Glimpses of Dayananda (Part-10)

*🌺TOWARDS OTHER CHURCHES🌺*
[Glimpses of Dayananda (Part-10)]

✍🏻Author - Pandit Chamupati M.A.
*Presentation - 🌺 ‘Avatsāra’*

The attitude of Dayananda towards what are regarded as non-Aryan faiths has been considered--wrongly, to be sure-as being hostile. His mission has been considered to have been to extirpate all systems, except his own which, it is thought, he wanted to build on the ashes of the former. In more places than one he makes his position on this point clear:

Truth, he was of opinion, could only be one. In religious verities he went for mathematical exactness. Religion, for one thing, deals with infinite entities; even so does higher Mathematics, too. His quarrel was not with the number of churches; they might be multiplied to any figure. As long as they were the various applications of the simple universal principles underlying all religions, applications designed to meet the exigencies of time and clime, he was all in for supporting them. His denunciations - and here he never minced matters-were directed against superstition and practical barbarities in vogue in the name of religion. For men of every inclination his heart was burning with love. He wanted to set all on the right path. All faiths prevalent in his day were, he thought, but so many aberrations from the Veda. His mission was to restore them to their original purity and perfection. What of truth was in them had its origin in the Veda, and hence was dear to him as part of that primeval Scripture which he regarded as the sole repository of Truth undistorted, Wisdom undefiled.

How else could be explained the tolerant and peaceful affection shown invariably to him by those whom the world would regard as his adversaries? Mohammedan fanaticism was in his time at its highest. No Arya Samaj had, by that time, by its incessant propaganda toned down the opposition of its opponents. For the first time, the Mullas and Padres saw their sacrosanct faith being denounced freely and without a hitch. Christians and Moslems have, after the death of Dayananda created trouble a great many times. Who prevented them from doing so in his very face? Was Dayananda milder in his refutation than his followers have been after him? Not a bit. His attacks are in their point keener, in their vehemence bolder. Only the spirit that prompted them was the spirit of love. He never attacked with a view to lay bare the weakness of his opponent. Victory was never his ideal. We have already, in a previous chapter, referred to the triangular controversy held at Chandpur. The statements of all the three parties have been preserved. One point that strikes there throughout the reader is the total absence in them of acerbity. The Maulvi, the Padre, and the Swami, speak out all their minds freely. The theories of the opponents are examined and discussed by the three threadbare, but personalities as also the dignity of the faiths they profess are left scrupulously untouched.

Sir Sayyad Ahmed Khan was among devoted admirers of the Swami. He never lost an opportunity of seeing him daily, whenever his presence in the same town or city made such visits possible. Similar, too, had been the practice of Reverend Scott of Bareilly. So deeply impressed was he with the reverence Scott showed him that the Swami would affectionately call him Bhakta Scott. Once, after the lecture of the Swami was over, it was found that Bhakta Scott had not come to attend it. It was Sunday, and the Bhakta, they said, might be conducting service in his Church. The Swami went all the way to the Church of Scott. The latter, as soon as the news was conveyed to him of the Seer's coming, came out to receive him and requested him to deliver his sermon that day. Man worship was the subject that the swami chose for his sermon. The audience listened spell-bound, and the Father himself had nothing but admiration for the remarks of the Sage. The moral of the incident is obvious.

A similar happening is reported to have taken place during his stay at Lahore. He had been invited to the place by Brahmo Samajists who had hoped to make him a preacher of their principles. Where there were points of difference between their faith and his, they'd thought they would be able to convert him by their superior reasoning. Two lectures did the Sage deliver from the pulpit of the Brahmo Samaj. The first being on the infallibility of the Veda, while in the second he established the doctrine of Transmigration. Now these two were the points on which he was a non-Brahmo. Finding themselves unable to question his reasonings in public, the Brahmos stopped his preaching from their platform. And the Sanatanists were never prepared to admit him into their temples. A Mohammedan physician, Rahim Khan by name, was at last heard saying he was ready to lend him his bungalow for both his residence as well as series of lectures. His hospitality the Swami requited, curiously by making refutation of Islam the subject of his very first discourse at his hoast's. Somebody objected that the Swami's conduct on the occasion was marked by gross ingratitude. Was it so?, asked the Swami of the doctor. The latter smiled, saying that the objection had been not his. The Swami forthwith began: “Cruelty could not daunt him, nor could hospitality allure him. A bungalow was a very low price with which to buy away his truth. His life had been passed in the open, where the azure was his pavilion, bare earth his floor and his bedding. He could revert to those former, natural haunts of his and summon his audiences there. The men of the world were kind in asking him to their houses. He, too, was grateful for the offer, which he meant to repay in his own, his most valuable, coin. He had no money, no wealth, no earthly belongings. He had bargained away his whole life for a glimpse of unalloyed Truth-nơ unprofitable bargain to be sure. That same glimpse was he going to share with the doctor. Was he ungrateful?" The whole audience shook their heads. All were deeply moved.

Such, my reader, was the spirit that underlay the thundering denunciations of Swami Dayananda, which spared neither friend nor foe, and for which every evil, whether of India or of outside, was an evil and every good, whether foreign or native was good. He was free, undaunted, unprejudiced, loving only Truth, condemning only Falsehood. In this he never made a compromise. Yet-below that 'condemnation', there lay flowing unceasingly a stream of love and compassion, love for all those that lived, compassion for those of them that were misguided.

✍🏻Author - Pandit Chamupati M.A.
*Presentation - 🌺 ‘Avatsāra’*

॥ ओ३म् ॥