ADVERTISEMENT. Two publications only have yet appeared with the professed object of defending Hindoo idolatry against the arguments which I have adduced from the Vedant and other sacred authorities, in proof of the erroneousness of that system. To the first, which appeared in a Madras journal, my reply has been for some time before the public. The second, which is the object of the present answer, and is supposed to be the production of a learned Brahmun now residing in Calcutta, was printed both in Bengali and in English; and I have therefore been under the necessity of preparing a reply in both of those languages. That which was intended for the perusal of my countrymen, issued from the press a few weeks ago. For my European readers I have thought it advisable. to make some additional remarks to those contained in the Bengali publication, which I hope will tend to make my arguments more clear and intelligible to them than a bare translation would do. ΙΟ A SECOND DEFENCE, &c. &c. THE learned Brahmun, in his defence of idolatry, thus begins" Let it not be supposed that the following "treatise has been written with a view to refute the "doctrines of those assuming inventors and self-interest"ed moderns," &c. "It is solely with the intention "of expressing the true meaning of these authorities "that this brief treatise has been composed;" and he thus concludes: "The Vedant chundrica, or lunar light "of the Vedant, has thus been made apparent, and 66 thus the glow-worm's light has been eclipsed." It is very much to be feared that, from the perusal of this treatise, called the lunar light of the Vedant, but filled up with satirical fables, † abusive expressions, and contradictory assertions, sometimes admitting monotheism, but at the same time blending with it and defending polytheism, those foreign gentlemen, as well as those natives of this country who are not acquainted with the real tenets of the Vedant, might on a superficial view form a very unfavourable opinion of that theology, which, however, treats with perfect consistency * P. I, 1. 26; P. 2, 1. 17; p. 19 and 20, margin. P. 1; p. 3, l. 9; p. 8. l. 17; p. 38, l. 14; p. 48, 1. 19, &c. &c. of the unity and universality of the Supreme Being, and forbids, positively, treating with contempt or behaving ill towards any creature whatsoever. As to the satire § and abuse, neither my education permits any return by means of similar language, nor does the system of my religion admit even a desire of unbecoming retaliation: situated as I am, I must bear them tranquilly. Besides, a sect of people who are apt to make use of the most foul language, when they feel angry with their supposed deities,* cannot of course be expected, when irritated with contradiction, to pay due attention, unless checked by fear, to the propriety of the use of decent expressions, either in common conversation or in religious controversy. The total sum of the arguments, set forth as far as page 13, of the translation of this treatise (however inconsistent they are with each other), seems intended to prove that faith in the Supreme Being, when unitedwith moral works, leads men to eternal happiness. This doctrine, I am happy to observe, strongly corroborates every assertion that I have made in my translation, a few paragraphs of which I beg leave to repeat here for the satisfaction of my readers. In the abridgment of the Vedant, page 16: "The Vedant shews * Vide the "Apology," passim. As may be observed when at the annual festival of Juggunnath, the car in which he is conveyed happens to be impeded in its progress by any unseen obstacle. In this case, the difficulty is supposed to be occasioned by the malicious opposition of that god, on whom the most gross abuse is liberally bestowed by his devotees. "that moral principle is a part of the adoration of God, “viz. a command over passions and over the external -66 .66 senses of the body, and good acts are declared by the "Ved to be indispensable in the mind's approximation "to God; they should therefore be strictly taken care “of, and attended to both previously and subsequently "to such approximation to the Supreme Being; that "is to say, we should not indulge our evil propensities, "but should endeavour to have entire control over "them reliance on, and self-resignation to the only "true Being, with an aversion to worldly considerations, are included in the good acts above alluded to." In the introduction to the Ishopanishad (page 87): "Under "these impressions, therefore, I have been impelled "to lay before them genuine translations of parts of "their scriptures, which inculcate not only the enlight"ened worship of One God, but the purest principles "of morality." But the learned Brahmun asserts, in two instances, among arguments above noticed, that the worship of a favoured deity and that of an image are also considered to be acts of morality. The absurdity of this assertion will be shown afterwards, in considering the subjects of idol-worship. To English readers, however, it may be proper to remark, that the Sunskrit word which signifies works, is not to be understood in the same sense as that which it implies in Christian theology, when works are opposed to faith. Christians understand by works, acions of moral merit, whereas Hindoos use the term in their theology only to denote religious rites and ceremonies prescribed by Hindoo lawgivers, which are often irreconcilable with. the commonly received maxims of moral duty; as, for |