in London city.\" He actually used the\nEnglish word _committee_, the picture probably showing the House of\nCommons or the House of Lords. Thus the political constitution of India\nand its unity under Britain are inculcated among the humblest. In the\nminds of the educated, one need not then be surprised at the growth of a\nsense of Indian unity over against British supremacy.\n\n[Sidenote: The Indian National Congress.]\n\n[Sidenote: English, the _lingua franca_ of the Congress.]\n\nThe Indian National Congress, or All-India political association, is the\nembodiment of this new national consciousness of educated Indians, the\nonly embodiment possible while India is so divided in social and\nreligious matters. Were there only ten or twelve million Mahomedans in\nIndia instead of sixty, the new national consciousness would undoubtedly\nhave been a Hindu or religious, instead of a political, consciousness.\nBut in matters religious, Hindu looks across a gulf at Mahomedan, and\nMahomedan at Hindu, neither expecting the other to cross over.\nChristianity, third in numbers in India proper, proclaims the Christian\nGospel to both Hindus and Mahomedans, but is regarded by both as an\nalien.[39] Nor is any All-India _social_ movement possible while social\ndifferences are so sacred as they are. But politically, all India _is_\nalready _one_; her educated men have drunk at _one_ well of political\nideas; citizenship and its rights are attractive and destroy no\ncherished customs; and in the English language there is a new _lingua\nfranca_ in unison with the new ideas. The Indian National Congress is\nthe natural outcome. There, representatives of races which a hundred\nyears ago made war on one another, of castes that never either eat\ntogether or intermarry, now fraternise in one peaceful assembly,\ninspired by the novel idea that they are citizens. The Congress meets\nannually in December in one or other of the cities of India. The first\nmeeting at Bombay in 1885 has been described as follows[40]: \"There were\nmen from Madras, the blackness of whose complexions seemed to be made\nblacker by spotless white turbans which some of them wore. A few others\nhailing from the same Presidency were in simplest native fashion,\nbareheaded and barefooted and otherwise lightly clad, their bodies from\nthe waist upwards being only partially protected by muslin shawls. They\nhad preferred to retain their national dress and manners; and in this\nrespect they presented a marked contrast to the delegates from Bengal.\nSome of these appeared in entirely European costume, while others could\neasily be recognised as Bengalis by the peculiar cap with a flap behind\nwhich they had donned. None of them wore the gold rings or diamond\npendants which adorned the ears of some of the Madrassees; nor had they\ntheir foreheads painted like their more orthodox and more conservative\nbrethren from the Southern presidency. There were Hindustanis from\nDelhi, Agra, and Lucknow, some of whom wore muslin skull-caps and\ndresses chiefly made of the same fine cloth. There were delegates from\nthe North-West--bearded, bulky, and large-limbed men--in their coats and\nflowing robes of different hues, and in turbans like those worn by Sikh\nsoldiers. There were stalwart Sindhees from Karachee wearing their own\ntall hat surmounted by a broad brim at top instead of bottom. In the\nstrange assemblage were to be observed the familiar figures of Banyas\nfrom Gujarat, of Mahrattas in their cart-wheel turbans, and of Parsees\nin their not very elegant head-dress, likened to a slanting roof.\nAssembled in the same hall, they presented a variety of costumes and\ncomplexions scarcely to be witnessed except at a fancy ball.\" Now and\nagain, we may add, a speaker expresses himself in a vernacular, and with\nthe inborn Indian courtesy and patience the assembly will listen; but\nthe language of the motley gathering is English; the address of the\npresident and his rulings are in English; the protests, claims, and\nresolutions of the Congress are in English. For in the sphere of\npolitics, the new national feeling _confessedly_ looks to Britain for\nideals. Apologies for India's social customs and for her religious ideas\nand ideals are not wanting in India at the present time, for in matters\nsocial and religious, as we shall see, the political reformers are often\nardently conservative, or pro-Indian at least. But in the sphere of\npolitics it is the complete democratic constitution of Britain that\nlooms before India's leaders. Britons can view with sympathy the rise of\nthe national feeling as the natural and inevitable fruit of contact with\nBritain and of education in the language of freedom, and even although\nthe new problems of Indian statesmanship may call forth all the powers\nof British statesmen. Like a young man conscious of noble lineage and of\ngreat intellectual power, New India, brought up under Britain's care, is\nloudly asserting that she can now take over the management of the\ncontinent which Britain has unified and made what it is.\n\nWhere the \"National Congress\" and the Congress ideas have sprung from is\nmanifest when she first presents herself upon the Indian stage. As her\nfirst president she has a distinguished barrister of Calcutta, Mr. W.C.\nBonnerjee, of brahman caste by birth, but out of caste altogether\nbecause of frequent visits to Britain. Patriot though he is--nay,\nrather, as a true patriot, he has broken and cast away the shackles of\ncaste. His English education is manifest when he opens his lips, for in\nIndia there is no more complete master of the English language, and very\nfew greater masters will be found even in Britain. Further, as her first\nGeneral Secretary and general moving spirit, the first Congress has a\nScotchman, Mr. A.O. Hume, commonly known as the \"Father of the\nCongress.\" His leading of the Congress we can understand when we know\nthat he is the son of the celebrated reformer and member of Parliament,\nthe late Dr. Joseph Hume.\n\n[Sidenote: Representative Government.]\n\nSeveral of the claims of the Congress have been conceded in whole or in\npart. Since the first meeting in 1885, elected members have been added\nto the Legislative Councils in the three chief provinces, Bengal,\nMadras, and Bombay, and new Legislative Councils set up in the United\nProvinces and the Punjab. To the Council for all India, the Viceroy's\nCouncil, also have been added five virtually elected members, out of a\ncouncil now numbering about twenty-two members in all. Four of the new\nmembers represent the chief provinces, and the fifth the Chamber of\nCommerce, Calcutta. Other five the Viceroy nominates to represent other\nprovinces or other interests. Looking at the representation of Indians,\nit is noteworthy that in 1880 only two Indians had seats in the\nViceroy's Council, whereas in 1905 there were no fewer than six. The\nProvincial Legislative Council of Bombay will suffice as illustration of\nthe stage which Representative Government has now reached. Eight of the\ntwenty-two members are virtually elected. That is to say, certain bodies\nnominate representatives, and only in most exceptional circumstances\nwould the Governor refuse to accept the nominees. And who make the\nnominations? Who are the electors enjoying the new political citizenship\nof India? We shall not expect that the electors are \"the people\" in the\nBritish or American sense: no Congress yet asks for political rights for\nthem. The idea regarding citizenship still is that it is a royal\nconcession, as it were to royal burghs, not that it is one of the rights\nof men. The University elects a member to the Governor's Council, for it\nhas intelligence and can make its voice heard; the Corporation of Bombay\nelects a representative, for in the capital are concentrated the\nenlightenment and the wealth of the province; the importance of the\nBritish merchants must be recognised, and so the Chambers of Commerce of\nBombay and Karachi send each a representative. Other groups of\nmunicipalities elect one; the boards of certain country districts elect\none; and finally two groups of landlords elect one representative each.\nIt comes to this, that the men of learning, the burgesses of the chief\ntowns, the British traders, and the landowners and country gentlemen,\nhave now a measure of citizenship in the modern sense of the word.\n\nThe same feeling of citizenship has been given recognition to in 759\ntowns, whose municipalities are now partly elected, the right of\nelection having been greatly extended by the Local Self-Government Acts\nof 1882-84. In these Municipalities even more than in the higher\nCouncils the new educated Indian comes to the front. According to the\nroll of voters, it is property that enjoys the municipal franchise;\nemphatically so, for a wealthy citizen of Calcutta might conceivably\ncast three hundred votes for his Municipality throughout the twenty-five\nwards of the city; but they are English-speaking Indians in all cases\nwho are returned as members. Politically, this is the day of the\nEnglish-educated Indians. Such is the stage of the recognition of this\nnew idea of citizenship in India. The idea represents a great advance\nduring the British period, although, broadly speaking, it has not yet\nreached the stage of British opinion prior to 1832. Nevertheless one\nfeels justified in saying that in present circumstances the desire of\nthe educated class for a measure of citizenship has been reasonably met.\nOf course at the examination for the Indian Civil Service, held annually\nin London, the Indian competes on a complete equality with all the youth\nof the Empire.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VIII\n\nNEW POLITICAL IDEAS\n\nII. FALSE PATRIOTISM\n\n    \"Now do I know that love is blind.\"\n\n    ALFRED AUSTIN.\n\n\n[Sidenote: Cleavage of opinion--European _v._ Native.]\n\nAn unpleasant aspect of the new idea is much in evidence at the present\ntime. On almost every public question, the cleavage of the public\nopinion is Europeans _versus_ Natives. Far be it from me to assert that\nthe natives only are carried away by the community feeling. A case in\npoint is the violence of the European agitation over the \"Ilbert Bill\"\nof 1883, to permit trial of Europeans by native judges in rural criminal\ncourts. Our question merely is: How has the new regime affected native\nideas? Given then, say, a charge of assault upon a native by a European\nor Eurasian, or the reverse--a case by no means unknown--the native\npress and the class they represent are ranged at once, as a matter of\ncourse, upon the native's side. Given a great public matter, like Lord\nCurzon's Bill of 1903 for the necessary reform of the Indian\nUniversities, immediately educated Indians and the native press perceive\nin it a veiled attempt to limit the higher education in order to\ndiminish the political weight of the educated class. The 1904 expedition\ninto Thibet was unanimously approved by the Anglo-Indian, and as\nunanimously disapproved by the native press. Educated India no doubt\njoined with the rest of the Empire in wishing success to Japan in the\n1904-5 war with Russia, but the war presented itself primarily to the\nIndian mind as a great struggle between Asia and Europe. Other lines of\ncleavage may temporarily show themselves,--among natives the division\ninto Hindus and Mahomedans, or into officials and non-officials; but on\nthe first occasion when a European and a Native are opposed, or when the\nGovernment takes any step, the minor fissures close, and the new\nconsciousness of nationality unites the Indians. European lines of\ncleavage like the division between capital and labour or between\ncommerce and land have not yet risen above the Indian horizon.\n\nThe Indian Christian community occupies the peculiar position of sharing\nin the new-born national consciousness as strongly as any, and yet of\nbeing identified with the British side in the eyes of the Hindu and\nMahomedan communities.\n\n[Sidenote: Anti-British bias.]\n\n[Sidenote: India ruled by Indians.]\n\nThus, almost inevitably, an anti-British bias has been generated, one of\nthe noteworthy and regrettable changes in the Indian mind within the\nlast half-century. Probably many would declare that the unifying\nnational consciousness of which I have spoken is nothing more than a\nracial anti-British bias. At all events, hear an independent Indian\nwitness regarding the bias.[41] \"There is a strong and strange ferment\nworking in certain ranks of Indian society.... Instead of looking upon\nthe English rulers as their real benefactors, they are beginning to view\ntheir actions suspiciously, seizing every opportunity of criticising and\ncensuring their rulers.... The race feeling between rulers and ruled,\ninstead of diminishing, has increased with the increase, and spread with\nthe spread, of literary education. That all this is more or less true at\npresent cannot be denied by an impartial political observer.\" An\nup-to-date illustration of the bias appears in the address of the\nChairman of the National Congress of 1906. \"The educated classes,\" he\nsays, \"... now see clearly that the [British] bureaucracy is growing\nfrankly selfish and openly opposed to their political aspirations.\"\nWhile regretting that feeling and the prejudice that often mingles with\nit, let those interested in India at least understand the feeling. It is\nthe natural outcome of the new national consciousness. Even educated\nnatives are in general too ignorant of India, past and present, to\nappreciate the debt of India to Britain, and how great a share of the\nadministration of India they themselves--the educated Indians--actually\nenjoy. For every subordinate executive position in the vast imperial\norganisation is held by a native of India, and \"almost the entire\noriginal jurisdiction of Civil Justice has passed out of the hands of\nEuropeans into those of Indians.\"[42] But the anti-British bias, let us\non our part understand. The attitude of educated Indians to the British\nGovernment of India, and to Anglo-Indians as a body, is that of a\npolitical opposition, ignorant of many pertinent facts, divided from the\nparty in power by racial and religious differences, and with no visible\nprospect of succeeding to office. The National Congress is the permanent\nOpposition in India. A permanent Opposition cannot but be biassed, and\nits press will seize at everything that will justify the feeling of\nhostility.\n\n[Sidenote: Illustrations of the bias: Famines.]\n\nAn outstanding illustration of the anti-British spirit is the frequently\nexpressed opinion that the Indian famines are a result of British rule,\nor at all events have been aggravated thereby. The reasoning is that\nIndia is being financially drained to the amount of between thirty and\nforty millions sterling a year, and that the people of India have thus\nno staying fund to keep them going when famine comes. Having said this,\nwe ought perhaps to quote the opinion (1903), on the other side, of Mr.\nA.P. Sinnett, ex-editor of one of the leading Indian newspapers, and, as\na theosophist, very unlikely to be prejudiced in favour of Britain. He\ninsists \"that loss of life in famine time is infinitesimal compared with\nwhat it used to be.\" \"As for impoverishment,\" he goes on to say, \"we\nhave poured European capital into the country by scores of millions for\npublic works and the establishment of factories, and we have enriched\nIndia instead of impoverishing it to an extent that makes the Home\nCharges--of which such agitators as Digby always exaggerate the\nimportance--a mere trifle in the balance.\" Lord Curzon's statement of\nthree or four years back was that there were eight hundred and\ntwenty-five crores of rupees (five hundred and fifty millions sterling)\nof buried capital in India; and he might have added the easily\nascertainable fact that the sum is yearly being added to. The\nanti-British idea was put forward in 1885 by the late Mr. William Digby,\nan ardent supporter of the Congress; the Congress adopted it in one of\nits resolutions in 1896, and the idea has lamentably caught on. In 1897\na Conference of Indians resident in London did not mince their language.\nIn their opinion, \"of all the evils and terrible misery that India has\nbeen suffering for a century and a half, and of which the latest\ndevelopments are the most deplorable famine and plague arising from\never-increasing poverty,... the main cause is the unrighteous and\nun-British system of Government, which produces an unceasing and ever\nincreasing bleeding of the country,\" etc. etc.[43] Such language, such\nideas, do not call for refutation, here at least; they are symptoms only\nof a state of mind now prevailing, out of which educated India must\nsurely grow.\n\nNor need it be forgotten that the rise of the anti-British feeling was\nforeseen and political danger apprehended when the question of English\neducation for natives of India was under discussion. A former\nGovernor-General, Lord Ellenborough, declared to a committee of the\nHouse of Commons in 1852, that England must not expect to retain her\nhold on India if English ideas were imparted to the people. \"No\n_intelligent_ people would submit to our Government,\" were his words--a\nsentiment repudiated with indignation by the learned Bengali, the late\nRev. Dr. K.M. Banerjea. In the same spirit, apparently, Sir Alfred Lyall\nstill contemplates with some fear the rapid reformation of religious\nbeliefs under modern influences. He sees that the old deities and ideas\nare being dethroned, and that the responsibility for famines, formerly\nimputed to the gods, is being cast upon the British Government. \"The\nBritish Government,\" he says, \"having thrown aside these lightning\nconductors [the old theocratic system], is much more exposed than a\nnative ruler would be to shocks from famines or other wide-spread\nmisfortunes.\" \"Where no other authority is recognised, the visible ruler\nbecomes responsible for everything.\"[44] Fortunately, \"policy\" of that\nsort has not prevailed with Indian statesmen in the past, and Britain\ncan still retain self-respect as enlightener and ruler of India.\n\n[Sidenote: Championing of things Indian.]\n\nThe championing of all things Indian is another recent phase of the same\nnational consciousness. As the work of Britain is depreciated, the\nheroes, the beliefs, and the practices of India are exalted and defended\nas such. Idolatry and caste have their apologists. At almost every\npublic meeting, according to the late Mr. Monomohun Ghose of Calcutta,\nhe heard the remark made \"that the ancient civilisation of India was far\nsuperior to that which Europe ever had.\"[45] In the political lament\nover a golden past, there is glorification by Hindus of the Mahomedan\nemperor Akbar, praise of the Native States and their rule as opposed to\nthe condition of British India, and there are apologies for leaders in\nthe Mutiny of 1857. Much of that is natural and proper patriotism, no\ndoubt, and no one would deny the ancient glories of India or the many\nadmirable characteristics of the people of India to-day. It is the\nself-deceiving patriotism, the blind ancestor-worship, of which we are\nspeaking as a phase of modern opinion. As an instance when Indians\ncertainly did themselves injustice by this spirit, we may single out the\ncelebrated trial in 1897 of the Hon. Mr. Tilak, member of the\nLegislative Council of the Governor of Bombay. The Mahrattas of Western\nIndia look back to Sivaji as the founder of their political power, which\nlasted down to 1817, and have lately instituted an annual celebration of\nSivaji as the hero of the Mahratta race. One great blot rests on\nSivaji's career. In one campaign he invited the Mahomedan general\nopposing him to a personal conference, and stabbed him while in the act\nof embracing him. It was at one of these Sivaji celebrations in 1897\nthat Mr. Tilak abandoned himself to the pro-Indian and anti-British\nfeeling, glorifying Sivaji's use of the knife upon foreigners. \"Great\nmen are above common principles of law,\" ... he said. \"In killing Afzal\nKhan did Sivaji sin?\" ... \"In the Bhagabat Gita,\" he replied to himself,\n\"Krishna has counselled the assassination of even one's preceptors and\nblood relations.... If thieves enter one's house, and one's wrists have\nno strength to drive them out, one may without compunction shut them in\nand burn them. God Almighty did not give a charter ... to the foreigners\nto rule India, Sivaji strove to drive them out of his fatherland, and\nthere is no sin of covetousness in that.\" Practical application of Mr.\nTilak's language was soon forthcoming in the assassination of two\nBritish officers in the same city of Poona. Mr. Tilak, victim of his own\neloquence and of the spirit of the day, was necessarily prosecuted for\nhis inflammatory speech, and was sent to prison for eighteen months. But\nit is not too much to say that the _unanimous_ feeling of educated India\nwent with Mr. Tilak and regarded him as a martyr.\n\n[Sidenote: Boycott of British goods.]\n\nFrom the pro-Indian feeling to the anti-British Boycott feeling is only\none step along the road that new-educated India is treading. The boycott\nof British goods in 1905 has been the next step. The provocation alleged\nby the politicians who organised the boycott was the division of the\nprovince of Bengal. Whether that was cause sufficient to justify the\nboycott or a mere pretext for another anti-British step is now of\nsecondary importance. The plea of encouragement of native industries we\nmay set aside as an afterthought. The boycott has been declared, and\nwhat concerns us is to see the national feeling now take the form of a\ndeclaration of commercial war upon Great Britain--none the less\ndisconcerting because some of those concerned clearly have an eye,\nhowever foolishly, upon Boston in 1773 and the war thereafter. It gives\npause to India's well-wishers. \"India for the Indians,\" will that come\nnext? There no friend of India dare wish her success, to be a possible\nprey to Russia or Germany, or even to Japan. But reasoning to the\nlogical issue, we get light upon our premisses. _India for what\nIndians?_, we ask ourselves. For Hindus or Mahomedans; for the million,\nEnglish-speaking, or the many-millioned masses? For many a day yet to\ncome it will be Britain's duty to hold the balance, to instruct in\nself-government and to learn from her blunders.\n\nThat the national feeling of Indians may become a main strand in a\nstrong Imperial feeling, as is the national feeling of Scotland, must be\nthe wish of all friends of India. But how is the Indian feeling to be\ntransformed?\n\n[Sidenote: Remedies.]\n\n[Sidenote: Instruction in History and Political Economy.]\n\n[Sidenote: High-minded Anglo-Indians.]\n\nThe new Social Ideas of India have asserted themselves in spite of\nopposing ideas, deep-rooted; on the other hand, the new Political Ideas\nare in accordance with the natural ambition of educated Indians, and\nhave had no difficulty in expanding and spreading. In comparison with\nthe new social ideas, in consequence, the new political ideas are a\nsomewhat rank and artificial growth, forced by editors and politicians,\nand warped by ignorance and prejudice. The widely current idea that,\nowing to British rule, the poverty of the Indian people is now greater,\nand that the famines are more frequent and severe than in former\ndynasties, is the outstanding instance of the rank growth. Neither the\nallegation of greater poverty nor the causes of the acknowledged low\nstandard of living have been studied except in the fashion of party\npoliticians. Another of the ideas, as widely current, is that every ton\nof rice or wheat exported is an injury to the poor. A third is that the\npayments made in Britain by the Government of India are virtually\ntribute, meanly exacted, instead of honest payment for cash received and\nfor services rendered. Again, what can be the remedy? In the early part\nof the nineteenth century, the Foreign Mission Committee of the Church\nof Scotland objected to Dr. Duff, their missionary, teaching Political\nEconomy in the Church's Mission College, the General Assembly's\nInstitution, Calcutta. They feared lest the East India Company would\ndeem it an interference in politics.[46] In 1897, after the Tilak case\nalready referred to, the writer on Indian affairs in _The Times_\ncomplained of the teaching of historical half-truths and untruths in\nIndian schools and colleges, instancing the partisan writings of Burke\nand Macaulay, and many Indian text-books full of glaring historical\nperversions. The remedy for such erroneous ideas is certainly not to\nwithhold the present dole of knowledge, but to teach the whole truth.\nThe recent History of India and Political Economy with reference to\nIndia should be compulsory subjects for every student in an Indian\nUniversity. It ought to be the policy of Government to select the ablest\nmen for professors and teachers of such subjects. If, along with that\nremedy, more Anglo-Indians would take a high view of their mission to\nIndia, and of their residence in that country, much of that regrettable\nbias and bitterness on the part of Indians would surely pass away. If\ninstead of adopting the attitude of exiles, thinking only of the\ntermination of the exile and how to while away the interval,\nAnglo-Indians would take some interest in something Indian outside their\nbusiness, much would be gained! The best Anglo-Indians are eager to\npromote intercourse between Europeans and Indians, but many\nAnglo-Indians, whatever the cause, seem incapable of friendly\nintercourse. On the matters that should interest both them and their\nfellow-citizens in India, they have in them nothing save unreasoned\nfeelings. These form the numerous class, of whom Sir Henry Cotton spoke\nin an address in London in February 1904, to whom it is an offence to\ntravel in the same railway-carriage with Indians. These are the\ncorrupters of good feeling between Britons and Indians, as sympathetic\nmen are the salt that preserves what good feeling may still exist. In\nevery Indian sphere the men of the latter class are well known to the\nnative community, and are always spoken of with cordiality. The writer\nremembers trying to have a talk with a British soldier about the\ngenerals of the army, and how the man seemed unable to do more than say,\nwith enthusiasm, of Lord Roberts and General Wauchope and others, \"Yon\nwas a man!\" and as depreciatorily of others again, \"Yon was no man at\nall.\" Such sympathetic \"men,\" instinctively discerned, India has much\nneed of, if this anti-British feeling, so far as it is not inevitable,\nis to be checked. In such \"men\" the new Indian feelings of manhood and\ncitizenship and nationality will find recognition and response, in spite\nof displeasing accompaniments, for such feelings we must look for under\nBritish rule and from English and Christian education. From such \"men,\"\nalso, the new Indians will accept frank condemnation of social\nirrationalities or political exaggerations, as _e.g._ the notion that\nthose have right to claim full share in the British Empire's management\nwho would outcaste a fellow-Indian for visiting Britain, even had he\ngone to state their case before the House of Commons. To speak of laymen\nonly, there are no Anglo-Indians more trusted than those who make no\nsecret of their desire for the advancement of India's welfare through a\nreligious reformation, who hold that this purely pro-Indian national\nfeeling is as yet imperfect because divorced from the idea of the unity\nof mankind and the concomitant idea of the progress of the whole race.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IX\n\nNEW RELIGIOUS IDEAS--ARE THERE ANY?\n\n  \"From low to high doth dissolution climb.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n  Truth fails not; but her outward forms that bear\n  The longest date do melt like frosty rime,\n  That in the morning whitened hill and plain\n  And is no more; drop like the tower sublime\n  Of yesterday, which royally did wear\n  His crown of weeds, but could not even sustain\n  Some casual shout that broke the silent air,\n  Or the unimaginable touch of Time.\"\n\n    WORDSWORTH.\n\n\n[Sidenote: A Renaissance without a reformation.]\n\nIt would be interesting to speculate what the Renaissance of the\nsixteenth century would have done for Europe had it been unaccompanied\nby a Reformation of religion. Without the Reformation, we may aver there\nwould have been for the British nation no Bible of 1611, no Pilgrim\nFathers to America, and no Revolution of 1688, along with all that these\nthings imply of progress many-fold. What might have been, however,\nalthough interesting as a speculation, is too uncertain to be discussed\nfurther with profit. I only desire to give a general idea of the\nreligious situation in India at the close of the nineteenth century.\nThere has been a Renaissance without a Reformation.\n\nInto the new intellectual world the Hindu mind has willingly entered,\nbut progress in religious ideas has been slow and reluctant. The new\n_political_ idea of the unity of India and the consciousness of\ncitizenship were pleasing discoveries that met with no opposition; but\nthat same new Indian national consciousness resented any departure from\nthe old _social_ and _religious_ ideas.\n\n[Sidenote: Meaning of the term _religious_.]\n\nIn speaking of the development of religious ideas in India, I use the\nterm _religious_ in the modern sense. Under religion, in India is\ncomprehended much that in Europe would be reckoned within the _social_\nsphere. In India all questions of inter-marriage and of eating together,\nmany questions regarding occupations and the relations of earning\nmembers of a family to idle members, are religious not social questions.\n\nThe case was similar among the Jews, we may remember. As recorded in the\nfifteenth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, two of the three\ninjunctions of the Jerusalem Church to the Gentile Church at Antioch\ndeal with these same socio-religious matters. Blood and animals killed\nby strangling were to be prohibited as food, and certain marriages also\nwere forbidden.\n\nPerhaps among Europeans the question of burial _v_. cremation may be\ninstanced as a matter of social custom that has been made a religious\nquestion. But in no country more than in India have customs, _mores_,\ncome also to mean morals. A halo of religious sanctity encircles the\nthings that have been and are. Taking \"religion,\" however, in the modern\nsense, we ask: Although there has not been any great Reformation of\nreligion, have religious ideas undergone no noteworthy development? It\nis well to put the question definitely with regard to religion, although\nin the opening chapter abundant testimony to a general change in ideas\nhas already been cited. There _is_ no lack of specific evidence as to\nreligious changes, and the adoption of certain Christian ideas.\n\nSir Alfred Lyall's observations let us first of all recall, for he\npossesses all the experience of an Indian Civil Servant and Governor of\na Province--the United Provinces. He speaks both for officials and for\nEuropeans conversant with India.[47] Speaking in the person of an\northodox brahman surveying the moral and material changes that English\nrule is producing in India, he says: \"We are parting rapidly under ...\nthis Public Instruction with our religious beliefs.\" The old brahman\nwarns the British Government that the old deities are being dethroned,\nand that the responsibility for famines, formerly imputed to the gods,\nis being cast upon the British Government. Another official witness\nspeaks still more plainly. _The Bengal Government Report_ upon the\npublications of the year 1899 asserts: \"All this revolution in the\nreligious belief of the educated Hindu has been brought about as much by\nthe dissemination of Christian thought by missionaries as by the study\nof Hindu scriptures; for Christian influence is detectable in many of\nthe Hindu publications of the year.\" The writer of the _Report_ is a\nHindu gentleman. The _Report of the Census of India_, 1901, declares\nthat \"the influence of Christian teaching is ... far reaching, and that\nthere are many whose acts and opinions have been greatly modified\nthereby.\" After these statements from secular and official writers, we\nmay refrain from quoting from Mission authorities more than the\nstatement of the Decennial Conference of representative missionaries\nfrom all India in 1902. The statement refers to South India.\n\"Christianity,\" we are told, \"is in the air. The higher classes are\nassimilating its ideas.\"[48] Thus from East and North and South, from\nofficials and non-officials, from Europeans and natives, comes\nconcurrent testimony. There is no declared Reformation, but Christian\nand Western religious ideas are leavening India.\n\n[Sidenote: Variety of religious ideas in India.]\n\nTo the student of Comparative Religion, or of Christianity, or of the\ngeneral progress of nations, that testimony from India is particularly\ninteresting. To the student of Comparative Religion, India presents a\nparticularly attractive field. Not hidden away in sacred classics or in\nthe records of travellers, but as elements of existing religions,\nprofessed by men around, are illustrations of most of the types of\nreligious thought and practice. There are the pantheism of certain Hindu\nascetics, the polytheism of the masses, the animism of aboriginal races,\nand the varieties of theism of Christians, Mahomedans, and the new\nHindus respectively. There are the curious phenomena of goddesses as\nwell as gods, and of distinctive features in the character and worship\nof the female deities. There is the whole scale of worship up from\nbloody sacrifices and self-tortures and from worship where the priest is\neverything, to worship like that of Mahomedans and of Protestant\nChristians, where a mediatory priesthood is virtually repudiated. There\nis the stage, still farther beyond, at which the worshipper is supposed\nto be able to say of himself \"I am God.\" Of the first and last stages,\nIndia may be called the special fields, for probably nowhere else in the\nworld are so many animals killed in sacrifice as at the temple of\nKalighat in Calcutta; and the last stage, as an observable religious\nphenomenon, is peculiar to India. In India there is presented to us\nsalvation in the attainment of an eternal existence along with God, as\namong Christians and Mahomedans and many of the less educated Hindus;\nand there is salvation in deliverance from further lives, as among those\nHindus who hold the doctrine of transmigration. In India all these\nvarieties of religious thought and practice are actual, perceptible\nphenomena, ready for first-hand observation by the student of\nComparative Religion. But still more interesting to him is that they are\nthere in mutual contact, and telling upon each other. For in the sphere\nof human beliefs, the student is much more than an outside observer and\nclassifier. He has his own conception of truth, and is interested in\nobserving how far in each case there is a convergence towards truth or a\ndivergence from it. In the sphere of human beliefs he holds further,\nthat, given opportunity, the nearer to truth the greater certainty of\nsurvival. Given opportunity, as already postulated, the law of beliefs\nis the survival of the truest. Truth will prevail.\n\n[Sidenote: Dynamical elements of Christianity.]\n\n[Sidenote: Dynamical doctrines in other spheres]\n\nTo the student of Christianity, again, that same concurrent testimony is\nprofoundly interesting. Certain Christian ideas are being assimilated in\nIndia. Certain cardinal aspects of Christianity are proving themselves\npossessed of inherent force and attractiveness. They are showing that\nthey possess force not from authority, or tradition, or as part of a\nsystem of doctrine, or as racially fitting, but when presented in new\nand often very unfavourable surroundings. Borrowing an expression from\nphysical science, certain elements of Christianity are proving\n_themselves dynamical_. For in non-Christian India, ecclesiastical\nauthority or tradition and the system of Christian doctrine as such,\npossess no force. By illustrations from other spheres, let us make clear\nwhat is meant by such dynamical elements of Christianity. The doctrine\nof the Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection was put before\nthe world by Darwin in 1859, and within the half century has been\naccepted almost as an axiom by the whole civilised world. Undoubtedly\nthat doctrine has proved itself dynamical. On the other hand, a few\nyears earlier than the publication of _The Origin of Species_, another\nbody of new doctrine was propounded to Britain and the world, and\nstrongly urged by its upholders, namely, the doctrine of Free Trade--the\nadvantage to the community of buying in the cheapest market. True or\nfalse, that body of doctrine has not proved dynamical among the nations,\nfor the great majority of peoples still repudiate the doctrines of Free\nTrade. Similarly certain elements of Christianity are commending\nthemselves to new India, and certain others are failing to do so at this\ntime.\n\n[Sidenote: Illustrations from the history of Christianity.]\n\nFrom century to century these dynamical elements of Christianity may\nvary; and it is profoundly interesting to the student of the history of\nreligious beliefs to observe the variation. In the early apostolic\ntimes, when the apostles and disciples were \"scattered abroad,\" we see\nplainly in the Acts of the Apostles that the dynamical element of\nChristianity is the Resurrection of Our Lord. It is that which tells,\nand His coming reign--with Jewish audiences in particular. It was,\n_e.g._, the manifestation of Christ to St. Paul on his way to Damascus\nthat completed the conversion of his life. And so, repeatedly throughout\nthe record of the Acts of the Apostles, they are described as\nwitness--bearers of the resurrection to the outside world. [Greek:\nMegal\u00ea dynamei], \"_with great power_ gave the apostles their witness of\nthe resurrection of the Lord Jesus; and great grace was upon them\nall.\"[49] And yet--dynamical elements vary--in the different atmosphere\nof Athens (we are twice told in so many words) this same resurrection of\nChrist dug a gulf between St. Paul and the Athenians.[50] Passing to a\nvery different period, the latter half of the eighteenth century, the\nperiod of the rise of Methodism and the revival of religion in England,\nthe period of new interest in the inmates of prisons, of agitation for\nthe abolition of slavery, of the foundation of all the great missionary\nsocieties, the period of the French Revolution and the demand at home\nfor extension of the franchise, all outcome of the same\ninspiration,--what was the strong epidemic thought? Reading the\nreligious history of the time, we feel that the power that passed from\nsoul to soul was a tremulously intense realisation of the family of God\nand the love of God for men, represented in Christ's voluntary death\nupon the cross, love for the neglected and the enslaved in their sins\nand their sorrows. And again in our own day, when we are tempted to say\nthat the consciousness of God and the eternal, the primary religious\ninstincts, are fading, what by common consent is really dynamical among\neducated men? Assuredly not the shibboleths of High or Low Church. It is\nthe person of Jesus Christ that is dynamical; what He was on earth, what\nHe has been ever since in the hearts of individuals and in the Church.\nIn a real sense we are starting again from and with Himself.\nAnticipating, let us say that these two elements most recently dynamical\nin Britain have had force likewise in India.\n\n[Sidenote: India a new touch-stone of Christianity.]\n\nIndia in the nineteenth century has been indeed a new touchstone to the\nChristian religion; and, in brief, to make plain how far Christianity\nhas proved its force and its fitness to survive will occupy the\nremaining chapters of this book. What has been the nature and extent of\nthe impact of Christian and modern thought upon India, and particularly\nupon Hinduism? Of course I am thinking particularly of the educated\nnative Hindu community that has sprung up during the century just\nclosed. The dynamic of Christianity, which it is our task to test,\nimplies a measure of conscious and intelligent approval. Japan is\nanother such testing ground. Indeed the only large fields where\nChristianity is presented to bodies of non-Christian men able to yield\napproval or refuse it on intelligent grounds, of which they are\nconscious, are India and Japan. In China also there are no doubt large\nbodies of literati, but as a class they have not yet come into the\nmodern world and into contact with Christianity. Even down to the Boxer\nrising of 1900, the wall of conservative patriotism shut off the\nliterati in China from the outer civilisation and religions.\n\n[Sidenote: Indians themselves to be our witnesses.]\n\nFortunately for students of India, her new literati are not merely in\ntouch with the modern world, but express their minds readily in public\nmeetings and in print. From themselves we shall chiefly quote in\njustifying the statements that will be made regarding the former or the\nmodern religious opinions of India. To non-Christian or secular writers,\nalso, we shall chiefly go, that the bias may rather be against than for\nthe acknowledgment of change and progress. Our plan is to pronounce as\nlittle as possible upon either the Christian or the Hindu positions. We\nare observers of the religious ideas of modern India, and desire our\nreaders to come into touch with modern Indians and to see for\nthemselves.\n\n[Sidenote: Obstacles to changes in religion.]\n\n[Sidenote: Education strips new Indians of belief.]\n\nTruth is great and will prevail, but let us not under-estimate the\ndifficulties in the way of new opinions in India, where these do not\nappeal to the natural desires for power or status or comfort. I have\nalready referred to the deep-rooted notion that Hinduism is of the soil\nof India, and adherence to it bound up with the national honour. I refer\nto it here again only to glance at a kindred notion, common among\nAnglo-Indians, that the Indian religion is the outcome of Indian\nenvironment, and is \"consequently\" the best religion for India. That\nsuperficial fallacy, undoubtedly, alienates the sympathy of many\nAnglo-Indians from religious and social progress in India. Thrice at\nleast did one of the most distinguished viceroys, when addressing native\naudiences, advise them to stick to their own beliefs, using these or\nvery similar words. He was addressing Mahomedans at one place, Hindus at\nthe second place, and Buddhists at the third, and we leave his advice at\none place to contradict his advice at another. Certainly let us allow\nfor variation in local usage, and in subjective opinion, while we are\ninsisting on the universality and objectivity of truth. For in spite of\nnew and strange environment, in spite of that prevailing notion that\nreligion is a racial thing, of the natural disinclination to change, of\nmodern agnosticism and materialism when the old ideas do give way--in\nspite of these things, some of the cardinal features of Christianity are\ncommending themselves to educated India. Far from religion being racial,\nthe recent religious evolution of India suggests that in respect of the\nreligious instinct and the religious faculty, mankind are one, not\ndivided. _A priori_, therefore, we might anticipate that the elements of\nChristianity which have proved dynamical with new India will be the same\nthat have proved their dynamic with educated men at home. So far as the\nsituation in India has been created by the destructive influence of\nmodern education, and by what may be called the modern spirit, the same\ninfluences are telling both in Europe and in India; they have come from\nEurope to India. There is the same unwillingness to believe in the\nsupernatural, and the same demand that religion shall satisfy ethical\nand utilitarian tests. One difference, however, we may note. The\neducated men of India may not be living so entirely in the modern\natmosphere as the men of Europe and America; but in India the modern\nspirit finds usages and systems of thought more inconsistent with modern\nideas. As a consequence, where in India the modern spirit _has_ come, it\nhas stripped men barer of belief. Listen to the following curious\nconglomeration, showing the influences at work, constructive and\ndestructive. It is a passage from the pamphlet already referred to, _The\nFuture of India_; the author is arguing for what he calls \"practical\nrecognition of the Fatherhood of God\"--one new positive idea. That idea\nhe takes to mean that \"God is the Father of all nations and religions,\"\nand that _therefore_ \"it does not matter much to what religion a man\nbelongs, so far as the future of his soul is concerned.\" Does not that\nsignify that he himself is stripped bare of belief? From which modern\nnotion, that religion does not matter much, he next argues that a man\nought to deny himself the luxury and \"satisfaction of breaking his\nreligious fetters,\" _i.e._ of seceding from his own faith and joining\nanother. He ought to stick to his community, says this writer, and \"have\nthe satisfaction of working for the elevation of his countrymen.\" There\nwe have the new political consciousness. The writer, it should be added,\nsays some plain things about the need of social reform.\n\n[Sidenote: Three dynamical elements of Christianity.]\n\nAs proved by observation in India, the dynamical elements of\nChristianity may be briefly enumerated as follows. Monotheism, tending\nmore and more to the distinctively Christian idea of God, Our Father, is\ncommending itself, and being widely accepted. Secondly, in a remarkable\ndegree, Jesus Christ Himself is being recognised and receiving general\nhomage. In a less degree, and yet notably, the Christian conception of\nthe Here and Hereafter is commending itself to the minds of the\nnew-educated Hindus. In the new religious organisations also, the\nChristian manner of worship and of public worship commends itself almost\nas a matter of course. In none of these spheres am I describing the\noutcome of visible conflict or of any loud controversy. Rather,\nChristianity brought close to the religious instincts and the religious\nideas of India has been like a great magnet introduced among a number of\nkindred but non-magnetised bodies lying loosely around. In the presence,\nsimply, of these dynamical elements, or in contact with them, Indian\nreligious thought is becoming polarised. Towards and away from the same\ngreat points, Indian religious thought is setting. These dynamical\nelements of Christianity, and the illustration of their power, will be\nconsidered in the following chapters.\n\nOf the elements of Christianity that have proved themselves dynamical,\nwe may note the natural order in which they have come. The order in\nwhich I have stated them is the order in which they asserted themselves,\nfirst \"God Our Father,\" then \"Jesus Christ Himself.\" First, of this\nworld in which we find ourselves, when our _minds_ awake, we must have\nsome satisfying conception. The belief in one God, in Him for whom we\ncan find no better name than \"Our Father,\" approved itself to awakened\nIndia, to the _intellectually_ enlightened, and in the first place to\nsmall groups of enlightened men in the large towns, the centres of\nmodern education and Christian influence. Then came an advance of a\ndifferent nature altogether. To those spiritually minded and more\nintense men who needed a religious master, a hero, to whom their\n_hearts_ might go out, there came, after certain obstacles had been\nbroken down, some knowledge of the actual historical Jesus Christ. The\nfirst stage satisfied the _mind_ of modern educated India; the second\nstage concerns the highest affections and the lives. We know the step,\nwhen in the Apostles' Creed we pass from \"I believe in God the Father\nAlmighty, Maker of heaven and earth,\" to the words \"and in Jesus\nChrist.\" Thereat we have brought theology down from heaven to earth; or\nrather, in these days we would say, in Jesus Christ we have obtained on\nearth, in actual history, in our affections, a foundation on which to\nrear our system of actual and motive-giving belief.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER X\n\nTHE NEW RELIGIOUS ORGANISATIONS OF INDIA IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY\n\nTHE INDIAN CHRISTIAN CHURCH AND THE BR[=A]HMAS\n\n  Children of one family.\n\n\n[Sidenote: Two physical changes on the face of a country.]\n\nWhen we consider how the face of a country has been altered during the\nlapse of time, two great changes may be noticed, both of them due to the\naction of man. First we may observe that the whole general character of\nthe country has undergone transformation. Gone are the ancient forests\nof Scotland, which of old in many districts clad the whole countryside,\nand with them have gone the wild animals which they sheltered. The\nforests destroyed, and the rainfall in consequence less abundant, the\nsurface marshes and lakes have in many places vanished, taking the old\nagues and fevers in their train. Instead of the strongholds of\nchieftains in their fastnesses, surrounded by bands of their clansmen\nand retainers, has come the sober, peaceful, life of independent\ntenants, agricultural or artisan. And so on, down through the general\nchanges wrought on the face of a land by modern conditions of life, we\nmight watch the evolution of new features of the landscape. But we turn\nto the other kind of change, which is more noticeable at first sight,\nand is more directly due to the action of man. Great, laboriously\ncultivated, fields now stretch where formerly there was only waste or\nforest, or at best small sparsely scattered patches; and the very\nproducts of the soil in these new spacious fields are in many cases new.\nWhere, for example, even in Britain before the close of the seventeenth\ncentury, were the great fields of potatoes and turnips and red clover,\nand even of wheat, which now meet the eye everywhere as the seasons\nreturn? Where in India before the British period were the vast areas now\nunder tea and coffee, jute and cotton, although the two last have been\ngrown and manufactured in India from time immemorial? \"It might almost\nbe said that, from Calcutta to Lahore, 50 per cent. of the prevalent\nvegetation, cultivated and wild, has been imported into India within\nhistoric times.\"[51]\n\n[Sidenote: Two similar changes in the religious thought of India.]\n\nAll that, of course, is a parable. Likewise, in the new India we are\nstudying, product of new modern influences direct and indirect, two\nkinds of religious changes impress us. There is, first, the gradual\nchange coming over the whole thought of the people, a transformation\nlike that wrought upon the face and climate of many lands. There is,\nfurther, the religious change, more immediately evident, in the new\nIndian religious organisations of the past century, analogous to the\nnew, cultivated, products of the soil.\n\n[Sidenote: Four new religious organisations.]\n\nAs change more definite and perceptible, we look first at the new Indian\nreligious organisations. Within the British period, four organised\nreligious movements attract our notice. They are: I. The new Indian\nChristian Church; II. The Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j and the kindred\nPr[=a]rthan[=a] Sam[=a]jes; III. The [=A]rya Sam[=a]j; and IV. The\nTheosophical Society, which in India now stands for the revival of\nHinduism.\n\nI. To hear the native Indian Church reckoned among the products of the\nBritish period may be surprising to some. There are indeed Christian\ncommunities in India older than the Christianity of many districts in\nBritain, and even excluding the Syrian and Roman Christians of India we\nmust acknowledge that the Protestant Christian community dates farther\nback than the British period. Yet in a real sense the Protestant Indian\nChurch, and the progressive character of the whole Indian Church, belong\nto the century just closed. The Moravians and one English Missionary\nSociety excepted, all the great Missionary Societies now at work have\ncome into being since 1793. In 1901 the native _Protestant_ community in\nIndia, outcome of these Societies' labours, numbered close upon a\nmillion souls.\n\n[Sidenote: The Indian Church.]\n\n[Sidenote: The Indian Church and the national consciousness.]\n\nThe Indian Christian Church is a living organisation, or congeries of\norganisations, over two and a half million souls all told, and growing\nrapidly. The exact figures in 1901 were 2,664,313, showing an increase\nduring ten years of 30.8 per cent. The figures exclude Eurasians and\nEuropeans; and in Anglo-Indian speech, we may remark, all Americans and\nAustralians and South African whites and the like are Europeans. The\nattitude of the Indian Christian Church to the new ideas introduced by\nthe British connection and by the modern world can readily be\nunderstood. Cut off, cast off, by their fellow-countrymen, and brought\ninto closer contact than any others with Europeans in their missionaries\nand teachers, their minds have been open to all the new ideas. We know\nin fact that Indian Christians are often charged, by persons who do not\nappreciate the situation, with being over-Europeanised. It may be so in\ncertain ways, but, irrespective of Christianity or Hinduism, the\nadoption of European ways results from contact with Europeans, and in\ncertain respects is almost a condition of intercourse with Europeans.\nLet those, for example, who talk glibly about Indians sticking to their\nown dress, know that gentlemen in actual native dress are not allowed to\nwalk on that side of the bandstand promenade in Calcutta where Europeans\nsit--a scandal crying for removal. With regard to the new national\nconsciousness, it may be repeated that the Indian Christian community is\nalmost as alive with the national feeling as the educated Hindu\ncommunity. As the Indian Church becomes at once more indigenous and more\nthoroughly educated in Western learning, as it becomes less identified\nwith European denominations, and less dependent upon stimulus from\nwithout, it will no doubt become still more national in every sense, be\nmore recognised as one of India's institutions, and become a powerful\neducator in India. Once within the environment of the national feeling,\nthe seed of Christian thought and modern ideas will spring up and\nspontaneously flourish. The future progress of the Indian Church may be\nsaid to depend upon the growth of that national consciousness within it.\nThe sense of independence and the duty of self-support and union are,\nproperly, being fostered in the native churches. But one of the dangers\nahead undoubtedly is that, like one of the other religious movements of\nthe past century, or like the Ethiopian Church in South Africa, the\nIndian Church may become infected with the political rather than the\nreligious aspect of the idea.\n\n[Sidenote: The Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j.]\n\n[Sidenote: Rammohan Roy.]\n\nII. _The Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j_.--Next to the Christian Church in order of\nbirth of the issue of the new age, comes the Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j or\nTheistic Association. It was founded in Calcutta in 1828 by the famous\nreformer, Raja Rammohan Roy, first of modern Indians. The Br[=a]hma\nSam[=a]j is confessedly the outcome of contact with Christian ideas. By\nthe best known of the Br[=a]hma community, the late Keshub Chunder Sen,\nit was described as \"the legitimate offspring of the wedlock of\nChristianity with the faith of the Hindu Aryans.\" \"No other reformation\"\n[in India], says the late Sir M. Monier Williams, \"has resulted in the\nsame way from the influence of European education and Christian ideas.\"\nThe founder himself, Raja Rammohan Roy, was indeed more a Christian than\nanything else, although he wore his brahman thread to the day of his\ndeath in order to retain the succession to his property for his son. In\nLondon and in Bristol, where he died in 1833, he associated himself with\nDr. Carpenter and the more orthodox section of the Unitarians,\nexplicitly avowing his belief in the miracles of Christ generally, and\nparticularly in the resurrection. In Calcutta, indeed, the origin of the\nBr[=a]hma Sam[=a]j was acknowledged at its commencement. After attending\nthe Scotch and other Churches in Calcutta, and then the Unitarian\nChurch, Rammohan Roy and his native friends set up a Church of their\nown, and one name for it among educated natives was simply the Hindu\nUnitarian Church. It is a secondary matter that, to begin with, the\nreformer believed that he had found his monotheism in the Hindu\nScriptures, now known to all students as the special Scriptures of\npantheism.\n\nRaja Rammohan Roy, the brave man who made a voyage to Britain in\ndefiance of caste, the champion of the widow who had often been\nvirtually obliged to lay herself on her dead husband's pyre, the\nstrenuous advocate of English education for Indians, the supporter of\nthe claim of Indians to a larger employment in the public service, has\nnot yet received from New India the recognition and honour which he\ndeserves. To every girl, at least in Bengal, the province of\nwidow-burning, he ought to be a hero as the first great Indian knight\nwho rode out to deliver the widows from the torturing fire of Suttee.\n\n[Sidenote: Service of the Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j to India.]\n\nAs its theistic name implies, the Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j professedly\nrepresents a movement towards theism, _i.e._ a rise from the polytheism\nand idolatry of the masses and a rejection of the pantheism of Hindu\nphilosophy. Of course, noteworthy though it be, the foundation of the\nBr[=a]hma Sam[=a]j in 1828 was not the introduction of monotheism to\nIndia. In the Indian Christian Church and in Mahomedanism, the doctrine\nof one, personal, God had been set forth to India, and in one of the\nancient Hindu philosophical systems, the Yoga Philosophy, the same\ndoctrine is implied. But in India, Christianity and Mahomedanism were\nassociated with hostile camps; the Yoga Philosophy was known only to a\nfew Sanscrit scholars. In Br[=a]hmaism, the doctrine of one personal God\nbecame again natural naturalised in India. That has been its special\nservice to India, to naturalise monotheism and many social and religious\nmovements. For in India, things new and foreign lie under a peculiar\nsuspicion. In the social sphere, the Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j repudiates caste\nand gives to women a position in society. As Indian _theists_ also, when\ntheir first church was opened in 1830, they gave the Indian sanction to\ncongregational worship and prayer, \"before unknown to Hindus.\" For, the\nbrahman interposing between God and the ignorant multitude, the Hindu\nmultitude do not assemble themselves for united prayer, as Christians\nand Mahomedans do; and at the other end of the Hindu scale, the\nprofessed pantheist as such cannot pray. In proof of the latter\nstatement, we recall the words of Swami Vivekananda, representative of\nHinduism in the Parliament of Religions at Chicago in 1893, in a lecture\n\"The Real and the Apparent Man,\" published in 1896. \"It is the greatest\nof all lies,\" he writes somewhat baldly, although one is often grateful\nfor a bald, definite statement, \"that we are mere men; we are the God of\nthe Universe.... The worst lie that you ever told yourself is that you\nwere born a sinner.... The wicked see this universe as a hell, and the\npartially good see it as heaven, and the perfect beings realise it as\nGod Himself.... By mistake we think that we are impure, that we are\nlimited, that we are separate. The real man is the One Unit Existence.\"\nPrayer is therefore irrational for a pantheist, for no man is separate\nfrom God.\n\n[Sidenote: Its limited membership.]\n\nThe influence of the Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j has been far greater than its\nnumerical success. Reckoned by its small company of 4050 members,[52]\nsome of them certainly men of the highest culture and of sincere\ndevoutness, the Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j is a limited and local movement,\nlimited largely to the province of Bengal, and even to a few of the\nlarger towns in the province. But if the taint of the intellectual\norigin of the Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j be still visible in the eclecticism\nthat it professes, in its rejection of the supernatural, and in its poor\nnumerical progress, it has nevertheless done great things for India.\n\n[Sidenote: The Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j and the national feeling.]\n\nAs yet the Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j has remained unaffected by the political\naspect of the new national feeling. Early in its history there was,\nindeed, a section of the Sam[=a]j resolved to limit the selection of\nscriptures to the scriptures of the Hindus, but the late Keshub Chunder\nSen successfully asserted the freedom of the Sam[=a]j, and probably\nsaved it from the narrow patriotic groove and from the political\ncharacter of the third of the new religious organisations, the [=A]rya\nSam[=a]j.\n\n[Sidenote: Pr[=a]rthan[=a] Sam[=a]jes or Prayer Associations of S.W.\nIndia.]\n\n_The Pr[=a]rthan[=a] Sam[=a]jes_ or Prayer Associations of South-Western\nIndia.--The history of India is pre-eminently the history of Northern\nIndia, that is of the great plains of the Ganges and the Punjab. One may\ntest it by the simple academical test of reckoning what percentage of\nmarks in an examination on Indian history is assigned to the events of\nthe great northern plains. It is the same in the more recent religious\nhistory of India. The southern provinces of Bombay and Madras have\ncontributed very little in respect of new religious life, organised or\nunorganised, compared with the northern provinces of Bengal, the United\nProvinces, and the Punjab. The Pr[=a]rthan[=a] Sam[=a]jes or Prayer\nAssociations of Bombay and South-western India are monotheistic like the\nBr[=a]hma Sam[=a]j, and have their halls for their own worship. But\nsocially they have not severed themselves from their Hindu brethren, and\ndo not figure in the Census as separate. Even compared with the\nBr[=a]hma Sam[=a]j, they are few in number. The first Pr[=a]rthan[=a]\nSam[=a]j was founded in Bombay in 1867. In Madras there is a small\nrepresentation of the Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XI\n\nNEW RELIGIOUS ORGANISATIONS\n\nTHE [=A]RYAS AND THE THEOSOPHISTS.\n\n    \"Let us receive not only the revelations of the past, but also\n    welcome joyfully the revelations of the present day.\"\n\n    --BISHOP COLENSO.\n\n\n[Sidenote: The [=A]rya Sam[=a]j.]\n\nIII. _The [=A]rya Sam[=a]j_ or _Vedic Theistic Association_--In contrast\nto the Sam[=a]jes which are leavening the country but themselves are\nnumerically unprogressive, are two other organisations--first, the\n[=A]rya Sam[=a]j of the United Provinces and the Punjab, and secondly,\nthe Theosophists, who are now most active in Upper India, with Benares\nthe metropolis of Hinduism, as their headquarters. These two have taken\nhold of educated India as no other movements yet have done. They appeal\ndirectly to patriotic pride and the new national feeling, or, more\ntruly, are primarily shaped thereby.\n\nFounded in 1875, the [=A]ryas are the most rapidly increasing of the new\nIndian sects. In 1901 they numbered 92,419, an increase in the decade of\n131 per cent. What ideas have such an attraction for the educated middle\nclass, for to that class the [=A]ryas almost exclusively belong? In\ncertain parts of the United Provinces and the Punjab, it seems as much a\nmatter of course that one who has received a modern education should be\nan [=A]rya, as that in certain other provinces he should be a supporter\nof the Congress.\n\n[Sidenote: Foundation ideas of the [=A]ryas--two.]\n\nThe prime motive ideas are two. One is the result of modern education\nand of Christian influence, namely, a consciousness that in certain\ngrosser aspects, such as polytheism, idolatry, animal sacrifices, caste,\nand the seclusion of women, the present-day Hinduism cannot be defended.\nThose things the [=A]ryas repudiate,--all honour to them for their\nprotest in behalf of reason, although in respect of caste and the\nseclusion of women, their theory is said to be considerably ahead of\ntheir practice. In the same modern spirit every [=A]rya member pledges\nhimself to endeavour to diffuse knowledge; and a college and a number of\nschools are carried on by [=A]ryas in the Punjab. Repudiating all those\ncurrent customs, of course the [=A]ryas have parted company with the\northodox Hindus. [=A]rya preachers denounce the corruptions of Hinduism,\nand in turn, what may be called a Great Council of orthodox Hindus has\npronounced condemnation on the [=A]ryas. At an assembly of about four\nhundred Hindu pandits, held in 1881 in the Senate House of the\nUniversity in Calcutta, the views of the founder of the [=A]ryas,\nDyanand Saraswati, were condemned as heterodox.[53]\n\nThe second motive idea is the new national consciousness, the new\npatriotic feeling of Indians. The patriotic feeling is manifest in the\nname; the [=A]ryas identify themselves with the [=A]ryans, the\nIndo-European invaders of India, from whom the higher castes of Hindus\nclaim to be descended. Virtually, we may say, the [=A]ryas claim by\ntheir name to be the pure original Hindus.\n\n[Sidenote: Infallibility of the Vedas the leading tenet at first.]\n\nTo the first influence we may assign one of the chief doctrines of the\n[=A]ryas, namely, their monotheism. Others of their doctrines belong to\nthe theology and philosophy of Hinduism, _e.g._ the ancient doctrine of\nthe transmigration of souls, and the doctrine of the three eternal\nentities, God, the Soul, and Matter, the doctrinal significance of which\nwe shall have occasion to consider hereafter. These three uncreated\nexistences constitute one of the doctrines of the Joga system of Hindu\nphilosophy. To the second, or patriotic, influence, we may assign\nespecially the fundamental tenet of the founder of the [=A]ryas, namely,\nthe infallibility of the original Scriptures, the four Vedas, given, as\nhe alleged, to Indian sages at the creation of the world. \"Back to the\nVedas!\" we may say, is the cry of the [=A]ryas. In effect, the cry is\ntantamount to the plea that the errors of Hinduism are only later\naccretions; and be it acknowledged that no sanction can be drawn from\nthe Vedas for the prohibition of widow marriages, for the general\nprevalence of child marriages, for the tyranny of caste, for idolatry\nand several other objectionable customs.[54] Among the [=A]ryas,\ntherefore, we have the championship of things Indian in its crudest\nform. Ludicrous are the attempts to rationalise all the statements of\nthe Vedas, and to find in them all modern science and modern ideas,\npouring new wine into old wine-skins, in perfect innocence of \"the\nhigher criticism.\" Thus while animal sacrifices are proscribed by the\n[=A]ryas, they are everywhere assumed in the Vedas, and two of the hymns\nin the Rigveda are for use at the sacrifice of a horse\n(a[s']wamedha).[55] According to an [=A]rya commentator, however,\na[s']wamedha is to be translated not \"sacrifice of a horse,\" but\ndestruction of ignorance,--sacrifice of an ass, as one may jestingly\nsay.[56] Offerings for deceased parents, prescribed in detail in the\nVedas, are similarly rationalised into kind treatment of parents in old\nage. The ancient and modern condemnation of eating beef was rationalised\nby the [=A]ryas as follows: To kill a cow is as bad as to kill many men.\nFor suppose a cow to have a lifetime of fourteen or fifteen years. Her\ncalves, let us say, would be six cow calves and six bull calves. The\nmilk of the cow and her six cow calves during her natural lifetime would\ngive food for a day to an army of 154,440 men, according to the\ncalculation of the founder of the [=A]ryas, while the labour of the\nother six calves as oxen would give a full meal to an army of 256,000\nmen. Therefore to kill a cow, etc., Q.E.D. Modern democracy, the\nCopernican system of astronomy, a knowledge of the American continent,\nof steamships, and of the telegraph are all discovered by Dyanand in the\nVedas, as no doubt wireless telegraphy and radium would have been, had\ndeath not cut short, in 1883, the discoveries of the founder of the\n[=A]ryas.[57]\n\n[Sidenote: The modern leaven still affecting the [=A]ryas.]\n\nThese specimens of [=A]rya exposition of the Vedas I have given with no\nintention of scoffing, although we may be permitted a laugh. I desire to\nshow the conflict of modern ideas and the new patriotic feeling, and how\nthe latter has affected the religious and theological position of the\n[=A]ryas. It is the prominence of the patriotic feeling in many branches\nof the Sam[=a]j that has led some observers to describe it as less of a\nreligious than a political organisation, anti-British and anti-Mahomedan\nand anti-Christian. But the opponents of the Sam[=a]j are always\nassociated by [=A]ryas with rival religions; _keranis, kuranis,_ and\n_puranis_ is their echoing list of their opponents,--namely, Christians\n_(kerani_ being a corruption of _Christiani_), and believers in the\nKoran, and believers in the Purans, _i.e._ the later Hindu books. And\nthat there is much more than political feeling is apparent in their\nlatest developments. The leaven of modern ideas has now led to the rise\nof a party among the [=A]ryas which is prepared to stand by reason out\nand out, and repudiate the founder's bondage to the Vedas and his _\u00e0\npriori_ expositions. Popularly, the new party is known as the\n\"flesh-eaters.\" At present the Sam[=a]j is about equally divided, but\nthe more rationalistic section comprises most of the new-educated\nmembers. Should the [=A]rya Sam[=a]j retain, as their chief doctrinal\npositions, the perfection of pure original Hinduism and opposition to\nevery other ism, no great foresight or historical knowledge is required\nto predict for the [=A]ryas, despite their vigour, a speedy lapse from\ntheir reforming zeal into the position simply of a new Hindu caste,\nreverting gradually to type. Their fate is still in the balance.\n\n[Sidenote: The Bombay [=A]rya Sam[=a]j.]\n\nThe [=A]rya Sam[=a]j in Bombay does not repudiate caste. One of their\nprinciples is that no member is expected to violate any of his own\nspecial caste rules. Why, one cannot help asking, this invertebrate\ncharacter of the new Indian religious associations in Western India? It\nis patent that what the Pr[=a]rthan[=a] Sam[=a]jes of Western India are\nto the Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j of Bengal, the [=A]rya Sam[=a]j in Bombay is\nto that in the Punjab and the United Provinces--only feeble echoes.\nBombay Indians lead their countrymen in commercial enterprise, and in\npolitical questions they take as keen an interest as any of the Indian\nraces. With hesitation and with apologies to Parsee friends, we ask\nwhether it is the numerous Parsees in Bombay who have made their\nfellow-westerns only worldly-wise. For to great commercial enterprise,\nthe Parsees add a stubborn conservatism in religion.\n\n[Sidenote: The Theosophical Society and the national feeling.]\n\nIV. _The Theosophists_ are the only other new religious organisation\nwhom we can notice.--Them too the new patriotic feeling has very largely\nshaped. Founded in America in 1875, the very year in which the [=A]rya\nSam[=a]j was established in Bombay, the Theosophical Society professed\nto be \"the nucleus of a Universal Brotherhood of Humanity,\" representing\nand excluding no religious creed and interfering with no man's caste. On\nthe other hand, somewhat inconsistently, it professed to be a society to\npromote the study of [=A]ryan and other Eastern literature, religion,\nand sciences, and to vindicate their importance; and it appealed for\nsupport, amongst others, \"to all who loved India and would see a revival\nof her ancient glories, intellectual and spiritual.\" At the same time\nthe society professed \"to investigate the hidden mysteries of nature and\nthe psychical powers latent in man.\" The society naturally gravitated\ntowards India, and by 1884 had 87 branches in India and Ceylon, against\n12 in all the rest of the world. Its career might easily have been\npredicted. Inevitably, when transplanted to India, about the year 1878,\nsuch a society came under the spell of the new national consciousness\nalready referred to. For a time Theosophy shared with the political\nCongress the first place in the interest of New India, and crowds of\neducated Indians still assemble whenever Mrs. Besant, now the leading\nTheosophist, is to speak. One of the rules of the society, however,\nsaved it from the descent into politics that has overtaken the [=A]rya\nSam[=a]j and tainted it as a religious movement. Rule XVI (1884) forbids\nmembers, as such, to interfere in politics, and declares expulsion to be\nthe penalty for violation of the rule.\n\n[Sidenote: [=A]rya period of the Theosophical Society.]\n\nConsistently enough, when the society was transplanted to India, it\nentered into partnership with the [=A]rya Sam[=a]j; for two years,\nindeed, Madame Blavatsky, the first leader of the Theosophists, had been\ncorresponding from America with the founder of the [=A]ryas. The [=A]rya\ntenet of the infallibility of the original Hindu Scriptures needed no\nreconciliation with the Theosophist declaration of the ancient spiritual\nglories of India. But the [=A]ryas are also religious reformers, while,\nas enlightened Hindus now complain, the Theosophists are more Hindu than\nthe Hindus. After three years, in 1881, difference arose on the question\nof the personality of God. The [=A]ryas, we have seen, are monotheist;\nthe Theosophical Society, we shall see, is identified with brahmanical\npantheism.[58]\n\n[Sidenote: Buddhist period of the Theosophical Society.]\n\n[Sidenote: Pro-Hindu period of the Theosophical Society.]\n\nThe Buddhist period of the Theosophical Society, which came next, is\nbest known to general readers, but is only an episode in its history. In\nthe early \"eighties,\" we find the society pro-Buddhist, and apparently\nidentifying _Buddhism_ with \"the ancient glories of India, spiritual and\nintellectual,\" that the society was professedly desirous to revive. We\nassociate the period with the publication of _Esoteric Buddhism_, by Mr.\nA.P. Sinnett, one of the society's leaders, and with Madame Blavatsky's\nclaim to be in spiritual communication with Mahatmas [great spirits] in\nThibet, the Buddhist land, now robbed of its mystery by the British\nexpedition of 1904. Madame Blavatsky claimed to be receiving letters\ncarried straight from Thibet by some air-borne Ariel. The discovery in\n1884 of Madame Blavatsky's trickery ended the exhibition of \"psychical\npowers,\" and also apparently the Buddhist period of the society. That\nthe society itself survived the exposure is proof that it had a deeper\nroot than any mere cult of Buddhism or Spiritualism could give. Its\nappeal, as we have said, was to the new patriotic feeling in the sphere\nof religion. To Madame Blavatsky succeeded Mrs. Besant as leading\nspirit, and to the cult of Buddhism again succeeded the glorification of\nancient Hinduism and now also apologies of Hinduism as it is; and to\nMadras as chief centre of Theosophy succeeded Benares, metropolis of\nHinduism. Mrs. Besant proclaimed herself the reincarnation of some\nancient Hindu pandit, and called upon Hindus to devote themselves to the\nstudy of the Sacred Sanscrit. Supported by many well-to-do Hindus, in\n1900 she founded a college at Benares in which Hinduism might be lived\nand inculcated as Christianity is inculcated in the Indian Missionary\nColleges. In the beginning of 1904 a great figure of the goddess\nSaraswati, the Hindu goddess of Learning, was being erected in the\ngrounds of the College. The subordination of the Indian Theosophical\nSociety, at least in the person of Mrs. Besant, to the pro-Hindu\nnational movement may be pronounced complete. In the sphere of religion,\nthis new Indian consciousness which has enveloped the Theosophists is a\nforce opposed to change and reform. The Theosophical Society, which at\nthe outset professed to be the nucleus of a Universal Brotherhood, is\nnow fostering caste and Hindu exclusiveness, the antitheses of the idea\nof humanity. Yet, as we shall see, even in the text-books of Hindu\nReligion prepared for use in the Hindu College, Benares, Christian\nthought is not difficult to discover. And its meed of praise must not be\nwithheld from the attempts of Theosophists and the Hindu College,\nBenares, to rationalise current Hindu customs and to reduce the chaos of\nHindu beliefs to some system that will satisfy New India. Fain would the\nTheosophists propound, as we have already noted in the chapter, \"New\nSocial Ideas,\" that caste should be determined by character and\noccupation, not by birth. That being impossible, they would fain see the\nmyriad of castes reduced to the original four named in Manu. To quote\nagain the summing up regarding the caste system in the chief Hindu\ntext-book referred to--\"Unless the abuses which are interwoven with caste\ncan be eliminated, its doom is certain.\" That is much from the leaders\nof the Hindu reaction. In Hinduism they may often see only what they\nwish to see, but they are not wholly blinded.\n\nThe Theosophists, it should be noted, do not figure as such in the\nCensus. Indian Christians, Brahmas, and [=A]ryas have all taken up a\ndefinite new position in respect of religion, and ticket themselves as\nsuch; the Theosophists are now at least mainly the apologists of things\nas they are, and require no name to differentiate themselves.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XII\n\nTHE NEW MAHOMEDANS\n\n\n[Sidenote: The national anti-British feeling not manifested among\nMahomedans.]\n\n[Sidenote: Mahomedan religious movements.]\n\nThe Mahomedans, the other great religious community of India,[59] have\nbeen far less stirred by the new era than the Hindus, whom hitherto we\nhave been chiefly considering. Only a small number of Mahomedans belong\nto the professional class, so that modern education and the awakening\nhave not reached Mahomedans in the same degree as Hindus. Quite\noutnumbered also by Hindus, they identify themselves politically with\nthe British rather than with the Hindus, so that as a body they do not\nsupport the Congress, the great Indian Political Association, and have\nno anti-British consciousness. Mahomedan solidarity is strong enough,\nbut it is religious not national, and so it is only in the religious\nsphere that we find the new era telling upon Mahomedans. Two small\nreligious movements may be noted curiously parallel to the [=A]rya and\nBr[=a]hma movements among Hindus, and suggesting the operation of like\ninfluences.\n\n[Sidenote: The Wahabbi movement analogous to [=A]ryaism.]\n\nAs the [=A]ryas preach a return to the pure original Hinduism of the\nVedas, the first Mahomedan movement inculcates a return to the pure\noriginal Mahomedanism of the Koran. In particular, it urges a casting\noff of the Hindu customs and superstitions that the Indian converts to\nMahomedanism have frequently retained,--the offerings to the dead, for\nexample. In the first instance, the movement came from a seventeenth\ncentury Arabian sect, the Wahabbis, but the movement reached India only\nabout the year 1820, and therefore is a feature of the period we are\nsurveying. The movement belongs specially to Bengal and the United\nProvinces north-west of Bengal, and is known by a variety of local\nnames, Wahabbi and other. Significant, as supporting what has been said\nregarding the absence of anti-British feeling among present-day\nMahomedans, is the fact that in the first stages of the Wahabbi\nmovement, both in Eastern and Western Bengal, the duty of war upon\ninfidels--on the British and the Hindus in this case--was a prominent\ndoctrine of the crusade. In Mahomedan language, India was _Daru-l-harb_\nor a Mansion of War. In these later years, on the contrary, it is\ngenerally recognised by Mahomedans that India under the British rule is\nnot _Daru-l-harb_, but _Daru-l-Islam_, or a Mansion of Islamism, in\nwhich war on infidels is not incumbent.[60] It may be noted that the\ndecree, recently issued from Mecca, that British territory is\nDaru-l-Islam, can only refer to India.\n\n[Sidenote: The Aligarh movement analogous to Brahmaism.]\n\nExactly like the Brahmas, the other new Mahomedan sect, in the modern\nrational spirit, have refined away their faith to a theism or deism\npurged of the supernatural. Mahomed's inspiration and miracles are\nrejected. These represent the modern rationalising spirit in religion;\nreason is their standard, and \"reason alone is a sufficient guide.\"\nAccording to Sir Syed Ahmad, founder of the movement, \"Islam is Nature,\nand Nature Islam.\" Hence the sect is sometimes called the Naturis,[61]\nor followers of _Natural_ Religion, the adoption of the English word\nidentifying them again with the Br[=a]hmas, who are essentially the\noutcome of English education and Christian influence among Hindus. The\nNaturis, the modernised Mahomedans, have as their headquarters the\nMahomedan Anglo-Oriental College at Aligarh in the United Provinces. It\nought to be said that they also claim to be going back to pure original\nMahomedanism before it was corrupted by the \"Fathers\" of Islam.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIII\n\nHINDU DOCTRINES--HOW THEY CHANGE\n\n    \"As men's minds receive new ideas, laying aside the old and\n    effete, the world advances. Society rests upon them; mighty\n    revolutions spring from them; institutions crumble before their\n    onward march.\"\n\n    --_Extract from Mr. Kiddle, an American writer, which occurs in\n    a letter \"received\" by Madame Blavatsky from Koot Humi in\n    Thibet_.\n\n\n[Sidenote: Will the new religious organisations survive?]\n\nThe four new religious organisations described in the preceding chapters\nmay or may not survive--who can tell? What would they become, or what\nwould become of them, in the event, say, of the great nations of Europe\nissuing from some deadly conflict so balanced that India and the East\nhad to be let alone, entirely cut off? The Indian Christian Church,\nhardly yet acclimatised so far as it is the creation of modern efforts,\nwould she survive? The English sweet-pea, sown in India, produced its\nflowers, but not at first any vigorous self-propagating seed. The\nBr[=a]hma Sam[=a]j, graft of West on East, and still sterile as an\nintellectual coterie, how would it fare, cut off from its Western\nnurture? The [=A]rya Sam[=a]j--what, in that event, would be her\nresistance to the centripetal force that we have noted in her blind\npatriotism? The reactionary Theosophists--after the provocative action\nhad ceased--what of them? Would not the Indian jungle, which they are\ntrying to reduce to a well-ordered garden of indigenous fruits, speedily\nlapse to jungle again? We shall not attempt to answer our own questions\ndirectly, but proceed to the second part of our programme sketched on p.\n122. How far then have Christian and modern religious ideas been\n_naturalised_ in New India, whether within the new religious\norganisations or without? Whatever the fate of the organisations, these\nnaturalised ideas might be expected to survive.\n\n[Sidenote: Modification of doctrines.]\n\n[Sidenote: Elements of Christianity being naturalised in India--three.]\n\nWe recall the statements made on ample authority in an earlier chapter,\nthat certain aspects of Christianity are attracting attention in India\nand proving themselves possessed of inherent force and attractiveness.\nThese, the dynamical elements of Christianity, were specially the idea\nof God the Father, the person of Jesus Christ, and the Christian\nconception of the Here and Hereafter. For although Hinduism declares a\nsocial boycott against any Hindu who transports his person over the sea\nto Europe, within India itself the Hindu mind is in close contact with\nsuch modern religious ideas. The wall built round the garden will not\nshut out the crows. Indeed, like the ancient Athenian, the modern Hindu\ntakes the keenest interest in new religious ideas.\n\nTo comprehend the impression that such new religious ideas are making,\nwe must realise in some measure the background upon which they are cast,\nboth that part of it which the new ideas are superseding and the\nremainder which constitutes their new setting and gives them their\nsignificance. In brief, what is the present position of India in regard\nto religious belief; and in particular, what are the prevailing beliefs\nabout God?\n\n[Sidenote: Indian beliefs about God--Polytheists; Theists; Pantheists.]\n\nA rough classification of the theological belief of the Hindus of the\npresent day would be--the multitude are polytheists; the new-educated\nare monotheists; the brahmanically educated are professed pantheists.\nRough as it is, we must keep the classification before us in trying to\nestimate the influence upon the Indian mind of the Christian idea of\nGod. From that fundamental classification let us try to understand the\nHindu position more fully.\n\n[Sidenote: No one doctrine is distinctive of Hinduism.]\n\nLet it be realised, in the first place, how _undefined_ is the Hindu's\nreligious position. From the rudest polytheism up to pantheism, and even\nto an atheistic philosophy, all is within the Hindu pale, like fantastic\ncloud shapes and vague mist and empty ether, all within the same sky. To\nthe student of Hinduism, then, the first fact that emerges is that there\nare no distinctive Hindu doctrines. No one doctrine is distinctive of\nHinduism. There is no canonical book, nowhere any stated body of\ndoctrine that might be called the Hindu creed. The only common measure\nof Hindus is that they employ brahmans in their religious ceremonies,\nand even that does not hold universally. A saying of their own is, \"On\ntwo main points all sects agree--the sanctity of the cow and the\ndepravity of women.\" In contrast to Hindus in this respect of the\nabsence of a standard creed, Mahomedans call themselves _kitabi_ or\npossessing a book, since in the Koran they do possess such a canon. In\nthe words of Mahomed, Christians and Jews likewise are \"the peoples of\nthe book,\" and have a defined theological position. But regarding\nHindus, again, we note there is no doctrinal pale, no orthodoxy or\nheterodoxy. \"We Europeans,\" writes Sir Alfred Lyall regarding Hinduism,\n\"can scarcely comprehend an ancient religion, still alive and powerful,\nwhich is a mere troubled sea without shore or visible horizon.\"[62] In\nthese days of opportunist denunciation of creeds, the amorphous state of\ncreedless Hinduism may be noted.\n\nThe experience of the late Dr. John Henry Barrows, President of the\nParliament of Religions at Chicago in 1893, may be quoted in\nconfirmation of the absence of a Hindu creed. After he had won the\nconfidence of India's representatives as their host at Chicago, and had\nsecured for them a unique audience there, being himself desirous to\nwrite on Hinduism, he wrote to over a hundred prominent Hindus\nrequesting each to indicate what in his view were some of the leading\ntenets of Hinduism. He received only one reply.\n\n[Sidenote: Pantheism, Maya, and Transmigration may be called Hindu\ndoctrines.]\n\nNo one doctrine is distinctive of Hinduism. It is an extreme misleading\nstatement, nevertheless, to say as some Western writers have done, and\nat least one Hindu writer,[63] that Hinduism is not a religion at all,\nbut only a social system. There are several doctrines to which a great\nmany Hindus would at once conventionally subscribe, and these I venture\nto call Hindu doctrines. In theological conversations with Hindus, three\ndoctrines very frequently show themselves as a theological background.\nThese are, first, Pantheism; secondly, Transmigration and Final\nAbsorption into Deity; and, thirdly, Maya, i.e. Delusion, or the\nUnreality of the phenomena of Sense and Consciousness. I find a recent\npro-Hindu writer making virtually the same selection. In the ninth\ncentury, she writes, Sankarachargya, the great upholder of Pantheism,\n\"took up and defined the [now] current catch-words--maya, karma [the\ndoctrine of works, or of re-birth according to desert], reincarnation,\nand left the terminology of Hinduism what it is to-day.\"... \"But,\" she\nalso adds, \"they are nowhere and in no sense regarded as essential.\"[64]\nNaturally, then, the inquiry that we have set ourselves to will at the\nsame time be an inquiry how far Christian thought has affected these\nthree main Hindu doctrines of Pantheism, Transmigration, and Maya.\n\n[Sidenote: Commingling of contradictory beliefs--]\n\n[Sidenote: Polytheism with Monotheism.]\n\nNor is it to be imagined that the Hindu polytheism, theism, and\npantheism are distinguishable religious strata. \"Uniformity and\nconsistency of creeds are inventions of the European mind,\" says a\ncynical writer already quoted. \"Hinduism bristles with contradictions,\ninconsistencies, and surprises,\" says Sir M. Monier Williams. The common\npeople are indeed polytheists, at different seasons of the year and on\ndifferent social occasions worshipping different deities, male or\nfemale, and setting out to this or that shrine, as the touts of the\nrival shrines have persuaded them. Nevertheless, an intelligent member\nof the humbler ranks is always ready to acknowledge that there is really\nonly one God, of whom the so-called gods are only variations in name. Or\nhis theory may be that there is one supreme God, under whom the popular\ndeities are only departmental heads; for the presence of the great\ncentral British Government in India is a standing suggestion of\nmonotheism. The officer who drew up the _Report of the Census of India_,\n1901 (p. 363) gives an instance of this commingling of monotheism and\npolytheism. \"An orderly,\" he writes, \"into whose belief I was inquiring,\ndescribed the relation between the supreme God and the Devata [minor\nGods] as that between an official and his orderlies, and another popular\nsimile often used is that of the Government and the district\nofficer.\"[65] The polytheism of the masses may thus blend with the\ntheism which is the ordinary intellectual standpoint of the educated\nclasses.\n\n[Sidenote: Monotheism with Polytheism.]\n\nRising to the next stage, namely, the theism of the educated class--the\nblending of their theism with the polytheism of the masses is\nillustrated in the July number of the magazine of the Hindu College,\nBenares, the headquarters of the late Hindu revival and of the\npantheistic philosophy. In answer to an inquirer's question--\"Is there\nonly one God?\" the reply is, \"There is one supreme Lord or Ishvara of\nthe universe, and there are minor deities or devas who intelligently\nguide the various processes of nature in their different departments in\nwilling obedience to Ishvara.\" The Hindu College, Benares, be it\nremembered, is primarily one of the modern colleges whence the modern\nnew-Indians come.\n\n[Sidenote: Monotheism with Pantheism.]\n\nAgain, the modern theism of the educated, in like manner, very readily\npasses into the pantheism of the philosophers and of those educated in\nSanscrit, which I have described as part of the accepted Hindu\northodoxy. For, whatever its origin, an observer finds the pantheistic\nidea emerge all over educated India. The late Sir M. Monier Williams\nspeaks of pantheism as a main root of the original Indo-Aryan creed,\nwhich has \"branched out into an endless variety of polytheistic\nsuperstitions.\" Whether that be so, or whether, as is now more generally\nbelieved, the polytheism is the aboriginal Indian plant into which the\npantheistic idea has been grafted as communities have become\nbrahmanised, the pantheistic idea very readily presents itself to the\nmind of the educated Hindu. In any discussion regarding human\nresponsibility the idea crops up that _all_ is God, \"There is One only,\nand no second.\" We can scarcely realise how readily it comes to the\nmiddle-class Hindu's lips that God is all, and that there can be no such\nthing as sin. The pantheists are thus no separate sect from the theists,\nany more than the theists are from the polytheists. The same man, if a\nmember of the educated class, will be polytheist in his established\ndomestic religion, theist in his personal standpoint and general\nprofession, and probably a pantheist in a controversy regarding moral\nresponsibility, or should he set himself to write about religion.\n\n[Sidenote: Illustration of polytheism, monotheism, and pantheism\ncommingling.]\n\nTake a statement of the mingling of polytheism, monotheism, and\npantheism from the extreme south of India, a thousand miles away from\nBenares. \"Though those men all affirmed,\" we read, \"that there is only\none God, they admitted that they each worshipped several. They saw\nnothing inconsistent in this. Just as the air is in everything, so God\nis in everything, therefore in the various symbols. And as our king has\ndiverse representative Viceroys and Governors to rule over his dominions\nin his name, so the Supreme has these subdeities, less in power and only\nexisting by force of Himself, and He, being all pervasive, can be\nworshipped under their forms.\"[66]\n\n[Sidenote: Pure pantheism rare.]\n\nAt the top of all is the pure pantheist, a believer in the illusion of\nthe senses, and generally though not always an ascetic. For life is not\nworth living if it is merely an illusion, and the illusion must be\ndispelled, and the world of the senses renounced. If \"father and\nbrother, etc., have no actual entity,\" said the reformer Raja Rammohan\nRoy [1829] when combating pantheism, \"they consequently deserve no real\naffection, and the sooner we escape from them and leave the world the\nbetter.\" So the pantheist is generally an ascetic cut off from the world\nto be consistent in his pantheism. Yet again, we repeat that such pure\npantheists are very rare, and that \"in India forms of pantheism, theism,\nand polytheism are ever interwoven with each other.\"[67]\n\nTo one familiar with India, such a medley is neither inconceivable nor\nimprobable; the debatable question only is, what sufficient account of\nthe cause thereof can be given. Why is it that Hindu doctrine has never\nset? Why this incongruity between doctrine and domestic practice? Why\nthis double-mindedness in the same educated individual? Much might be\nsaid in the endeavour to account for these characteristic features of\nIndia, the despair of the Christian missionary. I confine myself to the\nbearing of the question upon the influence of Christian ideas, and\nparticularly of Christian theism.\n\n[Sidenote: Fluidity of Hindu thought; rigidity of Hindu practice.]\n\nFor the student of this special aspect of Hinduism a second pertinent\nfact here emerges, namely, that Hindu practice is much more established\nthan Hindu doctrine. The unchangeableness of Hindu ritual is not a new\nidea; it is its bearing on doctrine that has not been clearly\nconsidered. There _is_, then, a distinctly recognised Hindu orthodoxy in\nmanners and worship, at least for each Hindu community, while there is\nno orthodoxy in doctrine. The broad distinctive marks of Hindu practice,\nwe may repeat, are the social usage of caste, and the employment of\nbrahmans in religious ritual. With ideas, then, thus fluid and practice\nthus rigid, it will be easily understood that Christian and modern ideas\nhave made much greater headway in India than Christian customs and modes\nof worship. The mind of educated India has been Christianised to a much\ngreater extent than the religious or domestic practices have been.\nPerhaps it might be said that all down the centuries of Christian Church\nhistory, opinion has often been in advance of worship and the social\ncode, that social and religious conventionalities have lagged behind\nbelief. If so, it is the marked conservatism in ceremonial that is\nnoteworthy in India. While Hindu beliefs are dissolving or dropping out\nof the mind, Hindu practices are successfully resisting the solvent\ninfluences or only slowly being transformed.\n\n[Sidenote: More progress towards Christian thought than Christian\npractice.]\n\nIt is not too much to say that the educated Hindu does not regard a\nfixed creed as a part of his Hinduism, but rather boasts of the\ndoctrinal comprehensiveness of his religion. He joyfully lives in a\nferment of religious thought, surrendering to the doctrine of a\nsatisfying teacher, but the idea of creed subscription, or a doctrinal\nstockade, is utterly foreign to his nature. For him the standards are\nthe fixed social usages and the brahmanical ritual. Hear a Hindu himself\non the matter, the historian of _Hindu Civilisation during British Rule_\n[i. 60]: \"Hinduism has ever been and still is as liberal and tolerant in\nmatters of religious belief as it is illiberal and intolerant in matters\nof social conduct.\" In a recent pamphlet[68] an Anglo-Indian civilian\ngives his evidence clearly, if too baldly, of the fixity of practice and\nthe mobility of belief. \"The educated Hindu,\" he writes, \"has largely\nlost his belief in the old myths about the gods and goddesses of the\nHindu pantheon, and has learned to smile at many of the superstitions of\nhis uneducated countrymen. But Hinduism as a religion that tells a man\nnot only what he shall eat, what he shall drink, and wherewithal he\nshall be clothed, but tells him how to perform innumerable acts that men\nof other nations never think have anything to do with religion at all,\nHinduism as an intricate social code, stands largely unaffected by the\nflood of Western education that has been poured upon the country. He\ninstances a brahman, one of his own subordinates, college-bred and\nEnglish-speaking, who, when away from home with his superior officer,\nhad to cook his food for himself, because the brahman servant he had\nwith him was of a lower division than his own, and he could not afford\nto hire a man of his own status among brahmans.\"\n\n[Sidenote: Thought independent of act.]\n\nWe ask again for the cause of this progress in thought and stagnation in\npractice. In India, creed and practice go their own way; thinking is\nindependent of acting. Listen to the naive standpoint assumed in the\nConfession or Covenant of a Theistic Association established in Madras\nin 1864. We read in article 3 that the person being initiated makes this\ndeclaration: \"In the meantime, I shall observe the ceremonies now in\nuse, but only where indispensable. I shall go through such ceremonies,\nwhere they are not conformable to pure Theism, as mere matters of\nroutine, destitute of all religious significance--as the lifeless\nremains of a superstition which has passed away.\" And again in article\n4: \"I shall never endeavour to deceive anyone as to my religious\nopinions.\" In the revision of 1871, both articles were dropped, but in\nthe earlier form there was no attempt to disguise that thought was\nindependent of act. The familiar figure of Buddha in meditation, seated\ncross-legged and motionless, with vacant introspective eyes, oblivious\nof the outer world, is a type of the separation of thought from act that\nseems natural to India or to the Indian mind, type also of the\nindependence of each thinker. The thinker secludes himself; \"the mind is\nits own place.\" To become a thinker signifies to become an ascetic\nrecluse; even modern enlightenment often removes an Indian from\nfellow-feeling with his kind.\n\n[Sidenote: No Theological Faculties.]\n\nHow is it so? I say nothing of the climate of tropical India as a\ncontributory cause. The way in which Hindu learning was and is\ntransmitted, is itself almost sufficient explanation of the independence\nand the fluidity of religious doctrine. Hinduism has no recognised\nTheological Faculties as training schools for the priesthood. _Buddhist_\nmonasteries of the early Christian centuries we do read of, institutions\ncorresponding to our universities, to which crowds of students resorted,\nand where many subjects were taught; but the _Hindu_ lore is transmitted\notherwise. Beside or in his humble dwelling, the learned Hindu pandit\nreceives and teaches and shares his poverty with his four, five, or it\nmay be twenty disciples, who are to be the depositaries of his lore, and\nin their turn its transmitters. Such an institution is a Sanscrit tol,\nwhere ten to twenty years of the formative period of a young pandit's\nlife may be spent. Without printed books and libraries and intercourse\nwith kindred minds, there may be as many schools of thought as there are\nteachers. And all this study, be it remembered, has no necessary\nconnection with the priesthood. Tols have no necessary connection with\ntemples, or temples with tols. Hereditary priests are independent of\nTheological Schools. Recently, indeed, in Bengal these tols have been\ntaken up by the Education Department, and their studies are being\ndirected to certain fixed subjects.\n\n[Sidenote: The twofold priesthood--religious teachers and celebrants.]\n\n[Sidenote: How doctrine moves independently of ritual.]\n\nAnother feature of the organisation of Hinduism, hitherto insufficiently\nnoticed, has a still closer connection with this freedom of thought and\nfixity of practice. The Indian mind is open to new religious ideas,\nwhile the religious customs of India remain almost unaffected, _because_\nthe priesthood of Hinduism is two-fold. One set of priests, called\npurohits, are merely the celebrants at worship and ceremonies; the\nsecond set, called gurus, theoretically more highly honoured, are or\nwere the religious teachers of the people. Among Mahomedans there is a\nsomewhat similar two-fold priesthood, although among them doctrine is\nnot divorced from religious worship and ritual. But in Christianity we\nhave not specialised so far. A Christian clergyman, as we know, holds\nboth offices; he is both the religious teacher and the celebrant at\nsacraments, etc. In Hinduism, with these two sets of priests entirely\nseparate, it is evident that a change may take place in the creed\nwithout the due performance of the Hindu ritual being affected. A\nstriking instance of the divergence of guru from purohit is given by Sir\nMonier Williams in another connection. In India, he says, no temples are\nmore common than those containing the symbol of the God Siva--there are\nsaid to be thirty million symbols of Siva scattered over India--yet\namong gurus there is scarcely one in a hundred whose vocation is to\nimpart the mantra (the saving text) of Siva.[69] It has already been\nexplained how the creed of Hinduism is dissolving while its practices\nremain; to restate the fact otherwise now--The hereditary purohits\ncontinue to be employed many times a year in a Hindu household, as\nworship, births, deaths, marriages, and social ceremonies recur, but the\nhereditary gurus as religious teachers have become practically\ndefunct.[70] Literally, the _one_ duty of a guru has come to be to\ncommunicate once in a lifetime to each Hindu his saving mantra or\nSanscrit text; periodically thereafter, the guru may visit his clients\nto collect what dues they may be pleased to give. The place of religious\nteacher in Hinduism is vacant, and Christianity and modern thought are\ntaking the vacant place. The modern middle-class Hindu is in need of a\nguru. For mere purohits, as such, he has a small and a declining\nreverence; but holy men, as such, his instinct is to honour--one of the\npleasing features of Hinduism. We can understand it all when we remember\nhow in the Christian Church, in a crisis like that from which the Church\nis now emerging, many come to be married by the clergyman who have\npractically lapsed from the faith.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIV\n\nTHE NEW THEISM\n\n    \"The idea of God is the productive and conservative principle\n    of civilisation; as is the religion of a community, so will be\n    in the main its morals, its laws, its general history.\"\n\n    _Vico_ and _Michelet_ (Prof. Flint's _Philosophy of History_).\n\n\n[Sidenote: Polytheism receding before Monotheism.]\n\nIn some measure, then, we understand how Hindu polytheism, theism, and\npantheism are related to each other; we realise in some measure the\nopenness of the Indian mind, and we now ask ourselves how far the\nChristian doctrine of God has impressed itself upon that open mind. Of\nthe polytheistic masses it has already been pointed out that intelligent\nindividuals will now readily acknowledge that there is truly one God\nonly. Further, that the polytheistic idolatry which is now associated\nwith the masses once extended far higher up the scale, is evident to\nanyone reading the observations made early in the nineteenth century.\nEarly travellers in India, like the French traveller Tavernier of the\nseventeenth century, speak of the Indians without distinction as\nidolaters, contrasting them with the Mahomedans of India. In the\n_Calcutta Gazette_ of 1816, Raja Rammohan Roy, the learned opponent of\nHindu idolatry, the Erasmus of the new era, is called the _discoverer_\nof theism in the sacred books of the Hindus. Rammohan Roy himself\ndisclaimed the title, but writing in 1817, he speaks of \"the system of\nidolatry into which Hindus are now completely sunk.\"[71] Many learned\nbrahmans, he says in the same pamphlet, are perfectly aware of the\nabsurdity of idol worship, indicating that the knowledge belonged only\nto the scholars. His own object, he said, was to declare _the unity_ of\nGod as the real thought of the Hindu Scriptures. Across India, on the\nBombay side, we find clear evidence of the state of opinion among the\nmiddle class in 1830, from the report of a public debate on the\nChristian and Hindu religions. The antagonists were, on the one side,\nthe Scottish missionary Dr. John Wilson and others, and on the other\nside two leading officials of the highest Government Appellate Court,\nmen who would now rank as eminent representatives of the educated class.\nOne of these demanded proof that there was only one God.[72]\n\n[Sidenote: The beginning of the nineteenth century.]\n\n[Sidenote: Monotheistic belief a broadening wedge between pantheism and\npolytheism.]\n\nReturning to Bengal, it would seem from Rammohan Roy's evidence that in\n1820 the standpoint of the learned at that time was exactly what we have\ncalled the standpoint of an intelligent individual among the masses\nto-day, namely, a plea that the multitude of gods were agents of the one\nSupreme God. \"Debased and despicable,\" he writes, \"as is the belief of\nthe Hindus in three hundred and thirty millions of gods, they (the\nlearned) pretend to reconcile this persuasion with the doctrine of the\nunity of God, alleging that the three hundred and thirty millions of\ngods are subordinate agents assuming various offices and preserving the\nharmony of the universe under one Godhead, as innumerable rays issue\nfrom one sun.\"[73] Turning to testimony of a different kind, we find\nMacaulay speaking about the polytheistic idolatry he knew between 1834\nand 1838. \"The great majority of the population,\" he writes, \"consists\nof idolaters.\" Macaulay's belief was that idolatry would not survive\nmany years of English education, and we shall now take note how in the\ncentury the sphere of idolatry and polytheism has been limited. At the\nbeginning of the nineteenth century, we may now say that Indian Hindu\nsociety consisted of a vast polytheistic mass with a very thin, an often\ninvisible, film of pantheists on the top. The nineteenth century of\nenlightenment and contact with Christianity has seen the wide acceptance\nof the monotheistic conception by the new-educated India. The founding\nof the Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j or Theistic Association in 1828 by Rammohan\nRoy has already been called the commencement of an indigenous theistic\nchurch outside the transplanted theism of Indian Christianity and Indian\nMahomedanism. Strictly rendered, the divine name _Brahm[=a]_, adopted by\nthe Br[=a]hmas, expresses the pantheistic idea that God is the _One\nwithout a second_, not the theistic idea of one personal God; but what\nwe are concerned with is, that it was in the monotheistic sense that\nRammohan Roy adopted the term. To him Brahm[=a] was a personal God, with\nwhom men spoke in prayer and praise. As a matter of fact the pantheistic\nformula, \"One only, no second,\" occurs in the creeds of all three new\nmonotheistic bodies, Br[=a]hmas, Pr[=a]rthan[=a] Sam[=a]jists, and\n[=A]ryas, but in the same monotheistic sense. The original Sanscrit of\nthe formula (Ekam eva advityam), three words from the Chh[=a]ndogya\nUpanishad, is regularly intoned (droned) in the public worship of\nBr[=a]hmas. Like a wedge between the polytheism of the masses below and\nthe pantheism of the brahmanically educated above, there came in this\nnaturalised theism, a body of opinion ever widening as modern education\nenlarges its domain. It is one of the _events_ of Indian history. Now,\npantheistic in argument and polytheistic in domestic practices as\neducated Hindus still are, they never call themselves pantheists, and\nwould resent being called polytheists; they call themselves theists.\n\"Every intelligent man is now a monotheist,\" writes the late Dr. John\nMurdoch of Madras, an experienced observer.[74] \"Many\" (of the educated\nHindus), says a Hindu writer, \"--I may say most of them--are in reality\nmonotheists, but monotheists of a different type from those who belong\nto the Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j. They are, if we may so call them, passive\nmonotheists.... The influence of the Hindu environment is as much\nperceptible in them as that of the Christian environment.\"[75] Professor\nMax M\u00fcller and Sir M. Monier Williams are of the same opinion. \"The\neducated classes look with contempt upon idolatry.... A complete\ndisintegration of ancient faiths is in progress in the upper strata of\nsociety. Most of the ablest thinkers become pure Theists or\nUnitarians.\"[76] That change took place within the nineteenth century, a\ntestimony to the force of Christian theism in building up belief, and to\nthe power of the modern Indian atmosphere to dissipate irrational and\nunpractical beliefs. For, in contact with the practical instincts of\nEurope, the pantheistic denial of one's own personality--a disbelief in\none's own consciousness, the thought that there is no thinker--was bound\nto give way, as well as the irrational polytheism. Very unphilosophical\nmay have been Lord Byron's attitude to the idealism of Berkeley: \"When\nBishop Berkeley said there was no matter, 'twas no matter what he said.\"\nBut that represents the modern atmosphere which New India is breathing,\nand it is fatal to pantheism.\n\n[Sidenote: The spread of monotheism traced.]\n\nIt is interesting to note how monotheism spread. The Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j\nof Madras was founded in 1864, theistic like the mother society, the\nBr[=a]hma Sam[=a]j of Bengal. Three years later the first of similar\nbodies on the west side of India was founded, the Pr[=a]rthan[=a]\nSam[=a]jes or Prayer Associations of Bombay. Their very name, the\n_Prayer_ Associations, implies the dual conception of God and Man, for\nthe pantheistic conception does not admit of the idea of prayer any more\nthan it admits of the other dualistic conceptions of revelation, of\nworship, and of sin. These movements, again, were followed in the United\nProvinces and the North-West of India by the founding of the _[=A]rya\nSam[=a]j_, or, as I have called it, the Vedic Theistic Association, also\nprofessedly theistic. Polytheism and pantheism alike, the [=A]ryas\nrepudiate. For the gods and goddesses of the Hindu pantheon, the founder\nof the [=A]ryas declared there was no recognition in the Vedas.\nDemonstrable or not, that is the [=A]rya position. The rejection of\npantheism by such a body is noteworthy, for pantheism is identified with\nIndia and the Vedanta, the most widely accepted of the six systems of\nIndian philosophy, and the [=A]rya Sam[=a]j is nothing if not patriotic.\nIt is above all pro-Indian and pro-Vedic. Their direct repudiation of\npantheism may not be apparent to Western minds. [=A]ryas predicate three\neternal entities, God, the Soul, and Matter,[77] and this declaration of\nthe reality of the soul and of matter is a direct denial of the\npantheistic conception, its very antithesis. One pantheistic formula is:\n\"Brahma is reality, the world unreality\" (Brahma satyam, jagan\nmithy[=a]). The Pantheist must declare, and does declare in his doctrine\nof Maya or Delusion, that the soul and matter are illusions.\n\n[Sidenote: The progress of monotheism seen in the _Text-book of Hindu\nReligion_.]\n\nA very striking illustration of the present insufficiency of the\npantheistic conception of God and of the movement of educated India\ntowards theism is to be found where one would least expect it--in\nconnection with the Hindu Revival. In 1903 an _Advanced Text-book of\nHindu Religion and Ethics_ was published by the Board of Trustees of the\nHindu College, Benares, a body representing the movement for a revival\nof Hinduism. It was a heroic undertaking to reconcile, in the one\nText-book, Vedic, philosophic, and popular Hinduism, to harmonise all\nthe six schools of philosophy, to embrace all the aspects of modern\nHinduism, and lastly to satisfy the monotheistic opinions of modern\nenlightened Hindus.\n\n[Sidenote: What is Pantheism?]\n\nTo appreciate the testimony of the Text-book, we must enter more fully\ninto the orthodox Hindu theological position. Pantheism, or the doctrine\nthat God is all and all is God--what does it imply? Pantheism is a\ntheory of creation, that God is all, that there are in truth no\ncreatures, but only unreal phantasies appearing to darkened human minds,\nbecause darkened and half-blind. As such, its nearest Christian analogue\nwould be the thought that in every phenomenon we have God's fiat and\nGod's reason, and that \"in Him we live and move and have our being.\"\nPantheism is a theory of spiritual culture, that our individuality is\nours only to merge it in His, although on this line, the Christian soon\nparts company with the Indian pantheistic devotee, who seeks to _merge_\nhis consciousness in God, not to train himself into active sonship.\nPantheism is a theory of God's omnipresence, and may be little more than\nenthusiastic feeling of God's omnipresence, such as we have in the 139th\npsalm, \"Whither shall I go from Thy presence? and whither shall I flee\nfrom Thy spirit?\" That Oriental mysticism and loyalty to an idea we can\nallow for. It is in that aspect that pantheism is in closest contact\nwith the belief of the new educated Hindu. But in brahmanical\nphilosophy, pantheism is nothing else than the inability to pass beyond\nthe initial idea of infinite preexistent, unconditioned, Deity. To the\npantheist, let us remember, there is Deity, but there are no real\ndeities; there is a Godhead, but there are no real persons in the\nGodhead. In the view of the pantheist, when we see aught else divine or\nhuman than this all-embracing Deity or Godhead, it is only a\nself-created mist of the dim human eye, in which there play the\nflickering phantasms of deities and human individuals and things. \"In\nthe Absolute, there is no thou, nor I, nor God,\" said Ramkrishna, a\ngreat Hindu saint who died in 1886.[78] In Hindu phraseology, every\nconception other than this all-comprehending Deity is _Maya_ or\ndelusion, and salvation is \"saving knowledge\" of the delusion, and\ntherefore deliverance from it. The perception of _manifoldness_ is Maya\nor illusion, says a modern pro-Hindu writer. And again, \"To India, all\nthat exists is but a mighty curtain of appearances, tremulous now and\nagain with breaths from the unseen that it conceals.\"[79]\n\n[Sidenote: Maya is implied in Pantheism.]\n\n[Sidenote: The outcome of Maya.]\n\nThe doctrine of Maya is, of course, a postulate, a necessity of\nPantheism. Brahma is the name of the impersonal pantheistic deity. First\namong the unrealities, the outcome of Maya or Illusion or Ignorance, is\nthe idea of a supreme _personal_ God, Parameswar, from whom, or in whom,\nnext come the three great personal deities, namely, the Hindu Triad,\nBrahm[=a] (not Brahma), Vishnu, and Siva,--Creator, Preserver, and\nDestroyer respectively. These and all the other deities are the product\nof Maya, and thus belong to the realm of unreality along with\nParameswar.[80] Popular theology, on the other hand, begins with the\nthree great personal deities.\n\n[Sidenote: The Hindu Text-book transforms Pantheism into Monotheism.]\n\nNow come we again to the Text-book. Rightly, as scholars would agree, it\ndescribes the predominant philosophy of Hinduism as pantheistic. The\nText-book, however, goes farther, and declares all the six systems of\nHindu philosophy to be parts of one pantheistic system.[81] The word\npantheism, I ought to say, does not occur in the Text-book. But here is\nits teaching. \"All six systems,\" we are told, \"are designed to lead man\nto the One Science, the One Wisdom which saw One Self Real and all else\nas Unreal.\" And again, \"Man learns to climb from the idea of himself as\nseparate from Brahma to the thought that he is a part of Brahma that can\nunite with Him, and finally [to the thought] that he is and ever has\nbeen Brahma, veiled from himself by Avidy[=a]\" (that is, Ignorance or\nMaya). Our point is that the _Text-book of Hindu Religion_ is\nprofessedly pantheistic, and the above is clearly pantheism and its\npostulate Maya. But in the final exposition of this pantheism, what do\nwe find? To meet the modern thought of educated India, the pantheism is\nvirtually given up.[82] Brahma, the One and the All, becomes simply _the\nDeity Unmanifested_; who shone forth to men as _the Deity Manifested_,\nParameswar; of whom the Hindu Triad, Brahm[=a] and Vishnu and Siva, are\nonly three _names_. Maya or Delusion, the foundation postulate of\npantheism, by which things _seem_ to be,--by which the One seems to be\nmany,--is identified with the creative will of Parameswar. In fact,\nPantheism has been virtually transformed into Theism, Brahma into a\nCreator, and Maya into his creative and sustaining fiat. The _Text-book\nof the Hindu Religion_ is finally monotheistic, as the times will have\nit.\n\n[Sidenote: A Parsee claiming to be a monotheist.]\n\nAs further confirmation of the change in the Indian mind, we may cite\nthe paper read at the Congress on the History of Religions, Basel, 1904,\nby the Deputy High-priest of the Parsees, Bombay. The dualism of the\nZoroastrian theology has hitherto been regarded as its distinctive\nfeature, but the paper sought to show \"that the religion of the Parsees\nwas largely monotheistic, not dualistic.\"\n\nThe theistic standpoint of the younger members of the educated class of\nto-day is easily discoverable. The word _God_ used in their English\ncompositions or speeches, plainly implies a person. The commonplace of\nthe anxious student is that the pass desired, the failure feared, is\ndependent upon the will of God--language manifestly not pantheistic.\nReligious expressions, we may remark, are natural to a Hindu.\n\n[Sidenote: The conception of the Deity as female has gone from the minds\nof the educated.]\n\nIn the new theism of educated Indians we may note that the conception of\nthe deity as female is practically gone. Not so among the masses,\nparticularly of the provinces of Bengal and Gujerat, the provinces\ndistinctively of goddesses. The sight of a man in Calcutta in the first\nhour of his sore bereavement calling upon Mother Kali has left a deep\nimpression upon me.[83] Be it remembered, however, what his cry meant,\nand what the name _Mother_ in such cases means. It is a honorific form\nof address, not the symbol for devoted love. The _goddesses_ of India,\nnot the gods, are the deities to be particularly feared and to be\npropitiated with blood. It is energy, often destructive energy, not\nwoman's tenderness that they represent, even according to Hindu\nphilosophy and modern rationalisers. We may nevertheless well believe\nthat contact with Christian ideas will yet soften and sweeten this title\nof the goddesses.\n\n[Sidenote: The new theism is largely Christian theism--God is termed\nFather;]\n\n[Sidenote: Or Mother.]\n\nThe new theism of educated India is more and more emphatically Christian\ntheism. Anyone may observe that the name, other than \"God,\" by which the\nDeity is almost universally named by educated Hindus is \"The Father,\" or\n\"Our Heavenly Father,\" or some such name. The new name is not a\nrendering of any of the vernacular names in use in modern India; it is\ndue directly to its use in English literature and in Christian preaching\nand teaching. The late Keshub Chunder Sen's _Lectures in India_,\naddressed to Hindu audiences, abound in the use of the name. The\nfatherhood of God is in fact one of the articles of the Br[=a]hma creed.\nIn his last years, the Brahma leader, Keshub Chunder Sen, frequently\nspoke of God as the divine _Mother_, but we are not to suppose that it\nexpresses a radical change of thought about God. Keshub Chunder Sen's\nlast recorded prayer begins: \"I have come, O Mother, into thy\nsanctuary\"; his last, almost inarticulate, cries were: \"Father,\"\n\"Mother.\" Where modern Indian religious teachers address God as\n_Mother_, it is a modernism, an echo of the thought of the Fatherhood of\nGod. The name is altered because the name of Mother better suits the\necstasies of Indian devotion, where the ecstatic mood is cultivated. A\ncase in point is the Hindu devotee, Ramkrishna Paramhansa, who died near\nCalcutta in 1886. \"Why,\" Ramkrishna Paramhansa asks, \"does the God-lover\nfind such pleasure in addressing the Deity as Mother? Because,\" his\nanswer is, \"the child is more free with its mother, and consequently she\nis dearer to the child than anyone else.[84] Another instance we find in\nthe appeal issued by a committee of Hindu gentlemen for subscriptions\ntowards the rebuilding of the temple at Kangra, destroyed by the\nearthquake of 1905. The president of the committee, signing the appeal,\nwas a Hindu judge of the High Court at Lahore, a graduate from a Mission\nCollege. \"There are Hindus,\" thus runs the appeal, \"who by the grace of\nthe Divine Mother could give the [whole] amount ... and not feel the\npoorer for it.\"[85]\n\n[Sidenote: The [=A]rya Sam[=a]j and the name Father.]\n\n[Sidenote: The Hindu College, Benares, and the name _Father_.]\n\nThe [=A]rya Sam[=a]j, on the other hand, seems set against speaking or\nthinking of God as the Father. Specially present to their minds and in\ntheir preaching is the thought of God's absolute justice; and they hold\nthat His Justice and His Fatherhood are contradictory attributes. Virtue\n_will_ have its reward, they assert, and Sin its punishment, both in\nthis and the following existences. We recognise the working of their\ndoctrine of transmigration, perhaps also the effect of a feeble\npresentation of the Christian doctrine of the Father's forgiveness of\nsin. Nevertheless, we may note in a hymn-book published in London for\nthe use of members of the [=A]rya Sam[=a]j resident there, such hymns as\n\"My God and Father, while I stray,\" and \"My God, my Father, blissful\nname,\" as if the name were not explicitly excluded. We also read that\nthe very last parting words of the founder of the [=A]ryas himself were:\n\"Let Thy will be done, O Father!\"[86] The heart of man will not be\ndenied the name and the feeling of \"God who is our home.\" Turning again\nfrom the [=A]ryas to the new citadel of Benares, and Hinduism, the Hindu\nCollege, Benares, we find that along with the Text-book already\nmentioned, there was published a _Catechism in Hindu Religion and\nMorals_ for boys and girls. One question is, \"Can we know that eternal\nBeing (the \"One only without a second,\" or \"The All,\" _i.e._ pantheistic\nDeity)? The answer is, \"Only when revealed as Ishwar, the Lord, the\nloving Father of all the worlds and of all the creatures who live in\nthem.\" That idea of the loving Father, of divine Law and Love in one\nperson, is new to Hinduism. The law of God may be only imperfectly\napprehended, but the loving Fatherhood of God, the approachable one, has\nbecome manifest in India--one of Christianity's dynamic doctrines.\nStrangest confirmation of all, a Mahomedan preacher of Behar a few years\nago was expounding from the Koran the Fatherhood of God. The name and\nthought of the divine Father established, we may leave name and thought\nto be invested with their full significance in the fulness of time.\n\n\"It is with Pantheism, not Polytheism, that a rising morality will have\nto reckon,\" says Sir Alfred Lyall.[87] The result of all our observation\nhas been different. Pantheism is melting out of the sky of the educated,\nand if nothing else take its place, it will be a selfish materialism or\nagnosticism, not avowed or formulated yet shaping every motive, that the\nnew morality will have to reckon with.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XV\n\nJESUS CHRIST HIMSELF\n\n    \"Tandem vicisti, Galilaee\"\n\n    --said to have been uttered by Julian, the Apostate emperor.\n\n\n[Sidenote: Pantheism does not lead to belief in \"the Son of God.\"]\n\nPantheism, it has been said, lends itself to the lead to belief idea of\navatars or incarnations of deity, and Hinduism, therefore, is familiar\nwith avatars. Observation contradicts this _\u00e0 priori_ reasoning, nay, it\njustifies a statement almost contrary. To the philosopher who is\nthinking out a pantheistic system, or to the ascetic who is seeking\nafter identity of consciousness with the One, the Hindu Avatars are only\na part of the delusion, the Maya, in which men are steeped. To a\npantheist, holding that his own consciousness of individuality is\ndelusion, born of spiritual darkness and ignorance, the conception of an\navatar or concrete presentation of deity as an individual is only still\ngrosser delusion. \"The name of God and the conventions of piety are as\nunreal as anything else in Maya,\" writes a modern British apostle of\nHinduism, while advocating the realisation of Maya as our salvation.[88]\nIt does not seem to me justifiable to say that through Pantheism the\nIndian mind can approach the thought of Christ the Son of Man and the\nSon of God. But pantheism, with its allied doctrine of transmigration,\nmay encourage the thought that our Lord was a great jogi or religious\ndevotee, the last climax of many upward transmigrations, and that Christ\nhad attained to the goal of illumination of the jogi, namely, identity\nof consciousness with deity, when he felt \"I and the Father are one.\"\nThat statement about Our Lord is sometimes made in India.\n\n[Sidenote: The avatars of popular theology.]\n\nIt is not through the pantheism of the brahmanically learned and of\nreligious devotees that the Indian mind has come within Christ's sphere\nof influence, but rather through the beliefs of the multitude and the\nnew education of the middle class. And how, we ask, has Christ been\nintroduced to India by association with the popular beliefs--how,\nrather, has the attempt been made to do so? The theology of the people\nbegins, as has been already stated, with the Hindu Triad, the three\ngreat personal deities, namely, Brahm[=a], Vishnu, and Siva,--Creator,\nPreserver, and Destroyer respectively. From these and other deities, but\nparticularly from Vishnu, the Preserver, there descended to earth at\nvarious times and in various forms, human and animal, certain\navatars.[89] Best known of these avatars of Vishnu, the Preserver, are\nRam, the hero of the great epic called after him, the R[=a]m[=a]yan; and\nsecondly, Krishna, one of the chief figures of the other great Indian\nepic, the Mah[=a]bh[=a]rat; and thirdly, Buddha, the great religious\nteacher of the sixth century B.C. Ram and Krishna have become deities of\nthe multitude over the greater part of India. Buddha, latest in time of\nthese three avatars, and unknown as an avatar to the multitude, has not\nyet been lost to history. Such is the genealogy of certain of the Hindu\ngods and their avatars, and the object of setting it forth is to enable\nus to see how Jesus Christ has presented Himself or been presented to\nthe Hindu people.\n\n[Sidenote: Parallels in Christian and Hindu theology.]\n\nWhen Christian doctrine was presented to India in modern times, the\nChristian Trinity and the Hindu Triad at once suggested a\ncorrespondence, which seemed to be confirmed by the coincidence of a\nCreator and Preserver in the Triad with the Creator and the Son, Our\nSaviour, in the Trinity. The historical Christ and the avatars of Vishnu\nwould thus present themselves as at least striking theological and\nreligious parallels. \"On the one hand, learned brahmans have been found\nquite willing to regard Christ himself as an incarnation of Vishnu for\nthe benefit of the Western world.\"[90] On the other, Christian\nmissionaries in India have often preached Christ as the one true\navatar.[91] The idea and the word _avatar_ are always recurring in the\nhymns sung in Christian churches in India. Missionaries have also sought\nto graft the doctrine of Christ's atonement upon Hinduism, through one\nof the avatars. A common name of Vishnu, the second member of the Triad,\nas also of Krishna, his avatar, is _Hari_. Accepting the common\netymology of _Hari_ as meaning _the taker away_, Christian preachers\nhave found an idea analogous to that of Christ, the Redeemer of men.\nThen the similarity of the names, _Christ_ and _Krishna_, chief avatar\nof Vishnu, could not escape notice, especially since Krishna,\nChrist-like, is the object of the enthusiastic devotion of the Hindu\nmultitude. In familiar speech, Krishna's name is still further\napproximated to that of Christ, being frequently pronounced _Krishta_ or\n_Kishta_. In the middle of the nineteenth century the common opinion was\nthat there was some historical connection between Krishna and Christ,\nand the idea lingers in the minds of both Hindus and Christians. One is\nsurprised to find it in a recent European writer, formerly a member of\nthe Indian Civil Service. \"Surely there is something more,\" he says,\n\"than an analogy between Christianity and Krishna worship.\"[92]\n\nMuch has been made by the late Dr. K.M. Banerjea, the most learned\nmember of the Indian Christian Church of the nineteenth century, and\nsomething also by the late Sir M. Monier Williams, of a passage in the\nRigveda (x. 90), which seems to point to Christ. The passage speaks of\nPurusha (the universal spirit), who is also \"Lord of Immortality,\" and\nwas \"born in the beginning,\" as having been \"sacrificed by the Gods,\nSadyas and Rishis,\" and as becoming thereafter the origin of the various\ncastes and of certain gods and animals. A similar passage in a later\nbook, the _T[=a]ndya Br[=a]hmanas_, declares that \"the Lord of\ncreatures, Prajapati, offered himself a sacrifice for the devas\"\n(emancipated mortals or gods). Of the parallelism between the\nself-sacrificing Prajapati, Lord of creatures, and the Second Person in\nthe Christian Trinity, propitiator and agent in creation, we may hear\nDr. Banerjea himself: \"The self-sacrificing Prajapati [Lord of\ncreatures] variously described as Purusha, begotten in the beginning, as\nViswakarma, the creator of all, is, in the meaning of his name and in\nhis offices, identical with Jesus.... Jesus of Nazareth is the only\nperson who has ever appeared in the world claiming the character and\nposition of Prajapati, at the same time both mortal and immortal.\"[93]\n\n[Sidenote: These parallels ineffective.]\n\n[Sidenote: Christ Himself attractive.]\n\nBut it must be confessed that these parallels, real or supposed, between\nChristianity and Hinduism have not brought Christ home to the heart of\nIndia. In themselves, they only bring Christianity as near to Hinduism\nas they bring Hinduism to Christianity. Uneducated Hindus feel that the\ntwo religions are balanced when they have Krishna and Christians have\nChrist. Educated Hindus, as we shall see, are employing some of these\nvery parallels to buttress Hinduism. Far be it from me, however, to\ndepreciate the labours of scholars and earlier missionaries who have\nthus established links between Hindus and Christians, and have thus at\nleast brought Christ into the Hindu's presence. To Indian Christians\nalso such reasoning has often been a strength, furnishing as it were a\nnew justification of their baptism into Christianity; for looking back\nthey can perceive the finger of Hinduism itself pointing the way. But\nhad no other influence been exerted on the Indian mind, one could not\nsay what I now say, that Christ Himself is the feature of Christianity\nthat has most powerfully moved men in India. The person of Christ\nHimself has been the great Christian dynamic. I am now speaking of\neducated India, the India that is not dependent solely upon the preacher\nfor its religious ideas and feeling.\n\n[Sidenote: Christianity identified with Britain and therefore\nunpopular.]\n\n[Sidenote: The anti-foreigner instinct.]\n\nThe grand new political idea in India is the idea of nationality, and\none of its corollaries is the championing of things Indian and\ndepreciation of things British. The strong anti-British bias among the\neducated is one of the noteworthy and regrettable changes in the Indian\nmind within the last half-century. It is not surprising then that all\nover India the influence of Christ and of Christianity is lessened from\nthe identification of Christianity with the British. For a native of\nIndia to accept the British religion is to run counter to the prevailing\nanti-British and pro-Indian feeling; it is unpatriotic to become a\nconvert to Christianity. \"Need we go out of India in quest of the true\nknowledge of God?\" wrote a distinguished Indian litt\u00e9rateur a few years\nago.[94] All that feeling is of course in addition to the instinctive\nhostility to things foreign that has been nowhere stronger than in\nself-contained India--self-contained between the Himalayas and the seas.\nThe exclusiveness of caste is based upon that feeling. The statement of\nthe late Rev. M.N. Bose, B.A., B.L., a native of Eastern Bengal,\nregarding his youth [1860?] is: \"I had a deep-rooted prejudice against\nChristianity from my boyhood.... At this time I hated Christianity and\nChristians, though I knew not why I did so.\"[95] We find the instinctive\nhostility more bluntly expressed in China in the cry that drops\nspontaneously from the opening lips of many Chinamen, as their greeting,\nwhen they unexpectedly behold a European. The involuntary ejaculation\nis: \"Strike the foreign devil.\"\n\n[Sidenote: Christ reverenced; Christians disliked.]\n\nIn the first part of the nineteenth century, along with the great\ndevelopment of modern missions, and of modern education, we may say that\nChrist came again to India. The national and anti-British feeling had\nnot then arisen to interpose in His path, but, coming as an alien, His\nname evoked great hostility. The popular mood was _Christianos ad\nleones,_ as many incidents and witnesses testify. Now, in spite of the\nold anti-foreign hostility and the new currents of feeling, a remarkable\nattitude to Christianity--far short of conversion, no doubt--is almost\neverywhere manifest. There is a profound homage to its Founder, coupled\nwith that strong resentment towards His Indian disciples. Christ Himself\nis acknowledged; His church is still foreign and British. Resentfully\nruled by a Christian nation, but subdued by Christ Himself, is the state\nof educated India to-day. In spite of His alien birth and in spite of\nanti-British bias, Christ has passed within the pale of Indian\nrecognition. Indian eyes, focused at last, are fastened upon Him, and\nmen wonder at His gracious words. Again I direct attention to a\nsignificant event in Indian history--the incoming of an influence that\nwill not stale, as mere ideas may. \"Is there a single soul in this\naudience,\" said the Brahmo leader, the late Keshub Chunder Sen,[96] to\nthe educated Indians of Calcutta, mostly Hindus, \"who would scruple to\nascribe extraordinary greatness and supernatural moral heroism to Jesus\nChrist and Him crucified?\"\n\n\"That incarnation of the Divine Love, the lowly Son of man,\" writes\nanother, even while he is rejoicing over the revival of Hinduism.[97]\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XVI\n\nJESUS CHRIST THE LODESTONE\n\n    \"And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men\n    unto myself.\"\n\n    --ST. JOHN'S GOSPEL, xii. 32.\n\n\n[Sidenote: Instances of Indian homage to Christ, and dislike of His\nChurch.]\n\n[Sidenote: Bengal.]\n\n[Sidenote: Bombay.]\n\n[Sidenote: Madras.]\n\nInteresting phases of that divided mind--homage to Christ, resentment\ntowards His disciples--may be found on opposite sides of the great\ncontinent of India. In Bengal, a not-infrequent standpoint of Br[=a]hmas\nin reference to Christ is that _they_ are the true exponents of Christ's\nspirit and His teaching. Western Christian teachers, they say, are\nhidebound by tradition; and the ready-made rigidity of the creeds of the\nChurches is no doubt a factor in the state of mind we are describing.\nLooking back as far as to 1820, we see in _The Precepts of Jesus_,\npublished by the founder of the Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j, that standpoint of\nhomage to Christ and dissent from accepted views regarding Him.\nIllustrative of that Br[=a]hma standpoint, we have also the more recent\nbook, _The Oriental Christ_, by the late Mr. P.C. Mozumdar, the\nsuccessor of Keshub Chunder Sen. But the attitude is by no means limited\nto Brahmas. \"Without Christian dogmas, cannot a man equally love and\nrevere Christ?\" was a representative question put by a senior Hindu\nstudent in Bengal to his missionary professor. In South India,\nMahomedans sometimes actually describe themselves as better Christians\nthan ourselves, holding as they do such faith in Jesus and His mother\nMary and His Gospel. The case of Mahomedans is not, of course, on all\nfours with that of Hindus, since Mahomedans reckon Christ as one of the\nfour prophets along with their own Mahomed. In Bombay province, on the\nother side of India from Bengal, we find Mr. Malabari, the famous\nParsee, pupil of a Mission School, doubting if it is possible for the\nEnglishman to be a Christian in the sense of _Christ's Christianity_,\nthe implication being that an Indian may. What element of truth is there\nin the idea, we may well ask? From Indian Christians, be it said, we may\nindeed look for a fervency of loyalty to Christ that does not enter into\nour calculating moderate souls; and from India, equally, we may look for\nthat mystically profound commentary on St. John's Gospel which Bishop\nWestcott declared he looked for from Japan. But to return. About Mr.\nMalabar! himself, his biographer writes: \"If he could not accept the\ndogmas of Christianity, he had imbibed its true spirit,\" meaning the\nspirit of Christ Himself. \"The cult of the Asiatic life\" is the latest\ndefinition of Christianity given by a recent apologist of Hinduism, one\nof a small company of Europeans in India officering the Hindu revival.\nCrossing India again and going south, we find the late Dr. John Murdoch,\nof Madras, an eminent observer, adding his testimony regarding the\nhomage paid to the Founder of Christianity. \"The most hopeful sign,\" he\nwrites, \"is the increasing reverence for our Lord, although His divinity\nis not yet acknowledged.\"[98] And of new India generally, again, we may\nquote Mr. Bose, the Indian historian. \"The Christianity [of\nNorth-western Europe] is no more like Christianity as preached by Christ\nthan the Buddhism of the Thibetans is like Buddhism as preached by\nGautama.\" Take finally the following sentences from a recent number of a\nmoderate neo-Hindu organ, the _Hindustan Review (vol._ viii. 514):\n\"Christ, the great exemplar of practical morality ...; the more one\nenters into the true spirit of Christ, the more will he reject\nChristianity as it prevails in the world to-day. The Indians have been\ngainers not losers by rejecting Christianity for the sake of\nChrist.\"[99]\n\n[Sidenote: Desire to discover Christian ideas in Hindu Scriptures.]\n\n[Sidenote: Christ and Krishna set alongside.]\n\nAnother phase of that same divided mind, acknowledging Christ and\nresenting Indian discipleship, may be perceived in the willingness to\ndiscover Christian ideas in Hindu Scriptures, and Christ-like features\nin Hindu deities and religious heroes. To express it from the Indian\nstandpoint,--they see Christ and Christianity bringing back much of\ntheir own \"refined and modernised.\" In a sense, as a Bengali Christian\ngentleman put it, Christ and Christianity have become the accepted\nstandards in religion.[100] Again we quote from the same page of the\n_Hindustan Review_: \"A revival of Hinduism has taken place.... It\n[Christianity] has given us Christ, and given us noble moral and\nspiritual lessons, which we have discovered anew in our own Scriptures,\nand thereby satisfied our self-love and made our very own.\" We have\nmentioned how missionaries used to find the doctrine of the atonement in\nthe name of the Indian God Hari; the argument has now in turn been\nannexed by Hindus, and employed as an argument in their favour. Within\nthe last twenty years, there has been a great revival of the honouring\nof Krishna among the educated classes in Bengal and the United\nProvinces. Krishna has set up distinctly as the Indian Christ, or as the\nIndian figure to be set up over against Christ. A Krishna story has been\ndisentangled from the gross mythology, and he has become a paragon of\nvirtue,--the work of a distinguished Bengali novelist. I mean no\nsarcasm. From the sermon of a Hindu preacher in a garden in Calcutta in\n1898, I quote: \"The same God came into the world as the Krishna of India\nand the Krishna of Jerusalem.\" These are his words. From the catalogue\nof the Neo-Krishnaite literature in Bengal, given by Mr. J.N. Farquhar\nof the Y.M.C.A., Calcutta, it appears that since 1884 thirteen Lives of\nKrishna or works on Krishna have appeared in Bengal. Many essays have\nappeared comparing Krishna with Christ. There have been likewise many\neditions of the Bhagabat Gita, or Divine Song, the episode in the\nMahabharat, in which Krishna figures as religious teacher. It may be\ncalled the New Testament of the Neo-Krishnaite. Perhaps the most\nstriking of these Neo-Krishnaite publications is _The Imitation of\nSri-Krishna_, a daily-text book containing extracts from the Bhagabat\nGita and the Bhagabat Puran. The title is, of course, a manifest echo of\n\"The Imitation of Christ,\" which is a favourite with religious-minded\nHindus. The _Imitation of Buddha_, likewise we may observe, has been\npublished. About \"The Imitation of Christ\" itself, we quote from a\nHindu's advertisement appended to the life of a new Hindu saint,\nRamkrishna Paramhansa. \"The reader of 'The Imitation of Christ,'\" it\nsays, \"will find echoed in it hundreds of sayings of our Lord\nSri-Krishna in the Bhagabat Gita like the following: 'Give up all\nreligious work and come to me as thy sole refuge, and I will deliver\nthee from all manner of sin.'\" The notice goes on: \"The book has found\nits way into the pockets of many orthodox Hindus.\"\n\n[Sidenote: Christ and Chaitanya of Bengal.]\n\nFrom Krishna we turn to Chaitanya, surname Gauranga, the fair, a\nreligious teacher of Bengal in the fifteenth century, who is also being\nset up as the Christ of Bengal, in that he preached the equality of men\nbefore God and ecstatic devotion to the god Krishna. A Christ-like man,\nindeed, in many ways, Chaitanya was, and the increased acquaintance of\neducated Bengal with Jesus Christ naturally brought Chaitanya to the\nfront. The new cult of Chaitanya and his enthronement over against Jesus\nChrist are manifest in the titles of two recent publications in Bengal,\nthe first entitled, _Lord Gauranga, or Salvation for all_, and the\nother, _Chaitanya's Message of Love_. Chaitanya and his two chief\nfollowers, it should be said, were called the great _lords_ (prabhus) of\nthe sect, but the title \"Lord Gauranga\" is quite new, an echo of the\ntitle of Jesus Christ. With regard to the new power of Christ's\npersonality, it should be noted that the author of _Lord Gauranga_\nstrongly deprecates the idea that his desire is to demolish\nChristianity, or other than to extend the kingdom of Jesus Christ. He\ndeclares that Jesus Christ is as much a prophet as any avatar of the\nHindus, and that Hindus can and ought to accept him as they do Krishna\nor Chaitanya. This is in accord with the spirit of Hinduism--namely, the\nfluidity of doctrine, and the free choice of guru or religious teacher,\nas set forth in a previous chapter--although it is still an advanced\nposition for a Hindu to take up publicly.\n\n[Sidenote: Eccentric manifestations of the power of Christ's\npersonality.]\n\nCould we observe the course of evolution down which a species of animals\nor plants has come from some remote ancestry to their present form, with\nwhat interest would we note the specific characteristics gathering\nstrength, as from generation to generation they prove their \"fitness to\nsurvive\"! The whole onward career of the evolving species would seem to\nhave been aimed at the latest form in which we find it. Yet quite as\nwonderful phenomena as the species that has survived are the many\nvariations of the species that have presented themselves, but have not\nproved fit to survive. One species only survives for hundreds of\nwould-be collaterals that are extinct. The religious evolution that we\nhave been observing is the growing power of Christ's personality in New\nIndia; and now, as further testimony to its power, a number of\ncollateral movements, similarly inspired yet eccentric and hardly likely\nto endure, attract our attention. In these eccentric movements the power\nof Christ's personality is manifest, and yet it appears amid\ncircumstances so peculiar that the phenomena in themselves are\ngrotesque.\n\n[Sidenote: The Punjab--two have set themselves up as Christ come again.]\n\n[Sidenote: Hakim Singh.]\n\n[Sidenote: Mirz[=a] Ghol[=a]m Ahmad.]\n\nThree of these strange movements let us look at as new evidence of the\npower of Christ's personality in India. All three occur in still another\nprovince than those named, the Punjab, a province _sui generis_ in many\nways. Within a generation past, at least two men have arisen, either\nclaiming to be Christ Himself come again, or a Messiah superior to Him.\nA third received a vision of \"Jesus God,\" and proclaimed Him, wherever\nhe went, as an object of worship. Of the first of the three leaders, Sir\nAlfred Lyall tells us, one Hakim Singh, \"who listened to missionaries\nuntil he not only accepted the whole Christian dogma, but conceived\nhimself to be the second embodiment [of Christ], and proclaimed himself\nas such and summoned the missionaries to acknowledge him.\" It sounds\nmuch like blasphemy, or mere lunacy; but in India one learns not to be\nshocked at what in Europe would be rankest blasphemy; the intention must\ndecide the innocence or the offence. Hakim Singh \"professed to work\nmiracles, preached pure morality, but also venerated the cow,\"--strange\nchequer of Hindu and Christian ideas.[101] The second case is the better\nknown one of Mirz[=a] Ghol[=a]m Ahmad, of Q[=a]di[=a]n, who sets up a\nclaim to be \"the Similitude of the Messiah\" and \"the Messiah of the\nTwentieth Century.\" As his name shows, he is a Mahomedan, but the\nassumption of the name \"Messiah\" also shows that it is in Christ's place\nhe declares himself to stand. At the same time, his appeal is to his\nfellow-Mahomedans; for he explains that as Jesus was the Messiah of\nMoses, he himself is the Messiah of Mahomed. His superiority to Christ,\nhe expressly declares. \"I shall be guilty of concealing the truth,\" he\nsays in his English monthly, the _Review of Religions_, of May 1902, \"if\nI do not assert that the prophecies which God Almighty has granted me\nare of a far better quality in clearness, force, and truth than the\nambiguous predictions of Jesus.... But notwithstanding all this\nsuperiority, I cannot assert Divinity or Sonship of God.\" He claims \"to\nhave been sent by God to reform the true religion of God, now corrupted\nby Jews, Christians, and Mahomedans.\" Doubly blasphemous as his claims\nsound in the ears of orthodox Mahomedans, who reckon both Christ and\nMahomed as prophets, his sect is now estimated to number at least\n10,000, including many educated Mahomedans. Whatever its fate--a mere\ncomet or a new planet in the Indian sky--it indicates the religious\nstirring of educated India in another province, and the prominence of\nChrist's personality therein. Mirz[=a] Ghol[=a]m Ahmad himself\nrecommends the reading of the Gospels. As to Christ's death, Mirz[=a]\nGhol[=a]m Ahmad has a theory of his own. The Koran declares, according\nto Mahomedan expositors, that it was not Christ who suffered on the\ncross, but another in His likeness. Mirz[=a] Ghol[=a]m Ahmad teaches\nthat Jesus was crucified but did not die, that He was restored to life\nby His disciples and sent out of the country, whence He travelled East\nuntil He reached Thibet, eventually arriving at Cashmere, where He died,\nHis tomb being located in the city of Srinagar.[102] According to the\nlatest report of this reincarnation, he now claims to be at once Krishna\ncome again for Hindus, Mahomed for Mahomedans, and Christ for\nChristians.\n\n[Sidenote: Chet Ram claimed to be an apostle.]\n\nThe third movement is that of the Chet Ramis, or sect of Chet Ram, whose\nstrange history may be found in _East and West_ for July 1905. Chet Ram\nwas an illiterate Hindu, a water-carrier and then a steward in the\nIndian army that took part in the war with China in 1859-1860. Returning\nto his native district not far from Lahore, Chet Ram, the Hindu, came\nunder the spell of a Mahomedan ascetic Mahbub Sh[=a]h, left all and\nfollowed him as his \"familiar\" disciple. How this relationship between\nHindu and Mahomedanism is quite possible in India, we have already\nexplained on pages 163-4; Mahbub Sh[=a]h's strange combination of\nreligious asceticism with the consumption of opium and wine, it takes\nsome years' residence in India to understand. Then Mahbub Sh[=a]h died,\nand the disciple succeeded the master. According to one account, Chet\nRam made his bed on the grave in which his master lay; according to\nanother, for three years his sleeping place was the vault within which\nhis master was buried. It was at this time that he had the vision of\n\"Jesus God,\" already referred to, between the years 1860 and 1865. Like\nCaedmon, he has described his vision in verse--\n\n  \"Upon the grave of Master Mahbub Shah\n  Slept Sain Chet Earn.\n\n  A man came in a glorious form,\n  Showing a face of mercy.\n\n  Sweet was his speech and simple his face,\n  Appearing entirely as the image of God.\n\n  He called aloud, 'Who sleeps there?\n  Awake, if thou art sleeping.\n  Thou art distinctly fortunate,\n  Thou art needed in the Master's presence.'\n\n  'Build a church on this very spot,\n  Place the Bible therein.'\n\n  Then said that luminous form,\n  Jesus, the image of Mary:\n\n  'I shall do justice in earth and heaven,\n  And reveal the hidden mysteries.'\n\n  Astonished there alone I stood,\n  As if a parrot had flown out of my hands.\n\n  Then my soul realised\n  That Jesus came to give salvation.\n\n  I realised that it was Jesus God\n  Who appeared in a bodily form.\"[103]\n\n[Sidenote: The Followers of Chet Ram.]\n\n[Sidenote: Their indefinite composite theology.]\n\nWhence came the Christian seed of Chet Ram's vision? His master Mahbub\nShah was a Mahomedan, and Jesus Christ is reckoned one of the Mahomedan\nprophets. But it is the Christ of Christianity, not of Mahomedanism,\nthat Chet Ram saw in his vision of the glorious form showing the face of\nmercy, at once the dispenser of justice, the revealer of mysteries, and\nthe giver of salvation. Whatever the source of the vision, Chet Ram saw\nand believed and began to hold up Jesus Christ before other men's eyes,\nand Chet Ram himself thus became the guru or religious teacher of what\nmay be called an indigenous Christian Church. A moderate estimate\nreckons the Chet Ramis at about five thousand souls, the religious force\nof the sect being represented by the Chet Rami ascetics, who go about\nmaking their gospel known and living on alms. Chet Ram himself died in\n1894, and at the headquarters of the sect at Buchhoke, near Lahore, his\nashes and the bones of his master Mahbub Shah are kept in two coffins,\nwhich the faithful visit, particularly on certain Chet Rami holy-days,\non which fairs are held. In keeping with the command of the vision,\nseveral copies of the New Testament and one complete Bible were also on\nview when the writer of the article in _East and West_ visited the\nsanctuary in 1903. The _Census Report_ for 1901 sums the Chet Ramis up\nby saying that \"the sect professes a worship of Christ,\" and that is our\npresent point of view. But we cannot leave them without noticing also\nhow Indian they are in their unwillingness to define their thought, and\nin their readiness to enthrone a holy man and his relics. Undefined\nthought we see expressed in symbol. There are _four_ doors to the\nsanctuary at Buchhoke,--the fakiri [Chet Rami ascetics'] door, the\nHindu, Christian, and Mahomedan doors--expressing the openness of the\nChet Rami sanctuary to all sects. Their theology is a corresponding\nconglomeration. It includes a Christian trinity of Jesus Son of Mary\n[the Mahomedan designation of Christ], the Holy Spirit, and God; and a\nHindu triad of the world's three potencies, namely, Allah, Parameswar,\nand Khuda, a jumble of Hindu and Mahomedan names, but representing the\nHindu triad of the Creator, Preserver, and Destroyer.\n\n[Sidenote: Parallel between the nineteenth century in India and the\nsecond, third, and fourth centuries in the History of the Church.]\n\n[Sidenote: The Theosophists and the Neo-Platonists.]\n\n[Sidenote: The Neo-Platonists and New India's homage to Christ.]\n\n[Sidenote: The Neo-Platonists and the Hindu Revivalists.]\n\nIn respect of the phenomenon of the homage shown to Christ over against\nthe hostility shown to His Church, the second, third, and fourth\ncenturies in the history of the Church present a striking parallel to\nthe nineteenth century in India. Steadily in these centuries\nChristianity was progressing in spite of contempt for its adherents,\nphilosophic repudiation of the doctrines of the _superstitio prava_, and\nofficial persecution unknown in British India at least. Then also, as\nalways, Christ stood out far above His followers, lifted up and drawing\nall men's eyes. Such in India also, in the nineteenth century, has been\nthe course of Christianity; parts of the record of these centuries read\nlike the record of the religious movements in India in these latter\ndays. Describing the Neo-Platonists of these centuries, historians tell\nus that at the end of the second century A.D. Ammonius of Alexandria,\nfounder of the sect, \"undertook to bring all systems of philosophy and\nreligion into harmony, by which all philosophers and men of all\nreligions, Christianity included, might unite and hold fellowship.\"\n_There_ are the four doors of the Chet Rami sanctuary. There also we\nhave the Theosophical Society of India, professing in its constitution\nto be \"the nucleus of a Universal Brotherhood of Humanity, representing\nand excluding no religious creed.\" Ammonius, founder of the\nNeo-Platonists, was a pantheist like the present leader of the\nTheosophical Society, Mrs. Besant, and like her too, curiously, had\nbegun as a Christian.[104] We recall that of Indian Theosophy in\ngeneral, in 1891, the late Sir Monier Williams declared that it seemed\nlittle more than another name for the \"Vedanta [or Pantheistic]\nphilosophy.\" Exactly like the earlier theosophists also, Ammonius, the\nNeo-Platonist, held that the purified soul could perform physical\nwonders, by the power of Theurgy. In its constitution the Theosophical\nSociety professed \"to investigate the hidden mysteries of nature and the\npsychical powers latent in man.\" Many can remember how, in the eighties,\nMadame Blavatsky took advantage of our curiosity regarding such with\nair-borne letters from Mahatmas in Thibet. Again Ammonius, we read,\n\"turned the whole history of the pagan gods into allegory.\" There we\nhave the Neo-Krishnaites of to-day. \"He acknowledged that Christ was an\nextraordinary man, the friend of God, and an admirable Theurgus.\" There\nwe have the stand point of the educated Indians who have come under\nChrist's spell. For two centuries the successors of Ammonius followed in\nthese lines. \"Individual Neo-Platonists,\" Harnack tells us, \"employed\nChristian sayings as oracles, and testified very highly of Christ.\nPorphyry of Syria, chief of the Neo-Platonists of the third century,\nwrote a work \"against Christians\"; but again, according to Harnack, the\nwork is not directed against Christ, or what Porphyry regarded as the\nteaching of Christ. It was directed against the Christians of his day\nand against the sacred books, which according to Porphyry were written\nby impostors and ignorant people. There we have the double mind of\neducated India,--homage to Christ, opposition to His Church. There also\nwe have the standpoint of Sahib Mirza Gholam Ahmad of Qadian. Some, we\nread, being taught by the Neo-Platonists that there was little\ndifference between the ancient religion, rightly explained and restored\nto its purity, and the religion which Christ really taught, not that\ncorrupted form of it which His disciples professed, concluded it best\nfor them to remain among those who worshipped the gods. There is the\npresent Indian willingness to discover Christian and modern ideas in the\nHindu Scriptures, especially in the original Vedas that the new [=A]rya\nsect declare to be \"the Scripture of true knowledge.\" The practical\noutcome of the Neo-Platonic movement was an attempt to revive the old\nGr\u00e6co-Roman religion,--Julian the apostate emperor had many with him.\nThere we have the revival of the worship of Krishna in India, and the\napologies for idolatry and caste. The most recent stage of the\nTheosophical Society in India reveals _it_ as virtually a Hindu revival\nsociety. Finally, we read, the old philosopher Pythagoras, Apollonius of\nTyana, and others were represented on the stage dressed in imitation of\nChrist Himself, and the Emperor Alexander Severus [A.D. 222-235] placed\nthe figure of Christ in his lararium alongside of those of Abraham,\nOrpheus, and Apollonius. There we have the modern Indians who fully\nrecognise Christ alongside of their own avatars. The whole parallel is\ncomplete.[105] In spite of the feebleness and, it may be, unworthiness\nof His Church, through the force of Christ's personality, the Roman\nhistory of the second, third, and fourth centuries has been repeating\nitself in India in the nineteenth and twentieth, and unless the force of\nChrist's personality be spent, the parallels will proceed.\n\nFrom new reasonings about God, her new monotheism, New India has been\nbrought a stage farther to actual history. From theologies she has come\nto the first three Gospels. New India has been introduced to Christ as\nHe actually lived on earth before men's eyes; and to India, intensely\ninterested in religious teachers, the personality of the Christ of the\nGospels, of the first three Gospels in particular, appeals strongly. To\nthe pessimistic mood of India He appeals as one whose companionship\nmakes this life more worth living; for Christ was not a jogi in the\nIndian sense of a renouncer of the world. His call to fraternal service\nhas taken firm hold of the best Indians of to-day. Of the future we know\nnot, but we feel that the narrative of the first three Gospels naturally\nprecedes the deeper insight of the fourth.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XVII\n\nINDIAN PESSIMISM--ITS BEARING ON BELIEF IN THE HERE AND HEREAFTER\n\n  \"How many births are past, I cannot tell:\n  How many yet to come, no man can say:\n  But this alone I know, and know full well,\n  That pain and grief embitter all the way.\"\n\n    (_South-Indian Folk-song_, quoted in _Lux Christi_, by Caroline\n    Atwater Mason.)\n\n    \"When desire is gone, and the cords of the heart are broken,\n    then the soul is delivered from the world and is at rest in\n    God.\"\n\n\n[Sidenote: Indian pessimism.]\n\nTwo commonplaces about India are that pessimism is her natural\ntemperament, and that a natural outcome of her pessimism is the Indian\ndoctrine of the transmigration of souls. The second statement will\nrequire explanation; but as regards the former, there is no denying the\nstrain of melancholy, the note of hopelessness, that pervades these\nwords we have quoted, or that they are characteristic of India. In them\nlife seems a burden; to be born into it, a punishment; and of the\ntransmigrations of our souls from life to life, seemingly, we should\ngladly see the end. All the same, as new India is proving, pessimism is\nnot the inherent temperament of India, and the hope of the end of the\ntransmigration, and of the lives of the soul, no more natural in India\nthan in any other land.\n\n[Sidenote: Due to nature?]\n\nPessimism is natural in India, say such writers as we have in mind,\nbecause of the spirit-subduing aspects of nature and life amid which\nIndians live their lives. Life is of little value to the possessor, they\nsay, where nature makes it a burden, and where its transitoriness is\nconstantly being thrust upon us. And that is so in India. Great rivers\nkeep repeating their contemptuous motto that \"men may come and men may\ngo,\" and by their floods sometimes devastate whole districts. Sailing up\nthe Brahmaputra at one place in Assam, the writer saw a not uncommon\noccurrence, the great river actually eating off the soft bank in huge\nslices, five or six feet in breadth at a time. Something higher up, it\nmight have been the grounding of a floating tree, had turned the current\ntowards the bank, and at five-minute intervals, it seemed, these huge\nslices were falling in. Not fifty yards back from the bank stood a\ncottage, whose garden was already part gone; a banana tree standing upon\none of these slices fell in and was swept down before our eyes. Within\nan hour the cottage itself would meet the same fate, and the people were\nalready rushing in and out. Or pass to another aspect of nature. For a\nseason every year the unveiled Indian sun in a sky of polished steel\nglares with cruel pitiless eye. The light is fierce. Then, arbitrarily,\nas it seems, the rains may be withheld, and the hard-baked, heat-cracked\nsoil never softens to admit the ploughshare, and hundreds of thousands\nof the cultivators and field hands are overtaken by famine. At one time\nduring the famine of 1899-1900, it will be remembered that six million\npeople were receiving relief. Or, equally arbitrarily, betokening some\nunknown displeasure of the gods, plague may take hold of a district and\nliterally take its tithe of the population. At any moment, life is\nliable to be terminated with appalling suddenness by cholera or the bite\nof a venomous serpent.\n\nWith French imagination and grace, in his _Introduction to General\nHistory_, Michelet describes the tyranny of nature--\"Natura maligna\"--in\nIndia. \"Man is utterly overpowered by nature there--like a feeble child\nupon a mother's breast, alternately spoiled and beaten, and intoxicated\nrather than nourished by a milk too strong and stimulating for it.\"[106]\nOne cannot help contrasting the supplicating Indian villagers--of whom a\nUniversity matriculation candidate told in his essay, how, when the\nrains were withheld, they carried out the village goddess from her\ntemple and bathed the idol in the temple tank--with the English\nfisher-woman of whom Tennyson tells us, who shook her fist at the cruel\nsea that had robbed her of two sons. As she looked at it one day with\nits lines of white breakers, she shook her fist at it and told it her\nmind--\"How I hates you, with your cruel teeth.\"\n\nCan this Indian aspect of nature, one wonders, be the true explanation\nof the fierceness of her goddesses as contrasted with her gods, and the\noffering of bloody sacrifices to goddesses only? Mother Nature is\nmalignant, not benign.\n\n[Sidenote: Indian life estimated by the economic standard of life's\nvalue.]\n\nThe value of life and the little worth of life in India may be gauged in\nanother way. In the language of the political economist, the value of\nhuman life in any country may be estimated by the average wage, which\ndetermines the standard of comfort and how far a man is restricted to\nthe bare necessities of bodily life. Again, judged by that standard,\nlife is probably in no civilised country at a lower estimate than in\nIndia, where the labourer spends over 90 per. cent of his income upon\nthe bare necessities for the sustenance of the bodies of his household.\n\n[Sidenote: Indian pessimism only a mood.]\n\n[Sidenote: Humanlife is rising in value]\n\n[Sidenote: Pessimism is declining]\n\nAll that is true, and yet the conclusion is only partly true. In spite\nof all such reasoning, and acknowledging that the physical\ncharacteristics of India have largely made her what she is, politically,\nsocially, and even religiously, I venture to think that the pessimism of\nIndia is exaggerated. Not a pessimistic temperament, but a mood, a mood\nof helpless submissiveness, a bowing to the powers that be in nature and\nin the world, seems to me the truer description of the prevailing\n\"pessimism.\" At least, if it be the case, as I have tried to show, that\nduring the past century in India, human life has been rising in value,\nthe pessimistic mood must be declining. Let us observe some facts again.\nIn a Government or Mission Hospital, _there_ is a European doctor taking\npart in the offensive work of the dressing of a coolie's sores,--we\nassume that the doctor's touch is the touch of a true Christian\ngentleman. To the despised sufferer, life is gaining a new sweetness,\nand to the high-caste student looking on and ready to imitate his\nteacher, life is attaining a new dignity. That human life has been\nrising in value is patent. The wage of the labourer has been steadily\nrising--in one or two places the workers are become masters of the\nsituation; the rights of woman are being recognised, if only slowly; the\nmiddle classes are eager for education and advancement; the individual\nhas been gaining in independence as the tyranny of caste and custom has\ndeclined; the sense of personal security and of citizenship and of\nnationality has come into being. Whatever the merits of the great\nagitation in 1905 against the partition of the Province of Bengal, and\ninconceivable as taking place a century ago, it is manifestly the doing\nof men keenly interested in the conditions under which they live. It is\na contradiction of the theory of an inherent Indian pessimism.\nSelf-respect and a sense of the dignity and duties of manhood are surely\nincreasing, and making our earth a place of hope and making life worth\nliving, instead of a burden to be borne. \"The Hindus,\" says Sir Alfred\nLyall, \"have been rescued by the English out of a chronic state of\nanarchy, insecurity, lawlessness, and precarious exposure to the caprice\nof despots.\"[107]\n\n[Sidenote: Asceticism is declining.]\n\nBest proof probably that pessimism is declining is the fact that\nasceticism is declining. The times are no longer those in which the life\nof a brahman is supposed to culminate in the Sannyasi or ascetic \"who\nhas laid down everything,\" who, in the words of the Bhagabat Gita, \"does\nnot hate and does not love anything.\"[108] The pro-Hindu writer often\nquoted also acknowledges the new pleasure in life and the religious\ncorollary of it when she says that the recent rise in the standard of\ncomfort in India is opposed to the idea of asceticism. Desire, indeed,\nis not gone, and the cords of the heart are not breaking. Says the old\nbrahman, in the guise of whom Sir Alfred Lyall speaks: \"I own that you\n[Britons] are doing a great deal to soften and enliven material\nexistence in this melancholy, sunburnt country of ours, and certainly\nyou are so far successful that you are bringing the ascetic idea into\ndiscouragement and, with the younger folk, into contempt.\"[109] Welcome\nto the new joy of living, all honour to the old ascetics, and may a\nstill nobler self-sacrifice take their place!\n\n[Sidenote: Pessimism, asceticism, transmigration are allied ideas.]\n\nFor Western minds it is difficult to realise the close connection\nbetween the doctrine of transmigration and the mood of India, rightly or\nwrongly termed pessimism. _Our_ instinctive feeling is that life is\nsweet; while there is life there is hope, _we_ say; \"_healthy_ optimism\"\nis the expression of Professor James in his _Varieties of Religious\nExperience_; it is \"_more life_ and fuller that we want.\" In keeping\nwith this Western and human instinct, the Christian idea of the\nHereafter is a fuller life than the life Here, a perfect eternal life.\nTo the pessimist, on the contrary [and Hindu philosophy is pessimistic,\nwhatever be the new mood of India], the question is, \"Why was I born?\"\nThe Indian doctrine of transmigration comes with answer--\"Life is a\npunishment: it is the bitter consequence of our past that we are working\nout; we must _submit_ to be born into the world again and again, until\nwe are cleared.\" \"Yes, until your minds are cleared,\" the Indian\npantheist adds, \"life _itself_ is a delusion, if you only knew it; life\nitself, your consciousness of individuality or separateness, is a\ndelusion.\" But the pantheist's thought is here beside our present point.\n\n[Sidenote: Transmigration the antithesis of eternal life.]\n\nTo the pessimistic Indian accepting the Indian view of transmigration,\nit is therefore no gospel to preach the continuation of life, either\nhere or hereafter. \"To be born again\" sounds like a penance to be\nendured. _Mukti_, commonly rendered _salvation_, is not regeneration\nHere and eternal life Hereafter; it is _deliverance_ from further lives\naltogether. If, however, we accept the statement that the value of human\nlife in India is rising, that life is becoming worth living, and that\nthe pessimistic mood is no ingrained fundamental trait, we are prepared\nto believe that the hopeful Christian conception of the Here and the\nHereafter is finding acceptance. Rightly understood, the Christian\nconception is at bottom the antithesis of pessimism and its corollary,\ntransmigration. To deny the one is almost to assert the other. The decay\nof the one is the growth of the other. For the Christian conception of\nthe Here and the Hereafter--what is it? Life, eternal, in and through\nthe Spirit of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. \"God gave unto us eternal\nlife, and the life is in His Son. He that hath the Son hath the\nlife.\"[110] Says Harnack in his volume _What is Christianity?_ \"The\nChristian religion means one thing, and one thing only--eternal life in\nthe midst of time by the strength and under the eyes of God.\" Not that\nthe new idea in India is to be wholly ascribed to Christian influence. A\nmarked change in Christian thought itself during the nineteenth century\nhas been the higher value of this present life. Christianity has become\na vitalising gospel for the life Here even more than for the Hereafter.\nBut assuming the truth of what we have sought to show, namely, that\nwithin the past century the winning personality of Christ has come to\nNew India, a new incentive to noble life and service, we have at least a\nfurther reason for believing that pessimism and transmigration are\nfading out of Indian minds. The new Advent, as that at Bethlehem, is a\nturning-point of time; the gloomy winter of pessimism is turning to a\nhopeful spring.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XVIII\n\nINDIAN TRANSMIGRATION AND THE CHRISTIAN HERE AND HEREAFTER\n\n  \"The dew is on the lotus. Rise, good sun!\n  And lift my leaf and mix me with the wave.\n        The sunrise comes!\n  The dewdrop slips into the shining sea.\n\n  If any teach Nirvana is to cease,\n    Say unto such they lie.\n  If any teach Nirvana is to live,\n    Say unto such they err.\"\n\n    (Buddha's teaching in Arnold's _Light of Asia_.)\n\n\n[Sidenote: Over against Transmigration, Christian immortality is\ncontinuity of the individual's memory.]\n\nTo appreciate the impact of the Christian idea of the Here and Hereafter\nupon the Hindu idea of Transmigration and Absorption, the two ideas must\nbe more fully examined. Stated briefly, the Christian idea is that after\nthis life on earth comes an Eternity, whose character has been\ndetermined by the life on earth. The crisis of death terminates our\nbodily activities and renders impossible any further action, either\nvirtuous or sinful, and ushers the soul, its ledger closed, its earthy\nlimitations cast off, into some more immediate presence of God. If in\ncommunion with God, through its faith in Jesus Christ, the soul is in a\nstate of blessedness; if still alien from God, the soul is in a state of\nutter misery, for its spiritual perception and its recollection of\nitself are now clear. That, at all events, seems a fair statement of the\nbelief of many Protestants, so far as their belief is definite at all.\nBut over against transmigration, what are the essential and distinctive\nfeatures of that Christian belief? Its essentially distinctive feature,\nboth in the case of the blessed and of the miserable, is a _continuity_\nof the consciousness in the life that now is with that which is to come.\nThe soul in bliss or misery is able to associate its existing state with\nits past. Even on earth, as the modern preacher tells us, heaven and\nhell are already begun. Over against the Hindu idea of transmigration,\naccordingly, we define the Christian idea of immortality as the\ncontinuity of our consciousness, or the immortality of the individual\nconsciousness.\n\n[Sidenote: Transmigration is essentially dissolution of the individual's\nmemory.]\n\nPer contra, the distinguishing feature of the Hindu doctrine of\ntransmigration or rebirth is the interruption of consciousness, the\ndissolution of memory, at the close of the present existence. In the\nnext existence there is no memory of the present.\n\n  \"The draught of Lethe\" does \"await\n  The slipping through from state to state.\"\n\nThe present life is a member of a series of lives; there are said to be\n8,400,000 of them, each member of which is as unconscious of the\npreceding as you are of being I. As a seed develops into plant and\nflower and seed again, so the soul in each new member of the series\ndevelops a conscious life, lapses from consciousness, and hands on a\ngerminal soul for a new beginning again. As the seed transmits the type,\nand also some variation from the type, so is the germinal soul\ntransmitted through unconsciousness, ennobled or degraded by each\nconscious existence it has lived. At each stage the germinal soul\nrepresents the totality, the net outcome of its existences, as in each\ngeneration of a plant the seed may be said to do. So far, the doctrine\nof transmigration is a doctrine of the evolution of a soul, a\ndeclaration that in a sense we are all that we have been, that virtue\nand vice will have their reward, that in a sense \"men may rise on\nstepping stones of their dead selves.\" It does not leave hard cases of\nheathen or of reprobates to the discernment and mercy of God; it offers\nthem, instead, other chances in subsequent lives. A not unattractive\ndoctrine it is, even although the attractive analogy of the evolution of\na plant breaks down. For in the scientific doctrine of evolution,\nindividuals have no immortality _at all_; it is only the species that\nlives and moves on. But in Hinduism, as in Christianity, we are thinking\nof the continuity of the _individual_ souls.\n\n[Sidenote: The end of transmigration is absorption into Deity.]\n\n[Sidenote: The saint Ramkrishna's obliviousness of self.]\n\nTo proceed with the statement of the doctrine of transmigration. The\nclimax of the transmigrations is Nirvana or extinction of the individual\nsoul, according to the Buddhist, and union with or absorption into\nDeity, according to the Hindu.[111] Buddhism has gone from the land of\nits birth, as Christianity and even Judaism from Palestine, and I pass\nfrom the Buddhist doctrine. The Hindu climax, of absorption into Deity,\nis reached when by self-mastery personal desire is gone, and by profound\ncontemplation upon Deity a pure-bred soul has lost the consciousness of\nseparation from Deity. The distinction between _I_ and the great _Thou_\nhas vanished; the One is present in the mind not as an objective\nthought, but by a transformation of the consciousness itself. The words\nof Hindus themselves in the _Advanced Text-book of Hindu Religion_ are:\nThe human soul (the Jivatmic seed) \"grows into self-conscious Deity.\"\nListen also to the words of Swami Vivekananda, in the Parliament of\nReligions, Chicago, about his master, Ramkrishna Paramhansa's growing\ninto self-conscious Deity: \"Every now and then strange fits of\nGod-consciousness came upon him.... He then spoke of himself as being\nable to do and know everything.... He would speak of himself as the same\nsoul that had been born before as Rama, as Krishna, as Jesus, or as\nBuddha, born again as Ramkrishna.... He would say he was ... an\nincarnation of God Himself.\" Again Swami Vivekananda tells us: \"From\ntime to time Ramkrishna would entirely lose his own identity, so much so\nas to appropriate to himself the offerings brought for the goddess\" (to\nthe temple in which he officiated). \"Sometimes forgetting to adorn the\nimage, he would adorn _himself_ with the flowers.\"[112] Transmigration\nis not necessarily bound up with the pantheistic view of the world, but\nin _Hinduism_, transmigration is only a ladder towards the realisation\nof the One.\n\n[Sidenote: Contrasts--\"Born again\" and a spiritual aristocracy of long\nspiritual descent.]\n\n[Sidenote: Heaven and Hell not necessary ideas in Transmigration.]\n\nRadical differences from Christian thought emerge. In the Hindu\nconception, the acme is reached only by a spiritual aristocracy of long\nspiritual descent; for the common multitude there is no gospel of being\nborn again in Christ, no guiding hand like that of Our Lord towards the\nFather's presence. The upward path, according to the Hindu idea, is the\npath of philosophical knowledge and of meditation, not the power of\nunion with Jesus Christ to make us sons of God. Most striking difference\nperhaps of all--in the Hindu philosophical system there is no place for\neven the conceptions of heaven and hell except as temporary\nhalting-places between two incarnations of the soul, which practical\nnecessity requires. For the soul, this world is the plane of existence;\nunion with omnipresent Deity is the climax of existence that the Hindu\ndevotee seeks to attain; yet not in a Hereafter, but as he sits on the\nground no longer conscious of his self. \"The beatific vision of\nHinduism,\" says a recent pro-Hindu writer, \"is to be relegated to no\ndistant future.\"[113] Heaven and Hell are mocked at as absurdities by\nthe new sect of the [=A]ryas in the United Provinces and the Punjab, who\nretain the doctrine of transmigration.[114]\n\n[Sidenote: Several heavens and hells in popular Hinduism.]\n\nHindus are divided as to the existence of these temporary halting-places\nbetween the successive incarnations of the soul. The _Text-book of Hindu\nReligion_, already referred to, speaks unhesitatingly about their place\nin the Hindu system. The [=A]ryas, on the other hand, hold that the\ninstant a soul leaves its body it enters another body just born. The\nsoul is never naked--to employ a common figure. Of course in popular\nHinduism it is not surprising to find not merely the ideas of Heaven and\nHell, but even that each chief Deity has his own heaven and that there\nare various hells. In the Tantras or ritual books of modern Hinduism,\nthere is frequent mention of such heavens and hells, and when the idea\nof rebirths is also met with, the rebirths are regarded as stages\ntowards the reward or punishment of the _individual conscious_ souls. It\nis the popular idea of heaven that has given rise to the common\neuphemism for _to die_, namely, to become a deva or inhabitant of\nheaven.\n\n[Sidenote: Transmigration, associated with pessimism and pantheism, is\nlikewise yielding.]\n\nWe have observed the pessimistic mood of India yielding before the\nimproved conditions of life, and the brahmanical pantheism before the\nthought of God the Father. Bound up as the idea of transmigration has\nbeen with the pessimism and pantheism of India, we are prepared to find\nthat it too is yielding. Of that we now ask what evidence there is in\nthe ordinary speech and writings of educated India, apart from\ncontroversy or professedly Hindu writings, in which the accepted Indian\northodoxy would probably appear.\n\n[Sidenote: Educated Hindus speak of the dead as if their former\nconsciousness continued.]\n\nFrom the ordinary speeches and writings of educated Hindus regarding the\ndead, no one would infer that their doctrinal standpoint was other than\nthat of the ordinary religious Briton, namely, that the dead friend has\nreturned to God or has been called away by God, or the like. A native\njudge in Bengal, one of the most distinguished leaders of the Hindu\nRevival, writes as follows: The beatitude which the new\nRadha-Krishnaites aspire to \"is not the Nirvana of the Vedantists, the\nquiescence of Rationalism. Nirvana and quiescence are merely negatives.\nThe beatitude [of the new Radha-Krishnaites] is a positive something.\nThey do not aspire to unification with the divine essence. They prefer\nhell with its torments to such unification.\"[115] A few years ago, at a\npublic meeting in Calcutta, the acknowledged leader of Hinduism,\nspeaking of a Hindu gentleman whose death we were lamenting, said: \"God\nhas taken him to himself\"--certainly not a Hindu statement of the\npassing of a soul. Similarly, in 1882 we find one nobleman in Bengal\nwriting to another regarding his mother's death: \"It is my prayer to God\nthat she may abide in eternal happiness in heaven.\"[116] Generations of\nHindu students I have known to find pleasure in identifying themselves\nwith Wordsworth's views of immortality:\n\n  \"Trailing clouds of glory do we come\n  From God who is our home,\"\n\nand\n\n  \"The faith that looks through death.\"\n\n[Sidenote: Transmigration now no more than a conventional explanation of\nhow misfortunes befell one.]\n\nSomewhat dreamlike Wordsworth's views may be, but his belief is clearly\nnot in transmigration. To the educated Hindu, who may not consciously\nhave rejected the idea of transmigration, the doctrine is really now no\nmore than a current and convenient explanation of any misfortune that\nhas befallen a person. \"Why has it befallen him? He must have earned it\nin some previous existence. It is in the debit balance of the\ntransactions in his lives.\" Such are the vague ideas floating in the\nair. Upon any individual's acts or plans for the future, the idea of\ntransmigration seems to have no bearing whatever beyond a numbing of the\nwill.[117] For in theory, the Hindu's fate is just. In strict logic no\ndoubt the same numbing effect might be alleged about the Christian\ndoctrine of predestination. Even when misfortune has overtaken an\neducated Hindu, I think I am justified in saying that the more frequent\nthought with him is now in keeping with the new theistic belief; the\nmisfortune is referred to the will of God. As already said, it is a\ncommonplace of the unfortunate student who has failed, to ascribe his\nfailure to God's will.\n\n[Sidenote: Transmigration and Predestination more properly contrasted.]\n\n[Sidenote: Illustration from actual fact.]\n\nThere is room for the Christian thought of the Hereafter, because in\nreality, as theologians know, the doctrine of transmigration stands over\nagainst the Christian doctrine of predestination rather than over\nagainst the Christian doctrine of the Here and Hereafter. Transmigration\nis a doctrine of what has gone before the present life rather than of\nwhat will follow. Every educated Anglo-Indian whom I have consulted\nagrees that in a modern Hindu's mouth transmigration is only a theory of\nthe incidence of actual suffering. Here is the doctrine of _karma_\n(works), that is of transmigration or merited rebirth, in the actual\nlife of India--transmigration and the pessimistic helplessness of which\nI have spoken? In the last great famine of 1899-1900, in a village in\nSouth-western India, a missionary found a victim of famine lying on one\nside of the village street, and not far off, upon the other side, two or\nthree men of the middle class. The missionary reproached them for their\ncallousness. What might be answered for them is not here to the point;\ntheir answer for themselves was, \"It is his _karma_.\" The missionary did\nwhat he could for the famine sufferer, and then when repassing the group\ncould not forbear remarking to them, \"You see you were wrong about his\n_karma_.\" \"Yes, we were wrong,\" they replied. \"It was his _karma_ to be\nhelped by you.\" The same views of karma and of transmigration, as\nreferring to the past, not the future, are apparent in a recent number\nof _The Inquirer_, a paper conducted in Calcutta for the benefit of\nHindu students and others. I take the following from the question\ncolumn: \"Do Christians believe in the doctrine of reincarnation? If not,\nhow do you account for blindness at birth?\" The questioner's idea is\nplain, and the coincidence with the question put to Christ in St. John's\nGospel, chapter ix, is striking. Hindus thus have room for an idea of\nthe _future_ of the soul, as Christians, on their side, have for a\ntheory of the soul's origin.\n\n[Sidenote: The idea of the Hereafter not dynamical with Christians at\npresent.]\n\nThe Christian idea of the Hereafter cannot, as yet, be called a strongly\ndynamical doctrine of Christianity in the sense that the Person of Our\nLord has proved dynamical. Not that interest in the subject is lacking.\nI have referred to questions put by educated Hindus in _The Inquirer_.\nOut of fifty-seven questions I find eight bearing on the Christian\ndoctrine of the Hereafter or the Hindu doctrine of Transmigration. In\nthe _Magazine of the Hindu College_, _Benares_, out of fourteen\nquestions I find four bearing on the same subject. The want of force in\nthe Christian doctrine no doubt reflects its want of force for\nChristians themselves in this present positive age. For even Tennyson\nhimself was vague:\n\n  \"That which drew from out the boundless deep\n  Turns again home.\"\n\n[Sidenote: The new sects and the doctrine of Transmigration.]\n\n[Sidenote: The _Text-book of Hindu Religion_.]\n\n[Sidenote: A European's place on the ladder of transmigration.]\n\nOf the sects of recent origin, only the Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j or Theistic\nAssociation rejects the doctrine of transmigration avowedly. We have\nalready said that the [=A]rya Sam[=a]j or Vedic Theists of the United\nProvinces and the Punjab hold strongly to the doctrine. It is noteworthy\nthat _they_ should do so, the Vedas being their standards wherewith to\ntest Modern Hinduism, for the doctrine of transmigration is scarcely\nhinted at in the Vedas, and in the oldest, the Rigveda, there is said to\nbe no trace of the doctrine.[118] It appears in the later writings, the\nUpanishads, and is manifest throughout the Code of Manu (c. A.D. 200).\nMrs. Besant, chief figure among the Indian Theosophists, now virtually a\nHindu Revival Association, preaches the doctrine, and, in fact, lectured\non it in Britain in 1904. At the same time, transmigration is no part of\nthe Theosophist's creed. As might be expected, the _Text-book of Hindu\nReligion_, of the Hindu College, Benares, gives the doctrine of\ntransmigration a prominent place, although the explicitness with which\nit is set forth is very surprising to one acquainted with the way the\ndoctrine is generally ignored by the educated. I quote from the _Hindu\nText-book_, published in 1903, that Westerns may realise that in dealing\nwith transmigration we are not dealing simply with some old-world\ndoctrine deciphered from some palm-leaf written in some ancient\ncharacter. After describing--here following the ancient philosophical\nwritings, the Upanishads--how the Jivatma or Soul comes up through the\nvarious existences of the mineral, plant, and animal kingdoms until it\nreaches the human stage, the Text-book proceeds to describe the further\nupward or downward process. It is declared that the downward movement\n(from man to animal) is now much rarer than formerly--that concession is\nmade to modern ideas--but the _law_ of the downward process is as\nfollows: \"When a man has so degraded himself below the human level that\nmany of his qualities can only express themselves through the form of a\nlower creature, he cannot, when his time for rebirth comes, pass into a\nhuman form. He is delayed, therefore, and is attached to the body of one\nof the lower creatures as a co-tenant with the animal, vegetable, or\nmineral Jiva [life], until he has worn out the bonds of these non-human\nqualities and is fit to take birth again in the world of men. A very\nstrong and excessive attachment to an animal may have similar results.\"\nWhere modern ideas reach in India, one can understand such ideas as\nthose melting away. A second passage from the Text-book is interesting,\nas showing the compiler's idea of the place of a life in Europe in the\nchain of existences, although in this case also the statement is made\nonly about \"ancient days.\" \"The Jivatma [soul] was prepared for entrance\ninto each [Indian] caste through a long preliminary stage _outside_\nIndia; then he was born into India and passed into each caste to receive\nits definite lessons; then was born away from India to practise these\nlessons; usually returning to India to the highest of them, in the final\nstages of his evolution.\" In other words, people of the outer world, say\nEuropeans, are rewarded for virtue by being born into the lowest Indian\ncaste, and then, after rising to be brahmans in India, they go back to\nEurope to give it the benefit of their acquirements; and finally crown\ntheir career by reappearing in India as a brahman philosopher or jogi.\nSurely we may laugh at this without being thought unsympathetic or\nnarrow-minded. We recall Mrs. Besant's assertion that she had a dim\nrecollection of an existence as a brahman pandit in India. According to\nthe spiritual genealogy of the _Hindu Text-book_, she may hope to be\nborn next in an Indian child, and become a jogi possessed of saving\nknowledge of the identity of self with Deity.\n\n[Sidenote: The women of the middle class and transmigration.]\n\nI asked a lady who had been a missionary in Calcutta for many years, how\nfar a belief in transmigration was apparent among the women of the\nmiddle class. She could recall only two instances in which it had come\nto her notice in her talks with the wives and daughters of educated\nIndia. Once a reason was given for being kind to a cat, that the\nspeaker's grandmother might then be in it as her abode, although the\nobservation was accompanied with a laugh. On the second occasion, when\nthe lady was having trouble with a slow pupil, one of the women present,\nsympathising with the teacher, said, \"Do not trouble with her; perhaps\nnext time when she comes back she will be cleverer.\" The general\nconclusion, therefore, I repeat: Transmigration is no longer a living\npart of the belief of educated India; the Christian conception of the\nHereafter is as yet only partially taking its place.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIX\n\nTHE IDEAS OF SIN AND SALVATION\n\n    \"Conscience does make cowards of us _all_.\"\n\n    --SHAKESPEARE.\n\n\n[Sidenote: Recapitulation.]\n\n[Sidenote: The new Theism.]\n\nIn the new India, as fish out of the water die, many things cannot\nsurvive. We have seen the educated Hindu dropping polytheism, forgetting\npantheism, and adopting or readopting monotheism as the basis of his\nreligious thinking and feeling. For modern enlightenment and Indian\npolytheism are incongruous; there is a like incongruity between Indian\npantheism and the modern demand for practical reality. Likewise, both\npolytheism and pantheism are inconsistent with Christian thought, which\nis no minor factor in the education of modern India. Further, the theism\nthat the educated Hindu is adopting as the basis of his religion\napproaches to Christian Theism. The doctrines of the Fatherhood of God\nand the Brotherhood of Man have become commonplaces in his mouth.\n\n[Sidenote: Homage to Christ Himself]\n\nLikewise, the educated Hindu is strongly attracted to the person of\nJesus Christ, in spite of His alien birth and His association with Great\nBritain. There is a sweet savour in His presence, and the man of any\nspirituality finds it grateful to sit at His feet. That familiar\noriental expression, hyperbolical to our ears, but ever upon the lips in\nIndia to express the relationship of student to trusted professor, or of\ndisciple to religious teacher, expresses exactly the relationship to\nJesus Christ of the educated man who is possessed of any religious\ninstinct. To such a man the miracles, the superhuman claims, the highest\ntitles of Jesus Christ, present no difficulty until they are formulated\nfor his subscription in some hard dogmatic mould. Then he must question\nand discuss.\n\n[Sidenote: Transmigration forgotten.]\n\nAgain, the educated Hindu finds himself employing about the dead and the\nhereafter not the language of transmigration, but words that convey the\nidea of a continuation of our present consciousness in the presence of a\npersonal God. For life is becoming worth living, and the thought of life\ncontinuing and progressing is acceptable. This present life also has\nbecome a reality; a devotee renouncing the world may deny its reality;\nbut how in this practical modern world can a man retain the doctrine of\nMaya or Delusion. It has dropped from the speech and apparently out of\nthe mind of the educated classes.\n\n[Sidenote: The ideas of Sin and Salvation by faith in Jesus Christ not\nyet dynamical.]\n\nI have suggested that those features of Christianity that are proving to\nbe dynamical in India will be found to be those same that are proving to\nbe dynamical in Britain. The converse also probably holds true, as our\nreligious teachers might do well to note. The doctrines of Sin and\nSalvation through faith in Jesus Christ do not yet seem to have\ncommended themselves in any measure in India. Positive repudiation of a\nChristian doctrine is rare, but the flourishing new sect of the\nNorth-West, the [=A]ryas, make a point of repudiating the Christian\ndoctrine of salvation by faith, although not explicitly denying it in\ntheir creed. Over against it they set up the Justice of God and the\ncertainty of goodness and wickedness receiving each its meed. One can\nimagine that salvation by faith in Jesus Christ, the outstanding feature\nof Christianity, may have been unworthily presented to the [=A]rya\nleaders, so that it appeared to them merely as some cheap or gratis kind\nof \"indulgences.\" The biographer of the Parsee philanthropist, Malabari,\na forceful and otherwise well-informed writer, sets forth that idea of\nsalvation by faith, or an idea closely akin. He is explaining why his\nreligious-minded hero did not accept the religion of his missionary\nteachers. \"The proud Asiatic,\" he says, \"strives to purchase salvation\nwith work, and never stoops to accept it as alms, as it necessarily\nwould be if faith were to be his only merit.\" The unworthy presentation\nof \"salvation by faith\" may have occurred either in feeble Christian\npreaching or in anti-Christian pamphlets. Neither is unknown in India;\nand anti-Christian pamphlets have been known to be circulated through\n[=A]rya agencies.\n\n[Sidenote: The ideas of sin incompatible with pantheism.]\n\nTo appreciate the attitude of the Hindu mind to the doctrines of Sin and\nSalvation, we must return again to the rough division of Hindus\ninto--first, the mass of the people, polytheists; secondly, the educated\nclasses, now largely monotheists; thirdly, the brahmanically educated\nand the ascetics, pantheists. It is only with the monotheists that we\nhave now to deal. As already said--to the pantheist the word sin has no\nmeaning. Where all is God, sin or alienation from God is a contradiction\nin terms. The conception of sin implies the _two_ conceptions of God and\nMan, or at least of Law and Man; and where one or other of these two\nconceptions is lacking, the conception of sin cannot arise. In\npantheism, the idea of man as a distinct individual is relegated to the\nregion of Maya or Delusion; there cannot therefore be a real sinner.\nDoes such reasoning appear mere dialectics without practical\napplication, or is it unfair, think you, thus to bind a person down to\nthe logical deductions from his creed? On the contrary, persons denying\nthat we can sin are easy to find. Writes the latest British apostle of\nHinduism, for the leaders of reaction in India are a few English and\nAmericans: \"There is no longer a vague horrible something called sin:\nThis has given place to a clearly defined state of ignorance or\nblindness of the will.\"[119] I quote again also from Swami Vivekananda,\nrepresentative of Hinduism in the Parliament of Religions at Chicago in\n1893. It is from his lecture published in 1896, entitled _The Real and\nthe Apparent Man_. His statement is unambiguous. \"It is the greatest of\nall lies,\" he says, \"that we are mere men; we are the God of the\nUniverse.... The worst lie that you ever told yourself is that you were\nborn a sinner.... The wicked see this universe as a hell; and the\npartially good see it as heaven; and the perfect beings realise it as\nGod Himself. By mistake we think that we are impure, that we are\nlimited, that we are separate. The real man is the One Unit Existence.\"\nSuch is the logical and the actual outcome of pantheism in regard to the\nidea of sin, and such is the standpoint of Hindu philosophy.\n\n[Sidenote: Sankarachargya, the pantheist's, confession of sins.]\n\nOr if further illustration be needed of the incompatibility of the ideas\nof pantheism and sin, listen to the striking prayer of Sankarachargya,\nthe pantheistic Vedantist of the eighth century A.D., with whom is\nidentified the pantheistic motto, \"One only, without a second.\"[120] It\nattracts our attention because Sankarachargya is professedly confessing\nsins. Thus runs the prayer: \"O Lord, pardon my three sins: I have in\ncontemplation clothed in form thee who art formless; I have in praise\ndescribed thee who art ineffable; and in visiting shrines I have ignored\nthine omnipresence.\"[121] Beautiful expressions indeed, confessions that\nfinite language and definite acts are inadequate to the Infinite, nay,\ncontradictions of the Infinite, expressions fit to be recited in prayer\nby any man of any creed who feels that God is a Spirit and omnipresent!\nBut in a Christian prayer such expressions would only form a preface to\nconfession of one's own _moral_ sin; after adoration comes confession.\nWhether, like Sankarachargya, we think of the Deity objectively, as the\nformless and literally omnipresent Being, the _pure Being_ which,\naccording to Hegel, equals nothing, or whether like Swami Vivekananda we\nthink of man and God as really one, all differentiation being a delusion\nwithin the mind--there is _no second_, neither any second to sin against\nnor any second to commit the sin.\n\n[Sidenote: The masses and the sense of sin.]\n\n[Sidenote: Prescriptions for sinners.]\n\nFor the ignorant masses, the sense of sin has been worn out by the\nimportance attached to religious and social externals and by the\nartificial value of the service of a hereditary monopolist priesthood.\nThese right, all is right in the eyes of the millions of India. When one\nof the multitude proposes to himself a visit to some shrine or sacred\nspot, no doubt the motive often is some divine dissatisfaction with\nhimself; it is a feeling that God is not near enough where he himself\nlives. But what is poured into his ears? By a visit to Dwaraka, the city\nof Krishna's sports, he will be liberated from all his sins. By bathing\nin the sacred stream of the Ganges he will wash away his sins. All who\ndie at Benares are sure to go to heaven. By repeating the Gayatri (a\ncertain verse of the Rigveda addressed to the sun) a man is saved. \"A\nbrahman who holds the Veda in his memory is not culpable though he\nshould destroy the three worlds\"--so says the Code of Manu. The Tantras,\nor ritual works of modern Hinduism, abound in such prescriptions for\nsinners. \"He who liberates a bull at the Aswamedika place of pilgrimage\nobtains _mukti_, that is salvation or an end of his rebirths.\" \"All sin\nis destroyed by the repetition of Kali's thousand names.\" \"The water of\na guru's [religious teacher's] feet purifies from all sin.\" \"The man who\ncarries the guru's dust [the dust of the guru's feet] upon his head is\nemancipated from all sin and is [the god] Siva himself.\" \"By a certain\ninhalation of the breath through the left nostril, and holding of the\nbreath, with repetition of _yam_, the V[=a]yu Bija or mystical spell of\nwind or air, the body and its indwelling sinful self are dessicated, the\nbreath being expelled by the right nostril.\"[122] And so on _ad\ninfinitum_. Superstition, Western or Eastern, has no end of panaceas. We\nrecall the advertisements of \"Plenaria indulgenzia\" on the doors of\nchurches in South Italy. Visiting Benares, the metropolis of popular\nHinduism, the conception of salvation everywhere obtruded upon one is\nthat it is a question of sacred spots, and of due offerings and\nperformances thereat.\n\n[Sidenote: The signification of sacrifices to the Indian masses.]\n\n[Sidenote: Description of animal sacrifice.]\n\nWhat to the masses is _sacrifice_ even, the word which to western ears,\nfamiliar with the term in our Scriptures, suggests acknowledgment of sin\nand atonement therefor? It is a mistake to regard sacrifices in India as\nexpiatory; they are gifts to the Deities as superior powers for boons\ndesired or received, or they are the customary homage to the powers that\nbe, at festivals and special occasions. Animal sacrifices are\ndistinguished from the offerings of fruits and flowers only in being\nlimited to particular Deities and pertaining to more special occasions.\nAn actual instance will show the place that sacrifices hold. In a letter\nfrom a village youth to his father, informing him how he had proceeded\nupon his arrival at Calcutta, whither he had gone for the University\nMatriculation Examination, he reports that he has offered a goat in\nsacrifice in order to ensure his success. What he probably does is this.\nIn a bazaar near the great temple of Kalighat, near Calcutta, the\ngreatest centre of animal sacrifices in the world, he buys a goat or\nkid, fetches it into the temple court and hands it over to one of the\npriests whom he has fee'd. The priest puts a consecrating daub of red\nlead upon the animal's head, utters over it some mantra or sacred\nSanscrit text, sprinkles water and a few flowers upon it at the actual\nplace of slaughter, and then delivers it over again to the offerer. Then\nwhen the turn of the offerer, whom we are watching, has come, he hands\nover the animal to the executioner, who fixes its neck within a forked\nor Y-shaped stick fixed fast in the ground. With one blow the animal's\nhead is severed from its body. The bleeding head is carried off into the\nshrine to be laid before the image of the goddess, and become the temple\nperquisite. The decapitated body is carried off by the offerer to\nfurnish his family with a holiday meal. With his forehead ceremonially\nmarked with a touch of the blood lying thick upon the ground, the\nofferer leaves the temple, his sacrifice finished. Such is animal\nsacrifice; if the description recalls the slaughter-house, the actual\nsight is certainly sickening. Yet, far as a European now feels from\nworship in such a place, and thankful to Him who has abolished sacrifice\nonce for all, there is no doubt religious gratification to those who go\nthrough what I have described. Our point is that, as Sir M. Monier\nWilliams declares, in such an offering, \"there is no idea of effacing\nguilt or making a vicarious offering for sin.\"[123]\n\n[Sidenote: The educated classes and the idea of sin.]\n\n[Sidenote: The brahma monopoly of nearness to the Deity broken down.]\n\nThe educated classes, breathing now a monotheistic atmosphere, although\nin close contact with polytheism in their homes and with pantheism in\ntheir sacred literature, have reached the platform on which the idea of\nsin may be experienced. A member of that class, a pantheist no longer,\nis in the presence of a personal God, a Moral Being, and is himself a\nresponsible person, with the instincts of a child of that Supreme Moral\nBeing, our Father. With his education, he knows himself to be\nindependent of brahmanical mediation in his intercourse with that Being.\nAs confirmation, it is noteworthy how many of the religious leaders of\nmodern times, like Buddha of old, are other than brahman by caste. In a\nprevious chapter the names of a number of these non-brahman leaders were\ngiven. Even the Hindu ascetics of these latter days are more numerously\nnon-brahman than of old, for in theory only brahmans have reached the\nascetical stage of religious development. Whatever the reason, the\nbrahmanical monopoly of access to and inspiration from the Deity is no\nlonger recognised by new-educated India.\n\n[Sidenote: The worship of the new sects--its significance.]\n\nIn like manner, the new religious associations seem to feel themselves\ndirectly in the presence of God. Congregational worship, a feature new\nto Hindus, is a regular exercise in the Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j or Theistic\nAssociation of Bengal, the Pr[=a]rthan[=a] Sam[=a]jes or Prayer\nAssociations of Western India, and the [=A]rya Sam[=a]j or Vedic\nTheistic Association of the United Provinces and the North-West of\nIndia. When Rammohan Roy, the theistic reformer, opened his church in\nCalcutta in 1830, he introduced among Hindus congregational worship and\nunited prayer, before unknown among them and confessedly borrowed from\nChristian worship.[124] The public worship in all these bodies is indeed\nnot unlike many a Christian service, consisting of Prayer to God, Praise\nof God, and expositions of religious truth. In a small collection of\nhymns, \"Theistic Hymns,\" published some years ago for the use of members\nof the [=A]rya Sam[=a]j, we find many Christian hymns expressive of this\npersonal relationship to God. We find \"My God, my Father, while I\nstray,\" and \"O God, our help in ages past.\" Neither of these hymns,\nhowever, it must be noted, contains confession of sin. Curiously\nincongruous to our minds is the inclusion among these hymns of poems\nlike \"The boy stood on the burning deck,\" and \"Tell me not in mournful\nnumbers,\" and \"There's a magical tie to the land of our home,\" etc.[125]\nEven among the Hindu revivalists, judged by that test of the incoming of\npublic worship, we perceive the growth of the idea of personal\nrelationship to God. A recent publication of that party is \"_Songs for\nthe worship of the Goddess Durga_.\" One of them, we may note in passing,\nis the well-known hymn, \"Work, for the night is coming.\" All such\npersonal relationship, we again repeat, is incompatible with pantheism,\nand almost equally so with the popular sacerdotalism. Not without\nsignificance do the new theists of Western India call their associations\nthe Pr[=a]rthan[=a] Sam[=a]jes or Prayer Associations, and give to the\nbuildings in which they worship the name of Prayer Halls instead of\ntemples. Let not men say that religion and theological belief belong to\nseparable spheres.\n\n[Sidenote: The idea of sin naturally accompanies the new monotheism.]\n\nOnce more, the public worship and prayer attendant on the new monotheism\nof the new religious associations are the signs that the stage has been\nreached where sin will be felt and confessed. As yet, however, it cannot\nbe said that the thought of sin is prominent. In the creeds of the\n[=A]rya Sam[=a]j and the Pr[=a]rthan[=a] Sam[=a]jes, the word _sin_ does\nnot occur. What we find in the Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j is as follows. From\nthe creed of the Southern India Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j, of date about 1883,\nwe quote paragraph 7: \"Should I through folly commit sin, I will\nendeavour to be atoned _[sic]_ unto God by earnest repentance and\nreformation.\"[126] From the \"Principles of the Sadharan [Universal or\nCatholic] Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j,\" set forth in the organ of the body, we\nquote a paragraph 8: \"God rewards virtue and punishes sin, but that\npunishment is for our good and cannot last to eternity.\" From a\npublication by a third section of the Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j, the party of\nKeshub Chunder Sen, we quote: \"Every sinner must suffer the consequences\nof his own sins, sooner or later, in this world or in the next; for the\nmoral law is unchangeable and God's justice irreversible. His mercy also\nmust have its way. As the just king, He visits the soul with _adequate\nagonies_, and when the sinner after being thus chastised mournfully\nprays, He as the merciful Father delivers and accepts him and becomes\nreconciled to him. Such reconciliation is the only true atonement.\"[127]\nEven in the last quoted, the expression \"adequate agonies\" shows its\nstandpoint regarding salvation from sin to be salvation by repentance,\nand not the standpoint of St. Paul, \"I live, and yet no longer I, but\nChrist liveth in me.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XX\n\nTHE IDEA OF SALVATION\n\n  \"The slender sound\n  As from a distance beyond distance grew,\n  Coming upon me--O never harp nor horn\n  Was like that music as it came; and then\n  Stream'd thro' my cell a cold and silver beam,\n  And down the long beam stole the Holy Grail.\"\n\n    TENNYSON.\n\n\n[Sidenote: Hinduism superseded Buddhism because it offered salvation,\nnot extinction.]\n\nSalvation does mean something to every class. The huge fabric of\nBrahmanism does not continue to exist without ministering to some\nwide-felt need of the masses. It was in obedience to some inward demand,\nhowever perverted, that children were cast into the Ganges at Saugor,\nthat human sacrifices were offered and self-tortures like hook-swinging\nwere endured. These have been put down by British authority, but there\nstill remain many austerities and bloody sacrifices and strange devices\nto satisfy the clamant demand of our souls. Even may we not say that,\nalong with other reasons for the disappearance of Buddhism from India,\nsome response more satisfying to the human need must have been offered\nby the rival system of Hinduism. Hinduism has deities and avatars;\nBuddhism had none. Two of the most interesting spots in India, the most\nsacred in the world to Buddhists, are Budh-gaya, where under the bo tree\nBuddha attained to enlightenment, and S[=a]rn[=a]th, where he began his\npreaching. Yet the worship at neither place to-day is Buddhist. At the\nscene of Gautama's enlightenment, where he became Buddha or Enlightened,\none of the conventional statues of Buddha is actually marked and\nworshipped as Vishnu, the Hindu deity, the Preserver in the Hindu triad.\nEven at that most holy shrine of Buddhism, Hinduism has supplanted it,\nfor popular Hinduism offered salvation, while Buddhism offered\nextinction. Turning from the masses to the philosophical ascetic--when\nhe cuts himself off from family life with all its variety of pleasure\nand interest, not to speak of the self-torture he also sometimes\ninflicts, he too has some corresponding demand, some adequate motive to\nsatisfy. His is the resolute quest for salvation of the higher, older\ntype. But we are dealing with modern, new-educated India, and now we ask\nourselves: What does the modern, new-educated Indian mean by salvation?\nWhy does the thought of salvation by faith in Jesus Christ fail to reach\nhis heart?\n\n[Sidenote: Three ways of salvation in Hinduism: more strictly, three\nstages.]\n\n[Sidenote: 1. Saving knowledge]\n\n[Sidenote: Or now Beatific Vision.]\n\nThe acute Indian mind, with its disposition to analyse and its\ntenderness towards all manifestations of religion, has noted three\ndifferent paths of salvation, or more strictly three stages in the path.\nThe last only really leads to salvation, the other two paths are\ntolerant recognition of the well-meaning religious efforts of those who\nhave not attained to understanding of the true and final path of\nsalvation. For convenience sake we may roughly designate the three ways\nas Saving Works, and Saving Faith, and Saving Knowledge, placing the\nelementary stage first. One of the Tantras or ritual scriptures of\nModern Hinduism, the Mahanirv[=a]na Tantra, thus explains the three\nstages in the path and their respective merits: \"The knowledge that\nBrahma alone is true is the best expedient; meditation is the middling\n[= the means?]; and (2) the chanting of glories and the recitation of\nnames is the worst; and (3) the worship of idols is the worst of the\nworst.[128] Of the pantheist's \"saving knowledge,\" perhaps enough has\nbeen said. But again, it is the piercing of the veil of Maya or Delusion\nwhich hides from the soul that God is the One and the All. It is the\ntransformation of the consciousness of \"I\" into that of the \"One only,\nwithout a second.\" It is the ability to say \"Aham Brahman,\" _i.e._ I am\nBrahma. In the _Life of Dr. Wilson_, the Scottish Missionary at Bombay,\nwe read that in 1833, Dr. Wilson went with a visitor to see a celebrated\njogi who was lying in the sun in the street, the nails of whose hands\nwere grown into his cheek, and on whose head there was the nest of a\nbird. The visitor questioned the jogi, \"How can one obtain the knowledge\nof God?\" and the reply of the jogi was, \"Do not ask me questions; you\nmay look at me, for I am God.\" \"Aham Brahman,\" very probably was his\nreply. That is pantheistic salvation, _mukti_, or deliverance from\nfurther human existences and their desires and delusions. At last the\nspirit is free, and the galling chains of the lusting and limited body\nare broken. But as pantheism is declining, such cases are growing fewer,\nand for the educated Hindus, now largely monotheists, the saving\nknowledge is rather a beatific vision of the Divine, only vouchsafed to\nminds intensely concentrated upon the quest and thought of God, and cut\noff from mundane distractions. This is the union with God which is\nsalvation to many of the modern monotheistic Hindus.\n\n[Sidenote: The quest of the beatific vision still implies the\ndissociation of religion and active life.]\n\n[Sidenote: An unproductive religious ideal.]\n\nWhat concerns us here is that in the conception of the beatific vision,\nwe still find ourselves in a different religious world from\nours--religion exoteric for the vulgar, and religion esoteric for the\nenlightened; religion not for living by, but for a period of retirement;\na religion of spiritual self-culture, not of active sonship and\nbrotherhood. Far be it from me to say that at this point the West may\nnot learn as well as teach, for how much thought does the culture of the\nspirit receive among us? How little! However that may be, this\nconception of the religious life is deeply rooted in educated India. The\nimpersonal pantheistic conception of the Deity may be passing into the\ntheistic, and even into Christian theism; the doctrine of transmigration\nmay be little more than the current orthodox explanation of the coming\nof misfortune; the doctrine of Maya or the illusory character of the\nphenomena of our consciousness, it may be impossible to utter in this\nnew practical age; and Jesus Christ may be the object of the highest\nreverence; but still the instinctive thought of the educated Hindu is\nthat there is a period of life for the world's work, and a later period\nfor devotion to religion. When dissatisfaction with himself or with the\nworld does overtake him, instinctively there occur to him thoughts of\nretirement from the world and concentration of his mind, thereby to\nreach God's presence. Very few spiritually minded Hindus past middle\nlife pass into the Christian Church, as some do at the earlier stages of\nlife. Under the sway of the Hindu idea of salvation, by knowledge or by\nintense intuition, they withdraw from active life to meditate on God,\nwith less or more of the practice of religious exercises. Painful to\ncontemplate the spiritual loss to the community of a conception of\nreligion that diverts the spiritual energy away from the community, and\nrenders it practically unproductive, except as an example. Once more we\nrecall as typical the jogi, not going about doing good, anointed with\nthe Holy Ghost and with power, but fixed like a plant to its own spot,\nand with inward-looking eyes. Time was that there were jogis and joginis\n(female jogis) in Europe; but even of St. Theresa, at one period of her\nlife a typical jogini, we read that not long after her visions and\nsupernatural visitations, she became a most energetic reformer of the\nconvents.\n\n[Sidenote: The jogi, not the brahman, is the living part of present-day\nHinduism.]\n\nThat quest for the beatific vision or for union with God, is the highest\nand the most living part of present-day Hinduism, whether monotheistic\nor pantheistic. Not the purohit brahman (the domestic celebrant), or the\nguru brahman (the professional spiritual director), conventionally\nspoken of as divine, but the jogi or religious seeker is the object of\nuniversal reverence. And rightly so. The reality of this aspect of\nHinduism is manifest in the ease with which it overrides the idea of\ncaste. In theory brahmans are the twice-born caste, the nearest to the\nDeity and to union with Him. A man of lower caste, in his upward\ntransmigrations towards union with God or absorption into Deity, should\npass through an existence as a brahman. In the chapter on Transmigration\nwe found that the upward steps of the ladder up to the brahman caste had\nbeen clearly stated in an authoritative Hindu text-book. The word\n_br[=a]hman_, the name of the highest caste, is itself in fact a synonym\nfor Deity. But as a matter of fact, men of any caste, moved by the\nspirit, are found devoting themselves to the jogi life. \"He who attains\nto God is the true br[=a]hman,\" is the current maxim, attributed to the\ngreat Buddha.\n\n[Sidenote: Saving Faith, or Bhakti.]\n\n[Sidenote: Bhakti implies a personal God.]\n\n[Sidenote: Bhakti a genuine feeling because it may override caste.]\n\n[Sidenote: Bhakti not fit to cope with caste.]\n\nThis brings us to the second of the three paths of salvation, the middle\nportion of the upward path to the mountain top of clear, unclouded\nvision of the All, the One Soul. In Hindu theory, at this second stage\nman is still amid the clouds that cling to the mountain's breast. For\neasy reference I have named it _Salvation by Faith_, although the\nEnglish term must not mislead. The extract from the Mahanirv[=a]na\nTantra, already quoted, describes this inferior stage as the method of\n\"chanting of glories and recitation of names\" of gods. The Sanscrit\nname, _Bhakti_, is rendered devotion, or fervour, or faith, or fervent\nlove; and in spite of alien ideas associated with bhakti, bhakti is much\nmore akin to Faith than are many of the features of Hinduism to the\nChristian analogues with whose names they are ticketed. For example,\nbhakti practically implies a personal god, not the impersonal\npantheistic Brahma. Intense devotion to some personal god, generally\nVishnu the preserver, under the name Hari, or either of Vishnu's chief\nincarnations, Ram or Krishna, is the usual manifestation of bhakti. In\nactual practice it displays itself in ecstatic dancing or singing, or in\nexclaiming the name of the god or goddess, or in self-lacerations in his\nor her honour. Lacerations and what we would call penances, be it\nremembered, are done to the honour of a Deity; they are not a discipline\nlike the self-whipping of the Flagellants and the jumping of the Jumpers\nof the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. \"Bhakti,\" says Sir Monier\nWilliams, \"is really a kind of 'meritorious work,' and not equivalent to\n'faith' in the Christian sense.\"[129] Bhakti is the religion of many\nmillions of India, combined more or less with the conventional externals\nof sacrifice and offerings and pilgrimages and employment of brahmans,\nwhich together constitute the third path of salvation, by karma or\nworks. That ecstatic adoration is religion for many millions of India,\nalthough the name _bhakti_ may never pass their lips. We judged the idea\nof salvation by knowledge, or by intense concentration of mind, to be\n_genuinely_ felt, because it could override the idea of caste. Applying\nthe same test here, we must acknowledge the genuineness of feeling in\nbhakti. Theoretically, at least, as Sir Monier Williams says, \"devotion\nto Vishnu supersedes all distinctions of caste\"; and again, \"Vishnavism\n[Vishnuism], notwithstanding the gross polytheistic superstitions and\nhideous idolatry to which it gives rise, is the only Hindu system worthy\nof being called a religion.\"[130] In actual practice the repudiation of\ncaste no doubt varies greatly. In some cases, caste is dropped only\nduring the fit of fervour or bhakti. At Puri, _during_ the celebrated\nJuggernath (Jagan-nath, Lord of the world) pilgrimage, high caste and\nlow together receive and eat the temple food, afterwards resuming their\nseveral ranks in caste. As a matter of fact it was found at the census\nof 1901, that with the exception of a few communities of devotees, all\nthe professed Vishnuites returned themselves by their caste names. Hindu\nbhakti, like Christianity, is in conflict with caste, and bhakti has not\nproved fit to cope with it.\n\n[Sidenote: Bhakti in other religions.]\n\n[Sidenote: In Christian worship.]\n\nBhakti, then, is simply the designation for fervour in worship or in\npresence of the Deity, as it appears in Hinduism. For fervour is not\npeculiar to any religion, even ecstatic fervour. We see it among the\nJews in King David's dancing before the ark of the Lord, and we see it\nin the whirling of the dervishes of Cairo, despite Mahomedans' overawing\nidea of God. May we not say that the singing in Christian worship\nrecognises the same religious instinct, and the necessity to permit the\nexercise of it. Many of the psalms, we feel we must chant or sing;\nreading is too cold for them--the 148th Psalm for example, \"Praise ye\nthe Lord from the heavens; praise Him in the heights: praise ye Him, sun\nand moon,\" and so on.\n\n[Sidenote: Bhakti a natural channel for religious feeling, now being\nreconsecrated.]\n\nWe pass over the extravagances and gross depths to which bhakti,\ndevotion or faith or love, may degenerate in the excitement of religious\nfestivals--_corruptio optimi pessimum_. Even, strange to say, we find\nthe grossness of bhakti also deliberately embodied in figures of wood\nand stone. Passing that over, we repeat that in bhakti or devotion to a\npersonal God, or even only ecstatic extravagant devotion to a saint or\nreligious hero semi-deified, we have a natural channel for the religious\nfeeling of Indians, a channel that in these days is wearing deep. I\nspeak of the middle classes, not of the ignorant masses, and my point is\nthat the middle classes and the new religious organisations including\nthe Indian Church are reconsecrating bhakti. Here is a portion of a\nbhakti hymn of one of the sections of the Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j:\n\n  \"The gods dance, chanting the name of Hari;\n  Dances my Gouranga in the midst of the choral band;\n  The eyes full of tears, Oh! how beautiful!\n  Jesus dances, Paul dances, dances Sakya Muni.\"\n\n[Sidenote: Bhakti in the Indian Church.]\n\nBetween singing the song and acting it while singing, the distance in\nIndia is little. The explanation of a recent Hindu devotee, Ramkrishna\nParamhansa, is: \"A true devotee, who has drunk deep of divine Love, is\nlike a veritable drunkard, and as such cannot always observe the rules\nof propriety.\"[131] Manifestations of bhakti we would soon have in the\nIndian Christian Church were the cold moderating influence of Westerns\nlessened; and as the Church increases and becomes indigenous, we must\nwelcome bhakti in measure. Every religious procession will lead to\nmanifestations of bhakti. In the Church of Scotland Magazine, _Life and\nWork_, for November 1904, we are told of a convert at Calcutta: \"She\nkept speaking and singing of Jesus.... She appeared to the Hindu family\nto be a Christ-intoxicated woman.\" Again, in the _Indian Standard_ for\nOctober 1905, we read of a religious revival among the Christians of the\nhills in Assam, where the Welsh missionaries work. We may contrast the\nconcomitants of the revival with those attending the late revival even\namong the fervid Welsh. At one meeting, we are told, \"the fervour rose\nat times to boiling heat, and scores of men were almost beside\nthemselves with spiritual ecstasy. We never witnessed such scenes;\nscores of people literally danced, while large numbers who did not dance\nwaved their arms in the air, keeping time, as they sang some of our\nmagnificent Khassie hymns.\"\n\n[Sidenote: Saving knowledge naturally superseded by Bhakti in the new\nmonotheism.]\n\n[Sidenote: An object of bhakti needed for educated India.]\n\n[Sidenote: Buddha, Krishna, Chaitanya.]\n\n[Sidenote: Jesus Christ, the supereminent object of bhakti.]\n\nIf what I have frequently repeated in these chapters be correct--that in\nthe nineteenth century educated India has become largely monotheistic,\nit is in keeping therewith that the prevailing conception of religion\nshould have changed, alongside, from the quest of Saving Knowledge to\nthat of Bhakti or enthusiastic devotion to a person. Direct confirmation\nof that inference, a recent Hindu historian supplies. In a different\ncontext altogether, he declares: \"The doctrine of bhakti (Faith) now\nrules the Hindu to the almost utter exclusion of the higher and more\nintellectual doctrine of gnan (Knowledge of the Supreme Soul).\" The\nconception of the all-comprehending impersonal Brahma has, indeed, lost\nvitality; for the educated also the externals of the popular religion\nhave lost their significance and become puerile. But for them also, the\nobjects of popular bhakti, Ram and Krishna, are as much epical as\nreligious heroes. Hinduism needs an object of bhakti for her educated\npeople. The fact explains several of the novel religious features of the\npast half-century. The great jogi, Buddha, although not a brahman, was\nrediscovered as a religious hero for Hindus; at the commencement of the\ncentury he was a heretic to the brahmans. \"The head of a sect inimical\nto Hinduism,\" the great Rammohan Roy calls him. So Sir Edwin Arnold's\n_Light of Asia_ had a great vogue some twenty years ago. Then Krishna\nhas had his life re-written and his cult revived--purged of the old\nexcesses of the Krishna-bhakti. More recently, Chaitanya, the religious\nteacher in Bengal in the fifteenth century, has been adopted by certain\nof the educated class in Bengal as an object of bhakti. Here, it seems\nto me, is found the place of Christ in the mind of educated India. They\nare fairly familiar now with the story of the New Testament, and Jesus\nChrist stands before them as the supereminent object of bhakti; and I\nventure to say is generally regarded as such, although comparatively few\nas yet have adopted the bhakti attitude towards Him. The _Imitatio\nChristi_, however, is a well-known book to the spiritually minded among\nthe educated classes. India has advanced beyond the cold, intellectual,\nUnitarian appreciation of Jesus Christ that marked the early Br[=a]hma\nand Pr[=a]rthan[=a] Sam[=a]j movements and manifested itself in their\ncreeds in express denial of any incarnation. For Br[=a]hma worship, I\nhave seen the hymn, \"Jesus, lover of my soul,\" transformed into \"Father,\nlover of my soul.\" Hindus of the newer bhakti attitude to Christ would\nfind no difficulty in singing the hymn as Christians do, provided the\ndoctrinal background be not obtruded upon them. Sober faith has dawned,\nand will formulate itself by and by.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXI\n\nCONCLUSION\n\n  \"Draw the curtain close,\n  And let us all to meditation.\"\n\n    SHAKESPEARE, _Hen. VI_. II.\n\n\nSailing, say to India, from Britain down through the Atlantic, close by\nthe coast of Portugal and Spain, and then, within the Mediterranean,\nskirting the coast of Algeria, and so on, one is often oppressed with a\nsense of his isolation. We can see that the land we are passing is\ninhabited by human beings like ourselves; and those houses visible are\nhomes; and signs of life we can see even from our passing vessel. What\nof all the tragedies and comedies that are daily being enacted in these\nhouses--the exits and the entrances, the friendships and the feuds, the\nselfishnesses and self-sacrifices, the commonplace toil, the children's\nplay, that are going on the very moment we are looking? We are out of\nit, and our affections refuse to be wholly alienated from these\nfellow-beings, although the ship of which we form a part must pursue her\nown aim, and hurries along.\n\nThe Briton's tie to India and Indians is of no passing accidental\ncharacter. Our life-histories are not merely running parallel; our\ndestinies are linked together. Christian feeling, duty, self-interest,\nand the interest of a linked destiny all call upon us to know each other\nand cherish mutual sympathy. Not that the West has ever been without an\ninterest in India, as far back as we have Indian history, in the Greek\naccounts of the invasion of India by Alexander the Great in 327 B.C.\nWriting in the first century B.C. and rehearsing what the earlier Greek\nwriters had said about India, Strabo, the Greek geographer, testifies to\nthe prevailing interest in India, and even sets forth the difficulty of\nknowing India, exactly as a modern student of India often feels inclined\nto do. \"We must take with discrimination,\" he says, \"what we are told\nabout India, for it is the most distant of lands, and few of our nation\nhave seen it. Those, moreover, who have seen it, have seen only a part,\nand most of what they say is no more than hearsay. Even what they saw,\nthey became acquainted with only while passing through the country with\nan army, in great haste. Yea, even their reports about the same things\nare not the same, although they write as if they had examined the things\nwith the greatest care and attention. Some of the writers were\nfellow-soldiers and fellow-travellers, yet oft-times they contradict\neach other.... Nor do those who at present make voyages thither afford\nany precise information.\" We sympathise with Strabo, as our own readers\nalso may. The interest of the West was of course interrupted when the\nTurks thrust themselves in between Europe and India and blocked the road\nEastward overland. But the sea-road round the Cape of Good Hope was\ndiscovered, and West and East met more directly again, and Britain's\nspecial interest in India began. Judged by the recent output of English\nbooks on India, the interest of Britons in things Indian is rapidly\nincreasing, and, _pace_ Strabo, it is hoped that this book, the record\nof the birth of New Ideas in India, will not only increase the knowledge\nbut also deepen interest and sympathy. For even more noteworthy than the\nnumber of new books--since many of the new books deal only with what may\nbe called Pictorial India--is the deepening of interest manifest in\nrecent years.\n\nThat self-glorifying expression, \"the brightest jewel in the British\ncrown,\" has grown obsolete, and India has become not the glory of\nBritain, but the first of her imperial responsibilities. The thought of\nBritain as well as the thought of new India has changed. To the extent\nof recognising a great imperial responsibility, the mission efforts of\nthe Churches and the speeches of statesmen and the output of the press\nhave converted Britain. India, what her people actually are in thought\nand feeling, what the country is in respect of the necessities of life\nand industrial possibilities--these are questions that never fail to\ninterest an intelligent British audience. In this volume, the aim has\nbeen to set forth the existing thoughts and feelings, especially of\nnew-educated India, and to do so on the historical principle, that to\nknow how a thing _has come to be_, is the right way to know what it is\nand how to treat it. The history of an opinion is its true exposition.\nThese chapters are not speculations, but a setting forth of the progress\nof opinion in India during the British period, and particularly during\nthe nineteenth century. The successive chapters make clear how wonderful\nhas been the progress of India during the century in social, political,\nand religious ideas. The darkness of the night has been forgotten, and\nwill hardly be believed by the new Indians of to-day; and ordinary\nBritons can hardly be expected to know Indian history beyond outstanding\npolitical events. Not, however, to boast of progress, but to encourage\neducated Indians to further progress, and to enlighten Britons regarding\nthe India which they are creating, is the hope of this volume. Further\nprogress has yet to be made, and difficult problems yet await solution,\nand to know the history of the perplexing situation will surely be most\nhelpful as a guide. What future is in store for India lies hidden. It\nwould be interesting to speculate, and with a few _ifs_ interposed, it\nmight be easy to dogmatise. What will she become? is indeed a question\nof fascinating interest, when we ask it of a child of the household, or\nwhen we ask it of a great people rejuvenated, to whom the British nation\nstands in place of parent. In the history of the soul of a people, the\ncentury just ended may be but a brief space on which to stand to take\nstock of what is past and seek inspiration for the future, to talk of\nprogress made and progress possible.\n\n  \"Where lies the land to which the ship would go?\n  Far, far ahead, is all her seamen know.\n  And where the land she travels from away?\n  Far, far behind, is all that they can say.\"[132]\n\nBut the past century is all the experience of India we Britons have, and\nwe are bound to reflect well upon it in our outlook ahead.\n\n\n\n\n[Footnote 1: The Senate and People of Rome--Senatus Populus-que\nRomanus.]\n\n[Footnote 2: In the Hindu College at Benares, affiliated to Allahabad\nUniversity, certain orthodox Hindus also objected to sacred texts being\nread in the presence of European professors and teachers. Think of it,\nin that college preparing students for ordinary modern degrees!--Bose,\n_Hindu Civilisation, I_. xxxiii.]\n\n[Footnote 3: One of the Zoroastrian Persians who fled to Western India\nat the beginning of the eighth century A.D. At the census of 1901 they\nnumbered 94,190. They are most numerous in the city of Bombay.]\n\n[Footnote 4: _Asiatic Studies_, I.]\n\n[Footnote 5: _Ibid_., I. iii.]\n\n[Footnote 6: _Quinquen, Report on Education in India_, 1897-1902.]\n\n[Footnote 7: For an apparently contrary view, see _Census of India,\n1901, Report,_ p. 430: \"Railways, which are sometimes represented as a\nsolvent of caste prejudices, have in fact enormously extended the area\nwithin which those prejudices reign supreme.\" The sentence refers to the\ninfluence of the fashion of the higher castes in regard to child\nmarriage and prohibition of the marriage of widows.]\n\n[Footnote 8: Sir W.W. Hunter, _England's Work in India_.]\n\n[Footnote 9: The manifold origins of castes are fully discussed in the\nnewest lights in the _Census of India Report_, 1901.]\n\n[Footnote 10: Miss Noble [Sister Nivedita], finds herein an apology for\ncaste. \"The power of the individual to advance is by this means kept\nstrictly in ratio to the thinking of the society in which he lives.\"\n_(The Web of Indian Life_, p. 145.)]\n\n[Footnote 11: Sir A. Lyall, _Asiatic Studies_, I. v.: \"A man is not a\nHindu because he inhabits India or belongs to any particular race or\nstate, but because he is a Brahmanist.\" Similarly _Census of India_,\n1901, _Report_, p. 360: \"The most obvious characteristics of the\nordinary Hindu are his acceptance of the Brahmanical supremacy and of\nthe caste system.\"]\n\n[Footnote 12: _Harvest Field_, March 1904; _Madras Decen. Missionary\nConference Report,_ 1902.]\n\n[Footnote 13: Introduction to _Translation of the Ishopanishad_.]\n\n[Footnote 14: _Benares Hindu Coll. Maga_. Sept. 1904.]\n\n[Footnote 15: _Karkarin: Forty years of Progress and Reform_, p. 117.]\n\n[Footnote 16: _Census of India_, 1901, _Report_, pp. 496, 517, 544.]\n\n[Footnote 17: Miss Noble [Sister Nivedita], _Web of Indian Life_, p.\n133.]\n\n[Footnote 18: _Report, Census of India_, 1901, p. 163.]\n\n[Footnote 19: _Census of India_, 1901, _Report_, p. 163.]\n\n[Footnote 20: _Census of India_, 1901, _Report_, p. 522.]\n\n[Footnote 21: _Lux Christi_, by C.A. Mason, p. 255. 1902.]\n\n[Footnote 22: In Italy, in 1891, the sexes were almost equal, being\nmales 1000 to females 995.]\n\n[Footnote 23: _Census of India_, 1901, _Report_, p. 115.]\n\n[Footnote 24: A case of Suttee is reported in the _Bengal Police Report_\nfor 1903.]\n\n[Footnote 25: _Report, Census of India_, 1901, pp. 442, 443.]\n\n[Footnote 26: Justice Amir Ali, _Life and Teaching of Mohammed_.]\n\n[Footnote 27: Sister Nivedita, _Web of Indian Life_, p. 80.]\n\n[Footnote 28: _Church of Scotland Mission Record_, 1894; _East and\nWest_, July 1905.]\n\n[Footnote 29: Trotter, _India under Queen Victoria_.]\n\n[Footnote 30: P. 428.]\n\n[Footnote 31: _Hindu_ was originally a geographical term referring to\nthe country of the River Indus. It is derived from the Sanscrit\n(_Sindhu_), meaning _river_, from which also come _Indus, Sindh, Hindu,\nHindi,_ and _India_. The names _Indus_ and _India_ are English words got\nfrom Greek; they are not Indian, terms at all, although they are coming\ninto use among educated Indians.]\n\n[Footnote 32: _Hindi_ is also used as a comprehensive term for all the\nkindred dialects of Hindustan. See R.N. Cust, LL.D, _Oecumenical List of\nTranslations of the Holy Scriptures_, 1901. The above account follows\nthat given in the _Census Report_ for 1901.]\n\n[Footnote 33: The correct form, _brahman_, not _brahmin_, is employed by\nthe majority of recent writers.]\n\n[Footnote 34: Quoted in _Census of India_, 1881.]\n\n[Footnote 35: _The Web of Indian Life_, pp. 101, 298.]\n\n[Footnote 36: I. xvi.]\n\n[Footnote 37: _Ancient Geography of Asia_, by Nibaran Chandra Das.]\n\n[Footnote 38: For other testimony to the new national feeling, see\n_Decen. Missionary Conference Report_, 1902, p. 305, etc.; Sister\nNivedita, _Web of Indian Life_.]\n\n[Footnote 39: This may not be so in the extreme south-west, where there\nhave been Christians since the sixth century.]\n\n[Footnote 40: _The Indian National Congress_, by John Murdoch, LL.D.,\n1898. (Christian Literature Society, Madras.)]\n\n[Footnote 41: _Karkaria: Forty Years of Progress and Reform_, 1896, p.\n94.]\n\n[Footnote 42: _The Indian National Congress_, by John Murdoch, LL.D., p.\n95. (Madras Christian Literature Society.)]\n\n[Footnote 43: _The Indian National Congress_, by John Murdoch, LL.D.\n(Madras Christian Literature Society), p. 142, etc.]\n\n[Footnote 44: _Asiatic Studies_, I. iii., II. i.]\n\n[Footnote 45: _The Indian National Congress_, by John Murdoch, LL.D., p.\n153. (Madras Christian Literature Society.)]\n\n[Footnote 46: Smith, _Life of Alexander Duff_, 1881, Chapter V.]\n\n[Footnote 47: _Asiatic Studies_, II. I. 7, 37.]\n\n[Footnote 48: _Report of Madras Decennial Missionary Conf_., 1902, p.\n311.]\n\n[Footnote 49: Acts iv. 33.]\n\n[Footnote 50: Acts xvii. 18, 32.]\n\n[Footnote 51: _Statistical Atlas of India_, 1895.]\n\n[Footnote 52: Census of 1901.]\n\n[Footnote 53: _Hinduism and its Modern Exponents_, by Rev. C.N. Banerji,\nB.A.]\n\n[Footnote 54: Monier Williams, _Brahmanism_, etc., p. 18.]\n\n[Footnote 55: Monier Williams, _Hinduism_, p. 38.]\n\n[Footnote 56: Youngson, _Punjab Mission of the Church of Scotland_, p.\n27.]\n\n[Footnote 57: \"The Arya Samaj,\" by Rev. H.D. Griswold, D.D., _Madras\nDecen. Mission. Conference Report_; \"The Arya Samaj,\" by Rev. H. Forman,\n_Allahabad Mission Press_, 1902; _Biographical Essays_, by Max\nM\u00fcller--\"Dyananda Saraswati\"]\n\n[Footnote 58: For another explanation of the separation, see Lillie,\n_Madame Blavatsky_, chap. vii.]\n\n[Footnote 59: 62,458,077 Mahomedans at Census of 1901.]\n\n[Footnote 60: _Census of India_, 1901, _Report_, pp. 371-73.]\n\n[Footnote 61: Disguised as _Necharis_ in the _Report, Census of India_,\n1901, p. 373. See Youngson, _Punjab Mission of the Church of Scotland_,\np. 14; _Madras Decen. Miss. Conf. Report of_ 1902, p. 341.]\n\n[Footnote 62: _Asiatic Studies_, I. 1.]\n\n[Footnote 63: Guru-prasad Sen in _Introduction to the Study of\nHinduism_, quoted in _Madras Decen. Miss. Conf. Report_, p. 280.]\n\n[Footnote 64: Sister Nivedita, _Web of Indian Life_, pp. 175, 179.]\n\n[Footnote 65: Cf. _Philosophic Hinduism_, p. 27, Madras, C.V.E.S.]\n\n[Footnote 66: Amy W. Carmichael, _Things as they are in South India_.]\n\n[Footnote 67: Monier Williams, _Brahmanism and Hinduism_, p. 54.]\n\n[Footnote 68: _Indian Missions from the Outside_.]\n\n[Footnote 69: _Hinduism_, p. 88. _Things as They Are_, iv. by Amy W.\nCarmichael.]\n\n[Footnote 70: _Intellectual Progress of India_, P. Mitter, p. 5.]\n\n[Footnote 71: _Defence of Hindu Theism: Appeal to the Christian Public_\n(II. 91).]\n\n[Footnote 72: Smith, _Life of Dr. Wilson_.]\n\n[Footnote 73: Rammohan Roy, _Appeal to the Christian Public_.]\n\n[Footnote 74: _Vedic Hinduism_, (Madras C.V.E.S.) 1888.]\n\n[Footnote 75: Bose, _Hindu Civilisation during British Rule_, i. 95.]\n\n[Footnote 76: Monier Williams, _Modern India_, 1878, p. 101.]\n\n[Footnote 77: Plato in the _Tim\u00e6us_ teaches the eternal existence of\nmatter as a substance distinct from God. See also p. 134.]\n\n[Footnote 78: Max M\u00fcller, _Ramakrishna_, p. 48.]\n\n[Footnote 79: Sister Nivedita, _The Web of Indian Life_.]\n\n[Footnote 80: Monier Williams, _Brahmanism and Hinduism_, p. 25, etc.]\n\n[Footnote 81: For the Yoga System, see pp. 127, 128, 134.]\n\n[Footnote 82: _Text-book of Hindu Religion_, etc., p. 60.]\n\n[Footnote 83: See _also Life of Rev. J.J. Weitbrecht_, 1830, p. 318.]\n\n[Footnote 84: Max M\u00fcller, _Ramakrishna_, p. 8.]\n\n[Footnote 85: _Weekly Statesman_ (Calcutta), 14 IX. 1905.]\n\n[Footnote 86: Rev. Dr. Griswold in _Madras Decen. Missionary Conf.\nReport_, 1902, p. 317.]\n\n[Footnote 87: _Asiatic Studies_, II. i. 11.]\n\n[Footnote 88: Sister Nivedita, _The Web of Indian Life_, pp. 191, 287.]\n\n[Footnote 89: Avatar=a descent.]\n\n[Footnote 90: Lillie, _India and its Problems_.]\n\n[Footnote 91: Smith, _Life of Dr. John Wilson_, pp. 63, 65.]\n\n[Footnote 92: Lillie, _India and its Problems_, p. 130.]\n\n[Footnote 93: _Biographical Sketch of K.M. Banerjea_, p. 79. K.M.\nBanerjea, _Christianity and Hinduism_, pp. 1, 2, 11. Monier Williams,\n_Hinduism_, p. 36, etc; _Brahmanism and Hinduism_, pp. 4, 14, 17, 33.\nCompare Hebrews i. 2, 3.]\n\n[Footnote 94: _Hinduism and its Modern Exponents_, Rev. C.N. Banerjea,\nB.A. Calcutta, 1893.]\n\n[Footnote 95: _Sketches of Indian Christians_ (Madras C.L.S.), 1896.]\n\n[Footnote 96: _Lectures in India_.]\n\n[Footnote 97: P.N. Mitter, _Intellectual Progress of Modern India_.]\n\n[Footnote 98: _U.F. Church of Scot. Mission Report_ for 1903; _Madras\nDecen. Missionary Conference Report_, 1903, pp. 310, 311.]\n\n[Footnote 99: Farquhar, _The Future of Christianity in India_ (Chr. Lit.\nSoc).]\n\n[Footnote 100: K.C. Banurji, Esq., M.A., B.L., Registrar of Calcutta\nUniversity.]\n\n[Footnote 101: _Asiatic Studies_, I. v. 143.]\n\n[Footnote 102: _Madras Decen. Miss. Conf. Report_, 1902, p. 345.]\n\n[Footnote 103: Translated by Rev. J.L. Thakur Das, of Lahore.]\n\n[Footnote 104: J.N. Farquhar, M.A., in _The Future of Christianity in\nIndia_, Madras C.L.S.]\n\n[Footnote 105: For a fuller statement, see Farquhar, _The Future of\nChristianity in India_. C.L.S., Madras.]\n\n[Footnote 106: Flint, _Philosophy of History_.]\n\n[Footnote 107: _Asiatic Studies_, I. i.]\n\n[Footnote 108: Bhag. Gita, v. 3, quoted by Max M\u00fcller in _Ramakrishna_,\np. 3.]\n\n[Footnote 109: _Asiatic Studies_, II. i. 35.]\n\n[Footnote 110: John v. 11.]\n\n[Footnote 111: The term _Nirvana_ is not used by ordinary uneducated\nIndians: it is known only to the educated.]\n\n[Footnote 112: Max M\u00fcller, _Ramakrishna_.]\n\n[Footnote 113: Sister Nivedita, _The Web of Indian Life_.]\n\n[Footnote 114: Rev. H. Forman, _The Arya Sarm[=a]j_, Allahabad.]\n\n[Footnote 115: _Madras Decen. Missionary Conf. Report_, 1902, p. 276.]\n\n[Footnote 116: Hastie, _Hindu Idolatry and English Enlightenment_.]\n\n[Footnote 117: \"The tendency of the doctrine of Karma has been to\npromote contentment.\"--Bose, _Hindu Civilisation_, I. lix.]\n\n[Footnote 118: Sir M. Monier Williams' _Brahmanism and Hinduism_.]\n\n[Footnote 119: Sister Nivedita, _The Web of Indian Life_, p. 198.]\n\n[Footnote 120: Taken from the Chh[=a]ndogya Upanishad.]\n\n[Footnote 121: Lilly, _India and its Problems_.]\n\n[Footnote 122: K.S. Macdonald, _Sin and Salvation ... in the Tantras_,\nCalcutta Methodist Publ. House.]\n\n[Footnote 123: _Brahmanism and Hinduism_, pp. 25, 24; _Hinduism_, p.\n39.]\n\n[Footnote 124: Monier Williams, _Brahmanism and Hinduism_.]\n\n[Footnote 125: _The [=A]rya Sam[=a][=i]_, by Rev. Henry Forman.\nAllahabad, 1887.]\n\n[Footnote 126: _Religious Reform_, Part IV. Madras C.V.E.S., 1888.]\n\n[Footnote 127: _Religious Reform_, Part IV. Madras C.V.E.S., 1888.]\n\n[Footnote 128: K.S. Macdonald, _Sin and Salvation ... in the Tantras_.\nCalcutta Methodist Publ. House.]\n\n[Footnote 129: Monier Williams, _Brahmanism and Hinduism_, p. 63.]\n\n[Footnote 130: Monier Williams, _Brahmanism and Hinduism_, Chap. V.]\n\n[Footnote 131: Max M\u00fcller, _Ranuikrishna Paramahansa_, p. viii.]\n\n[Footnote 132: A.H. Clough. Quoted by Lord Curzon at Simla, September\n1905.]\n\n\n\n\nINDEX\n\n\nAbsorption into Deity, 153, 223, 226, 230.\n\nAgnosticism, 183.\n\nAgra, 2, 67, 82.\n\nAhmad, Mirza Gholam, of Qadian, 202-4, 210.\n\nAhmad, Sir Syed, 146.\n\nAkbar, 13, 95.\n\nAllah, 3, 207.\n\nAllahabad, 13.\n\nAmmonius, the Neo-Platonist, 208-9.\n\nAnglo-Indians, viii, 51-2, 67, 88, 89, 91, 100, 101, 105, 114, 123, 124,\n160.\n\nAnti-British feeling, ix, xi, 88-95, 101, 137, 144-5, 190, 192, 240.\n\nAnti--Christian feeling, 137, 191-2, 241.\n\nAnti-foreign feeling, 128, 191-2, 240. _See_ Indian bias.\n\nArmy. _See_ British soldiers.\n\n[=A]rya Sam[=a]j, 30, 36, 46, 56-7, 64, 122, 132-40, 143-5, 149, 169, 172,\n181-2, 210, 228-9, 241-2, 250-2.\n\nAryans, 32, 70, 78, 134, 139, 156\n\nAscetics, 12, 47-9, 107, 157, 184, 219, 249, 255.\n\nAsoka. 77-8.\n\nAssam, 35, 214, 265.\n\nAurangzeb, 3, 14, 77.\n\nAvatars (descents or incarnations), 184-8, 200, 211.\n\nAvidya (ignorance). _See_ Delusion.\n\nAwakening, Intellectual, 19, 76, 118. _See_ New.\n\n\nBanerjea, K.M., 46, 94, 188-9.\n\nBanyan tree, 12-3.\n\nBaroda, 26, 35, 54, 58.\n\nBeef, 18, 136.\n\nBenares, 3, 13, 54, 132, 142, 246.\n\nBenares, Hindu College, 25, 142-3, 155, 173, 182, 234-5.\n\nBengal, v, 8-9, 35-6, 47-8, 54, 60, 64, 69, 75, 81-2, 84, 106, 127, 129,\n130, 138, 145, 163, 168, 178, 191, 194-5, 198-9, 218, 230-1, 250, 267.\n\nBentinck, Lord W., 25.\n\nBesant, Mrs., 31, 38, 140-2, 208, 237.\n\nBhagabat Gita, 96, 198-9.\n\nBhakti (enthusiastic devotion), 187, 261-8.\n\nBible, 111, 194-8, 205-6, 211-2, 233. 247, 253, 263-4, 267.\n\nBlavatsky, Madame, 31, 140-1, 209.\n\nBombay, 2, 44, 46, 54, 69, 75, 81, 84-6, 96, 130-1, 138-9, 167, 172,\n195, 257.\n\nBose's _Hindu Civilisation_, etc., 75, 160, 170, 196.\n\nBrahma, 70, 169, 175-7, 256-7, 261, 266.\n\nBrahm[=a], 70, 176-7, 185.\n\nBr[=a]hma Sam[=a]j, 30, 36, 56-7, 62-4, 71, 122, 125-31, 143, 145-6, 148,\n169-71, 179, 192, 194-5, 234, 250, 252, 264, 267-8.\n\nBrahman privileges, 6-7, 16-7, 24, 42, 60, 245-6, 249.\n\nBrahmanism, 69-70, 255.\n\nBrahmans, 7, 21, 23, 26, 30, 35, 38-9, 49, 60, 68-9, 128, 151, 158, 167,\n219, 237, 249-50, 260, 262.\n\nBreath, Ritual management of the, 246.\n\nBritain and India. _See_ India.\n\nBritish Government, 2, 8, 14, 25, 33-6, 53, 55, 73-6, 79, 92-4, 106,\n144, 208, 217-9.\n\nBritish Government, a theological illustration, 154, 157.\n\nBritish Government, Acts of, 14, 53-5, 72, 254.\n\nBritish Government and caste, 33-6.\n\nBritish influence, vii, ix, 4-5, 14-15, 42-4, 61, 106, 272-3.\n\nBritish merchants, viii.\n\nBritish soldiers, 2, 15.\n\nBrotherhood of man, 102, 239.\n\nBuddha or Sakya Muni, 161, 186, 196, 199, 223, 227, 249, 260, 264, 267.\n\nBuddhism, Buddhists, 66, 70, 77, 141, 196, 226, 254-5.\n\n\nCalcutta, 2, 17, 25-6, 36, 43, 45-8, 63, 72, 79, 85-6, 99, 122, 125-6,\n181, 192, 198, 230, 232, 247-8, 250.\n\nCalcutta University, 6, 49, 68, 134, 247.\n\nCapital in India, 92-3.\n\nCashmere, 204.\n\nCaste, 22, 39, 46, 48, 56, 75, 95, 128, 132, 135, 137, 142-3, 158, 190,\n211, 218, 260, 262-3.\n\nCaste declining, 16-8, 35, 37-8, 218.\n\nCastes: Brahman. _See_ Brahman;\n  Kayasth (Clerk), 5, 35, 48, 49;\n  Kshatriya or Soldier, 35;\n  Mahratta, 35;\n  Nayar, 33;\n  Pariah, 33;\n  Shaha, 35;\n  Soldier, 35;\n  Sudras (the group of lowest castes recognised as within Hinduism), 6, 21.\n\nCensus of 1901, 5, 17, 33-6, 53-4, 57, 59, 61, 64, 106, 131, 154, 207,\n263.\n\nCentral Provinces, 17.\n\nChaitanya or Gauranga, 22, 199-200, 264, 267.\n\nChet Ram, 204-8.\n\nChinese--Literati, 43, 113;\n  Pilgrim, 13;\n  Anti-foreign feeling, 191.\n\nChrist. _See_ Jesus Christ.\n\nChristian civilisation in India, xi, 4, 14.\n\nChristian doctrine in contrast, 172, 174, 181, 186, 207, 221-34, 238,\n241, 253, 261-2.\n\nChristian influence, 146, 153, 156, 158-9, 169-71, 179, 197, 206, 222.\n\nChristian religion, The, 221-2.\n\nChristian worship, 117, 128, 187, 245, 250, 263, 264.\n\nChristianity in India, xi, 14, 41, 44, 73, 80, 101, 105-9, 112, 115,\n125-7, 133, 143, 148-9, 165, 182, 190, 196-7, 241.\n\nChristians, 151, 163, 203-4, 233-4.\n\nChristians, Indian, 5, 30, 32, 37, 45, 52, 56-7, 62-4, 66, 89, 122-5,\n137, 143, 169, 190-2, 194-5, 264-6.\n\nCitizenship, Idea of, 24, 72-3, 87, 101, 104, 218.\n\nCivil Servants, vii-ix, 87, 160, 188.\n\nCochin, 33.\n\nColleges, Indian, x, 48-9, 74.\n\nCommon welfare, Idea of. _See_ Public.\n\nCommons, House of, 102.\n\nCompany, East India, 99.\n\nComparative religion, 107-8.\n\nConflict of ideas, 4, 6, 7, 49, 117. _See_ Christian doctrine.\n\nCongress, The--the All-India political association, 76-93, 133, 139,\n144.\n\nConservatism, Indian, vi, 11-20, 46, 49, 83, 142, 158-165.\n\nCoronation, Bengali representative at, 29.\n\nCow, Sanctity of the, 136, 151, 202.\n\nCreator, 177, 186, 189.\n\nCremation and burial, 105.\n\nCurzon, Lord, 15, 89, 93, 274.\n\n\nDarjeeling, 18.\n\nDaru-l-harb, 145-6.\n\nDelhi, 2, 67, 68, 82.\n\nDelusion, 153, 157, 173-7, 184-5, 220, 241, 243, 257-8.\n\nDevotee. _See_ Jogi.\n\nDigby, William, 92-3.\n\nDoctors, Indian lady, 62.\n\nDoctrine. _See_ Christian; Hindu.\n\nDrink-selling, 18.\n\nDualistic conceptions, 172, 178, 242.\n\nDufferin Association, Lady, 62.\n\nDurga, the Goddess, 251.\n\nDutt, Narendranath, B.A. _See_ Vivekananda.\n\n\nEating together, 81, 104, 160.\n\nEducated Indians, The New, v, vii, ix, 44-5, 55, 58, 76, 83, 86-7, 89,\n91, 97-8, 112, 115, 117-8, 124, 127, 132, 140, 143, 149, 155-6, 159-62,\n167-71, 173-4, 178, 183, 185, 189-92, 196, 211, 222, 230-42, 250, 255,\n258.\n\nEducation in India--\n  Boys, 5, 43.\n  Females, 5, 46, 55-6, 62.\n  Influence of, 15, 39-49, 94, 101, 106, 115, 126, 132, 146, 160, 168.\n\nEdward VII., 2, 29, 76.\n\nElphinstone, Mountstuart, 44.\n\nEnglish education. _See_ Education.\n\nEnglish-knowing Indians. _See_ Educated Indians.\n\nEnglish language, 14-5, 39-41, 44, 78, 81, 83.\n\nEnglish literature, 14, 23, 73, 179.\n\nEsoteric religion. _See_ Knowledge.\n\nEternal entities, Three, 134, 172.\n\nEurope, Voyages to, 26-9, 45, 48, 101, 127, 149.\n\nEuropeans. _See_ Anglo-Indians.\n\nEvolution of India, v.\n\nExtinction. _See_ Nirvana.\n\n\nFamily ties, Indian, 52, 60.\n\nFamines, 2, 20, 74, 92-3, 94, 98, 106, 215, 232-3.\n\nFarquhar, J.N., 197-8, 209.\n\nFemales. _See_ Education; Infanticide; Women.\n\nFemales fewer than males, 52-4.\n\nFlesh-eating. _See_ Food.\n\nFood forbidden, vi, 18, 26-7, 48, 105, 136-7.\n\nFuture of India, 41, 98, 116, 273-4.\n\n\nGanges, The, 17, 246, 254, 266-7, 272-3.\n\nGirls. _See_ Education.\n\nGod, 134, 150, 154-7, 166-9, 172-5, 178-82, 184, 211, 221-2, 224-5, 230,\n242-5, 250-1.\n\nGod, Fatherhood of, 116-8, 149, 179-82, 228-9, 239-40, 249-50.\n\nGoddesses, 107, 178-9, 216, 227, 251.\n\nGujarat, 82, 178.\n\nGunning Lectures, v. xii.\n\nGuru (religious teacher or spiritual guide), xi, 163-5, 200, 206, 246,\n260.\n\n\nHari, the God, 187, 197.\n\nHarnack, Prof., 209-10, 221.\n\nHastie, Rev. Dr., 48, 231.\n\nHeaven and hell, Ideas of, 224, 228-30. _See_ Hereafter.\n\nHereafter, The, 117, 149, 213-38, 240.\n\nHindu, Hinduism, Definitions of, 24, 26, 66, 69-70, 78, 151-4, 169.\n\nHindu doctrines, 144-69, 200, 228.\n\nHindu exclusiveness, 6, 30, 47, 75, 80, 142, 149.\n\n_Hindu Religion, Catechism of_, 182.\n\n_Hindu Religion, Text-book of_, 38, 142-3, 173-7, 227, 229, 235-7, 260.\n\nHindu religious mood, 7, 180.\n\nHindu reverence for holy men, 165.\n\nHindu Revival, 38, 79, 122, 143, 155, 173, 193, 211, 230, 235, 251.\n\nHindu rites, 158-65, 245-9.\n\nHindu Triad, 70, 176-7, 185-7, 207 255\n\nHinduism, 7, 112-3, 133, 135, 138, 142-3, 145, 159-60, 163, 173, 182,\n200, 202, 206-9, 228-9, 230, 246-7, 255, 260, 263, 266.\n\nHinduism and Christianity. _See_ Christian doctrine.\n\nHinduism regarded as local or racial, 40-1, 114-6.\n\nHinduism, Solidarity of, 17, 23-4, 75.\n\nHindus, 106, 128, 133-4, 140, 142, 144, 150, 178, 180, 204, 242, 250.\n\nHindus and Mahomedans, 3-4, 89, 137, 144, 204.\n\nHindustan, Hindustani, 66-8, 81.\n\n\nIdeas, New. _See_ New.\n\nIdolatry, 544-5, 48, 65, 127, 133, 135, 166-9, 171, 211, 256, 262.\n\nIlbert Bill, 88.\n\nIllusion. _See_ Delusion.\n\nImmortality. _See_ Hereafter.\n\nIncarnation. _See_ Avatar.\n\nIndia, Indians (meaning of), 65-6, 78.\n\nIndia, Ancient, 139-41, 236.\n\nIndia and Britain, xi, 2-4, 78, 91, 95-8, 236-7, 270-4.\n\nIndia and Mahomedans, 145-6.\n\nIndia, Features of, 158, 202, 204, 206, 212-17, 221.\n\nIndia, New. _See_ Educated.\n\nIndia ruled by Indians, 91.\n\nIndian bias, 95-7, 128, 190.\n\nIndividual's rights, The, 21-5.\n\nInfanticide, 53-4.\n\nInterest in India, 1-4, 107, 270-4.\n\n\nJapan, 89, 98, 113, 195.\n\nJesus Christ, 112, 117-9, 149, 184-213, 221-2, 227-8, 234, 240-1, 248,\n253, 255, 258, 264-5, 267-8.\n\nJesus Christ and Chaitanya, 199-200.\n\nJesus Christ and Krishna, 187-9, 198-9.\n\nJesus Christ distinguished from Christians and Christianity, 192-7,\n207-11.\n\nJews, 104, 151, 203, 263.\n\nJoga philosophy (the system which specially instructs devotees), 127-8,\n134.\n\nJogi (a devotee), 185, 212, 228, 237, 240, 257-60, 265.\n\nJohn's Gospel, St., 195, 212, 233.\n\nJuggernath, 263.\n\nJustice, God's, 181, 241, 252.\n\n\nKali, the Goddess, 178, 246.\n\nKalighat, 108, 248.\n\nKarachi, 82, 86.\n\nKarma (works, or rebirth according to one's acts), 262. _See_\nTransmigration.\n\nKayasth (clerk), caste. _See_ Castes.\n\nKeranis (Christians), 137.\n\nKnowledge, Saving, 175, 177, 220, 244, 256-9, 266.\n\nKoran, 145, 182, 203.\n\nKrishna, vi, 96, 186-9, 198-200, 204, 211, 227, 245, 261, 264, 266-7.\n\nKrishnaites, Neo-, 198, 209, 230.\n\nKulin brahmans (Kulin signifies a recognised aristocracy within a\ncaste), 60.\n\n\nLahore, 122, 180, 204, 206.\n\nLaw, Profession of, 42, 62.\n\nLegislative Councils, 73, 84-5.\n\nLife, Economic value of, 216-8, 221.\n\nLondon, 79, 93, 100, 126.\n\nLyall, Sir Alfred, 8, 24, 69, 94, 105, 151, 182, 202, 218-19.\n\n\nMacaulay, 44, 99, 168.\n\nMadras, 2, 46, 54, 69, 81-2, 84, 140-1, 152, 161, 170-1, 196.\n\nMahabharat, 186, 198.\n\nMahatmas (great spirits), 141, 209.\n\nMahomedanism, 36-7, 107-8, 128, 144-7, 169.\n\nMahomedans, 3, 37, 41, 50, 59, 61, 66, 68, 78, 80, 89, 96, 128, 137,\n144-7, 151, 163, 182, 196, 202-4, 206-7, 263.\n\nMahomedans. _See_ Hindus and Mahomedans.\n\nMahrattas, 78, 82.\n\nMalabari (a Parsee reformer), 7, 30, 46, 90, 195-6, 241.\n\nMantra (sacred Sanscrit text), 164, 248.\n\nManu, 143, 235, 246.\n\nMarriage, 22-3, 26, 31-2, 55-61, 104, 135.\n\nMarriage age for girls, 4, 14, 19, 46, 55-8.\n\nMarriage of widows, 19, 26, 31, 45, 55, 57, 63, 135.\n\nMary, mother of Jesus, 195, 205, 207.\n\nMasses, The, 43, 182, 228, 242, 245, 254-5.\n\nMatter, 134, 172-3.\n\nMaya or unreality of the objects of Sense and Consciousness. _See_\nDelusion.\n\nMerchants, British, viii.\n\nMessiahs, Indian, 201-4.\n\nMethodists, 111, 265-6.\n\nMiddle Class, New. _See_ Educated.\n\nMission College, 49, 142, 180, 195.\n\nMissionaries, viii, 52, 54, 62, 99, 106, 123, 124, 158, 167, 187, 189,\n191, 195-7, 202, 217, 232, 237, 241. _See_ Scotland.\n\nMissionary Conference, Decennial, 106, 136.\n\nMoghul empire and emperors, 2-4, 14, 67, 77.\n\nMonier Williams. _See_ Williams.\n\nMonotheism, 107, 117, 126, 127-8, 130, 134, 140, 150, 153-5, 161,\n166-183, 239, 242, 252, 258, 260, 266.\n\nMosque, 3, 13-4, 50.\n\nMother (title of deities), 178-81.\n\nMozumdar, P.C., 30, 195.\n\nMukti, 40-1, 246. _See_ Salvation.\n\nM\u00fcller, Max, 75, 136, 170, 175.\n\nMunicipalities, 86.\n\nMurdoch, Rev. Dr. John, 81, 91, 93, 95, 170, 196.\n\nMutiny, The, 95.\n\n\nNanda-kumar, 25, 42.\n\nNationality, Idea of, 9, 24, 75, 95, 101, 104, 124, 129, 132, 134, 139,\n190, 218.\n\nNative States, 76, 95.\n\nNature, Tyranny of, 214-6.\n\nNaturis, 146-7.\n\nNeo-Platonists a religious parallel to New Indians, 207-12.\n\nNew Era, The, 1-10, 19, 76.\n\nNew ideas, v, vi, ix, xi, 4, 6-10, 15, 19, 49, 76, 165, 236.\n\nNew India. _See_ Educated.\n\nNew Testament. _See_ Bible; John; Paul.\n\nNewspapers. _See_ Press.\n\nNirvana, 226, 230, 255.\n\nNoble, Miss (Sister Nivedita), 22, 31, 32, 75, 153, 175, 185, 228, 243.\n\nNorth-West, The, 82, 172, 241, 250.\n\nNorthern India, 2, 28-9, 37, 66-8, 77, 107, 130.\n\n\nPandit (learned man or teacher), xi, 31, 47, 134, 142, 162.\n\nPantheism, 107, 126-9, 140, 150, 153, 155-7, 166, 169-78, 182-5, 209,\n220, 229, 239, 242-5, 249, 251, 256-8, 260-1.\n\nParameswar, 176-7, 207.\n\nParamhansa, Ramkrishna, 47, 48, 175, 199, 227, 265.\n\nPariahs. _See_ Castes.\n\nParliament of Religions, 30, 48, 128, 152, 227, 243.\n\nParsees, 7, 41, 66, 82, 138, 178.\n\nPatriotism, 95, 116, 130, 132, 134-5, 141, 149, 172, 190. _See_ Indian\nbias.\n\nPaul, Saint, 111, 253, 264.\n\nPessimism, Indian, 212-22, 229, 232.\n\nPhilosophy, Hindu, 47, 70, 128, 172-6, 179, 220.\n\nPhysical changes, 120-2.\n\nPilgrims, 13, 245-6, 262-3.\n\nPlains, The, 2, 66, 130.\n\nPolitical activity, 20, 138.\n\nPolitical criticism, Idea of, 7, 72-4, 76, 78.\n\nPolitical Economy, 99, 216.\n\nPolitical ideas, New, v, 7, 72-102, 104.\n\nPolitical reformers, 83.\n\nPolygamy, 55, 59-61.\n\nPolytheism, 128, 133, 150, 153-6, 166-72, 182, 239, 242, 249, 262.\n\nPoona, 97.\n\nPost Office, 2, 34, 76.\n\nPoverty, Indian, 20, 99. _See_ Famines.\n\nPrajapati, 188-9.\n\nPr[=a]rthan[=a] Sam[=a]jes (Prayer Associations), 122, 130-1, 138, 169,\n171-2, 250-2, 267.\n\nPrayer, 128, 130, 244-5, 250-1.\n\nPress, The Indian, 20, 26, 72, 73, 75, 88-9, 92, 99.\n\nPriesthood, Hereditary, 7, 163, 245.\n\nPriesthood twofold, 163-5.\n\nProfessions, Modern, 42, 144.\n\nProgress, xi, 8, 52, 273.\n\nPublic meetings, 17, 113.\n\nPublic questions, Idea of, 16-7, 72.\n\nPunjab, 36, 47, 84, 130, 132-3, 138, 201, 228, 234.\n\nPurans or later Hindu Scriptures, 137.\n\nPurohit (celebrant priest), 163-5, 260.\n\nPurusha (the first embodiment of the Universal Spirit), 21, 188-9.\n\n\nQadian. _See_ Ahmad.\n\n\nRace feeling, 88-95.\n\nRailways, 2, 17, 18, 76.\n\nRajputana, 54, 58.\n\nRam, 77, 186, 227, 261, 266.\n\nRamabhai, Pandita, 46.\n\nRamayan, The, 77, 186.\n\nRao, Sir T. Madhava, 28, 46.\n\nReactionaries, 20, 46, 149, 243. _See_ Conservatism; Hindu Revival.\n\nReformers. _See_ Political, Religious, Social.\n\nReincarnation. _See_ Transmigration.\n\nReligious ideas, Hindu, 7, 94, 104, 115, 117, 150.\n\nReligious ideas, New, v, 8, 9, 103, 150.\n\nReligious leaders not brahmans, 30-1, 249.\n\nReligious reformers, 22, 45-6, 49.\n\nRenaissance, Indian, 19, 104. _See_ New.\n\nResponsibility, Moral, 156. _See_ Sin.\n\nResurrection, The, 110-1, 126.\n\nRigveda (earliest book of Aryan hymns), 135, 188, 234, 246.\n\nRobertson Lectures, Alexander, v, xi. xii.\n\nRoy, Rammohan, 16, 23, 26, 45, 54-5, 75, 125-7, 157, 167-9, 194, 250,\n267.\n\nRussia, 89, 98.\n\n\nSacred places, 3, 154, 244-8.\n\nSacrifice, 108, 133, 135, 179, 247-9, 262.\n\nSalvation, 40-1, 108, 221, 239-67. _See_ Mukti.\n\nSankarachargya, 153, 244-5.\n\nSanscrit College, Calcutta, 5, 15, 35.\n\nSanscrit learning, 6, 15, 47, 128, 162.\n\nSaraswati (Hindu Goddess of Learning), 192.\n\nSaraswati, Dyanand, 30, 46, 134, 136.\n\nSchools and Caste, 34, 39.\n\nSchools, Secondary, 43.\n\nScotland Mission, Church of, 48, 99, 265.\n\nSea--voyages forbidden. _See_ Europe.\n\nSelf-government, 15, 86.\n\nSelf-torture, 107, 254-55, 257, 261.\n\nSen, Keshub Chunder, 8, 30, 46, 125, 130, 179-80, 192, 195, 252.\n\nSerfdom, Indian, 27-9.\n\nShah, Mahbub, 204-6.\n\nShrines. _See_ Sacred places.\n\nSikhs, 37.\n\nSin, Idea of, 156, 172, 239-53.\n\nSingh, Hakim, 202.\n\nSinnett, A.P., 92, 141.\n\nSiva, the God, 14, 164, 176-7, 185, 246.\n\nSivaji, 96.\n\nSocial ideas, Hindu, 6-7, 21, 50, 104, 105. _See_ Women, Zenana.\n\nSocial ideas, New, v, 8, 21, 39, 98.\n\nSocial reformers, 22, 45-6, 49, 116.\n\nSocial usages rigid, Hindu, 159, 165.\n\nSorabjee, Miss Cornelia, 62.\n\nSoul, The, 134, 172-3, 213-4, 224-5, 227-31, 235-6.\n\nSouth India, 28-9, 33-4, 37, 106, 130, 156, 195, 232, 252.\n\nStudents, 41-5, 60.\n\nSudras. _See_ Castes.\n\nSuttee or Widow-burning (_Sati,_ a chaste woman), v, 4, 45, 54-5, 127.\n\nSwadeshi (boycott of all except _own-country_ products), 97.\n\n\nTantras, 229, 246, 256, 261.\n\nTeachers, Indian, xi.\n\nTennyson, 14, 216, 234, 254.\n\nTheatres, 63.\n\nTheism. _See_ Monotheism.\n\nTheosophists, 30, 38, 92, 122, 132, 138-43, 149, 208-9, 235.\n\nThibet, 89, 141, 196, 204, 209.\n\nTilak, Hon. Mr., 96-7, 99.\n\nTols, 162-3.\n\nTransmigration, 31, 38, 108, 134, 153, 185, 213-4, 220-38, 240, 246,\n258, 260.\n\nTravancore State, 37.\n\nTrinity, 186, 207.\n\n\nUnitarians, 126, 171, 267.\n\nUnited Provinces, 36, 46, 54, 84, 105, 130, 132-3, 145, 172, 228, 234,\n250.\n\nUnity of India, New, 75, 104, 116.\n\nUniversities, 43, 49, 89, 99-100, 216.\n\nUpanishads, 170, 235.\n\n\nVedanta (the specially pantheistic system of Hindu philosophy), 6, 172,\n209, 230, 244.\n\nVedas, 46, 135-7, 140, 210, 234.\n\nVedas do not sanction certain abuses, 47, 135.\n\nViceroy, 79, 85, 114.\n\nVictoria, Queen, 2, 52.\n\nVidyasagar, I.C., 45, 63.\n\nVivekananda, Swami (Narendranath Dutt, B.A.), 30, 47-9, 128, 227, 243-5.\n\nVishnu, the God; or Hari, 176-7, 185-7, 197, 255, 261.\n\nVishnuism, 262.\n\n\nWahabbis, 145.\n\nWestern India, 8, 35, 54, 82, 138, 171, 251.\n\nWidow. _See_ Marriage.\n\nWilliams, Sir M. Monier, 23, 70, 126, 154-5, 164, 170, 188-9, 235, 249,\n262\n\nWilson, Dr. John, 167, 257.\n\nWomen, 151, 237.\n\nWomen, Social position of, 31, 37, 40, 50-64. _See_ Zenana.\n\n\nYoungson, Rev. Dr., 135-6.\n\n\nZenana system (Zenana=the women's portion of a Hindu house), 52, 55,\n61-3, 133.","title":"New Ideas in India During the Nineteenth Century: A Study of Social, Political, and Religious Developments","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":59834}