यत्र काग्रता तत्वाविशेषात् (वेदान्तदर्शन सूत्र ) ४। १ । ११ यत्र वास्य दिने काले वा मनसः सौकये पैकाग्रता भवति तत्रवोपासौत प्राचौ दिक् पूर्वाह्न प्राचीप्रवणादिवत् विशेषाश्रवयात् ( भाषा ।) 12th उत्तरप्रमाणं । प्रजापतेः सकाशादिन्द्रविरोचनाभ्यां प्राप्तोऽपि तुलोपदेशे असुरस्वभावाद्दिरोचनस्तदुपदेशफल न लेभे । तथाहि । सहि प्रान्तहृदय एव विरोचनोऽसुरान् जगाम तेभ्योहैता मुपनिषदं प्रोवाच आत्म वेह महय्य आत्मा परिचर्य आत्मानमेवेह महयन् आत्मानं परिचरन् उभौ लोकाववाप्नोति इमच्चामुच्च ेति । (छान्दोग्योपनिषत् । ) । इन्द्रस्तु क्रमसाधनेन कृतार्थोऽभवत् । यथा । अश्व द्रव रोमाणि विधूय पापं चन्द्र इव राहोर्मुखात् प्रमुच्य धूत्वा शरीर सक्कृतं कृतात्मा इत्यादि (छान्दोग्योपनिषत् । ) ( अनुष्ठानं सम्पूर्ण THE BRAHMUNICAL MAGAZINE OR THE MISSIONARY AND THE BRAHMUN BEING A VINDICATION OF THE HINDOO RELIGION AGAINST THE ATTACKS OF CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES. CALCUTTA 1821. PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. In giving the contents of the following pages to the world in a new edition, I think it necessary to prefix a short explanation of the origin of the controversy, and the manner in which it concluded. The BRAHMUNICAL MAGAZINE was commenced for the purpose of answering the objections against the Hindoo Religion contained in a Bengallee Weekly Newspaper, entitled "SUMMACHAR DURPUN," conducted by some of the most eminent of the Christian Missionaries, and published at Shreerampore. In that paper of the 14th July 1821, a letter was inserted containing certain doubts regarding the Shastrus to which the writer invited any one to favor him with an answer, through the same channel. I accordingly sent a reply in the Bengallee language, to which however the conductors of the work calling for it, refused insertion; and I therefore formed the resolution of publishing the whole controversy with an English translation in a work of my own "the Brahmunical Magazine," now re-printed, which contains all that was written on both sides. In the first number of the MAGAZINE I replied to the arguments they adduced against the Shastrus, or immediate explanations of the "Veds," our original Sacred Books; and in the second I answered the objections urged against the Poorans and Tuntrus, or Historical Illustrations of the Hindoo Mythology, shewing that the doctrines of the former are much more rational than the religion which the Missionaries profess, and that those of the latter, if unreasonable, are not more so than their Christian Faith. To this the Missionaries made a reply in their work entitled the "FRIEND OF INDIA," No. 38, which was immediately answered by me in the 3rd No. of the Magazine; and from the continuation of a regular controversy of this kind, I expected that in a very short time, the truth or fallacy of one or other of our religious systems would be |