Religions of South Asia 2.

2 (2008) 195-214 ISSN (print) 1751-2689

doi:10.1558/rosa.v2i2.195 ISSN (online) 1751-2697

A Caitanya Vaiava Response to the

Nineteenth-century Bengal Renaissance
Movement According to the Works of
Bhaktivinoda hkura
Kiyokazu Okita

ABSTRACT: Bhaktivinoda hkura (18381914) was both a Bhadraloka and a Cait-

anya Vaiava reformer. Consequently, he played a unique role in the nineteenth-
century Bengal Renaissance movement. This paper first briefly analyses Western
impact on nineteenth-century Bengal and the responses to it from the Bhad-
ralokas and the traditionalists, in terms of their attitude to six points, namely 1)
ethics/morality, 2) monotheism, 3) the Bhgavata Pura, 4) image worship, 5) the
caste system, and 6) the status of women. Then the paper examines Bhaktivinodas
unique contribution in relation to the above-mentioned six issues.

KEYWORDS: Bengal Renaissance, Bhadraloka, Bhaktivinoda hkura, Caitanya

Vaiavism.

Introduction

My argument in this article is that Bhaktivinoda hkura (18381914), the

nineteenth-century Caitanya Vaiava reformer, occupied a unique position
among the figures that comprised the Bengal Renaissance Movement because
he was both a traditionalist and a reformer.
The profound Western influence brought about through the British pres-
ence in India after 1757 produced the polarity between reformers and tradi-
tionalists among the native people in Bengal during the nineteenth century.
On the one hand, the British occupation fostered an intellectual elite of
natives called the Bhadralokas. They were typically well educated and English
speaking, occupying governmental positions. They sought to reform the reli-
gio-social aspects of traditional popular Hinduism since they were exposed
to the Western-Christian critique of it. On the other hand, the masses that
were relatively free from the Western influence adhered to tradition, and
resisted the Bhadralokas reform movements.
Bhaktivinoda was a traditionalist because he supported a traditional
Puric Hinduism, namely Caitanya Vaiavism. At the same time he was a

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2009, 1 Chelsea Manor Studios, Flood Street, London SW3 5SR.
196 religions of south asia

reformer, since the way he defended his tradition reflected a certain mental-
ity that was typical among the Bhadralokas.
In this article, I will use the concept Renaissance as an analytical tool, as
suggested by David Kopf (Kopf 1969: 28089), rather than the word indicating
specific contents of the Renaissance of Europe. According to Kopf, the clas-
sicistic preoccupation with a golden age is the common factor of all renais-
sances, both European and non-European. He points out that the attempt
to reconstruct a golden age of a classical past functions as a justification for
rejecting the current tradition and provides a reason for modernization. The
immediate past (the Middle Ages) is rejected by the authority of the remote
past (the Classical Ages). In the Indian context, the Bhadralokas sought to
reform Hinduism by rejecting the Puric tradition (the immediate past) by
the authority of the Vedas/the Upaniads (the remote past).
In this article, I will limit my study of the Hindu response to the Western
influence roughly to the Bengal area during the nineteenth century.1
In order to examine the uniqueness of Bhaktivinodas response to the nine-
teenth-century Bengal Renaissance Movement, I will first analyze the elements
of the Western influence in terms of the British orientalists, the Christian
missionaries, and the British government. Secondly, I will analyze the Bhad-
raloka as well as traditional responses to the Western influence, in terms of
their attitude to six points, namely (1) ethics/morality, (2) monotheism, (3) the
Bhgavata Pura, (4) image worship, (5) the caste system, and (6) the status of
women. Finally, I will analyze Bhaktivinodas attitudes to these six points as his
responses both to the Western influence and the Hindu reactions.

Western Influence on Nineteenth-Century Bengal

British Orientalists

British Orientalists, influenced by the Enlightenment and the Romantic view

of India, esteemed Vedic/Upaniadic Hinduism as the pure form of religion.
At the same time, they rejected popular Puric tradition as a corruption of
the pristine Vedic/Upaniadic past (Halbfass 1988: 197). This contrast made
by the Orientalists had a decisive impact on the Bhadralokas perception of
Hindu tradition, motivating them to reconstruct the ideal form of the tradi-
tion based on the Vedic/Upaniadic texts, which was ethically and intellectu-
ally compatible with Christianity.

1. I am aware that, by limiting my study to the area of Bengal, I am cutting some of the impor-
tant thinkers during the nineteenth century in India. Probably the most prominent one
outside Bengal was Daynanda Sarasvat (182483), the founder of the rya Samj. Also,
Francis X. Clooney, SJ in his recent Fin de Sicle lecture at University of Oxford in May, 2004,
pointed out the importance of two thinkers from South India, namely J. M. Nallaswami Pillai
(18641920) and Alkondavilli Govindacharya.

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2009.

 Okita A Caitanya Vaiava Response 197

Christian Missionaries

The predominant view of Christian missionaries in nineteenth-century Bengal

towards Hindu tradition was one of disparagement. Consequently, compared
to the Orientalists, the missionaries were not so familiar with the rich textual
tradition of higher Hinduism. Thus, their critique of Hindu tradition was
based on what was practised rather than its ideas. This critical view of Hindu
practice, together with their theological exclusivism, led the missionaries to
engage in radical social-religious reforms.

The British Government

The attitude of the British Government to the Hindu tradition was similar
to that of the missionaries. Apart from their Christian sense of superiority
to paganism, the British officers were chauvinistic. Being proud of the pros-
perity of the British Empire, they took a condescending attitude toward the
Hindus. Again, based on their observation of popular Hindu practices, they
rejected the Puric tradition as irrational and immoral, and deserving to be
abolished. At the same time, they tried to improve Bengali society through
English education and social-religious reform.

The Bengal Response to the Western Impact

Ethics/Morality

For the Bhadraloka response, I will refer to the leaders of the Brahmo Samj,
namely Ram Mohan Roy, Debendranath Tagore, or Keshub Chandra Sen,
depending on who typified the reformer tendency most clearly. To represent
the traditionalist position, I will refer to Ramakrishna. I employ him as a tra-
ditionalist because he was virtually free from Western impact, and therefore
offered an indigenous response to the Bengal Renaissance.
The ethical influence of Christianity upon the Bhadralokas was exempli-
fied in Ram Mohan Roy, the father of modern India (Lipner 2001: 15). For
him, the first step to re-construct an ethically defensible Hinduism was to
reject popular Puric worship as morally unacceptable. As a second step,
Roy tried to re-interpret Hinduism in the light of the high morality of the
Vedic scriptures such as the Vedas, the Upaniads, and the Vedntic texts
(p.15). Roys motivation was to show that the Vedic/Upaniadic texts did not
contain immoral religious activities.
In contrast, Ramakrishna accepted the evolved whole of Hindu tradition,
and did not differentiate the pure Vedic/Upaniadic Hinduism from the
degraded Puric and Tantric tradition. As a result, he did not think that the

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2009.

198 religions of south asia

ethical reform of the tradition was necessary. His emphasis was on personal
realization of God, and according to him, all paths lead to the same goal.
Therefore, even left-hand Tantra2 practices were acceptable as long as the
practitioner could realize God.

Monotheism

Again, following the Orientalists, the Bhadralokas claimed that the true
Hinduism found in the Vedic/Upaniadic texts was actually monotheism,
and rejected the polytheistic Puric tradition as a later degradation. In
this regard, although their reconstructed Hindu tradition was largely based
on akaras Advaita Vednta, it should be observed that their concept of
brahman was theistic/dualistic rather than monistic (Halbfass 1988: 208).
Ramakrishna clearly contrasted with the Bhadralokas in his view of
ultimate reality. Whereas the Bhadralokas maintained monotheistic dualism,
Ramakrishna accepted monism based on his religious experience. Where
the Bhadralokas rejected the polytheistic worship of the Puric deities,
he accepted the Puric deities as manifestations of sagua-brahman. For
Ramakrishna, all faiths led to the same goal, nirgua-brahman, and Puric/
Tantric traditions were as valid as Christianity and other religions. Conse-
quently, he did not see any necessity for reform.

The Bhgavata Pura

Due to Western influence, the Bhadraloka reformers rejected the Bhgavata

as superstitious, polytheistic, and idolatrous. Roy attacked the Bhgavata in
terms of its authority and its ascription to God of a particular name and form.
Roys discussion typically exhibited the Renaissance-mentality in that he
attacked the validity of the Bhgavata (immediate past, Puric tradition) with
the authority of Advaita Vednta (remote past, Vedic/ Upaniadic tradition).
In contrast to the Bhadralokas, Ramakrishna not only accepted the
Bhgavata, but highly praised the gops3 love for Ka described in it. For
Ramakrishna, the most important thing is the realization of God, or brahman,
and any paths were accepted as long as they fostered the cause. He criticized
the Bhadralokas rejection of the Bhgavata. When Bankim Chandra, one of
the prominent Bhadralokas, wrote Kacarita accepting only the Ka of
the Bhagavad Gt and rejecting the Ka of the Bhgavata, Ramakrishna said,
Who can really be a Hindu who accepts Ka but not the Gops? (Halbfass
1988: 244).

2. Left-hand Tantra involves extramarital sexual intercourse as a spiritual practice.

3. Cowherd girls in Vndvana.

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2009.

 Okita A Caitanya Vaiava Response 199

Image Worship

Ram Mohan Roys strong rejection of image worship reflected the Semitic reli-
gions condemnation of idolatry as well as their egalitarian view of humanity.
Although akaras Advaita philosophy does accommodate the worship of
God with form (sagua-brahman) for spiritually less-qualified people, Roy
argues that the worship without image must be practised by all. According to
Halbfass, Roys egalitarian claim that everyone should adhere to the higher
worship of formless brahman violates akaras doctrine of qualification
(adhikra), an essentially hierarchical view of human nature (Halbfass 1988:
212).
Contrary to Roy, Ramakrishna fully accepted the pedagogical accommoda-
tion of image worship in akaras system. For Ramakrishna, the most impor-
tant thing is to develop love of God, and whatever meansincluding image
worshipthat serve that end should be accepted. Thus he fully accepted the
notion of adhikra, the idea that people adopt different practices according to
their spiritual qualification.

The Caste System

The Bhadralokas accepted the Western egalitarian critique of the caste

system, and they sought social reform. Keshub Chandra Sen, coming from a
non-brhmaa family, was probably the most active in this regard. Being influ-
enced by missionaries, he was convinced that social reform was the duty of
every theist (Farquhar 1919: 42). He advocated complete abolition of the caste
system, and promoted inter-caste marriage.
Ramakrishna was not at all interested in social reform. He saw it as just
one form of attachment to the world, and a lack of freedom for the divine
(Halbfass 1988: 227). Meeting with Keshub and the Brhmos, Ramakrishna
taught that the realization of God must take precedence over all different
kinds of philanthropic activities (Ramakrishna 1984: 142).

The Status of Women

The Bhadraloka reformers were against practices such as sat, child marriage,
and polygamy. Roys arguments against sat reflected Christian egalitarianism.
Pro-sat advocates claimed that a widow should be burnt with her deceased
husband because women are less virtuous by nature, and therefore, they are
prone to be misled without their husband. Roy argued against these advo-
cates view of the nature of women. Observing the wives of Kulna brhmaas
virtuously enduring their deprived situation, Roy claimed that women are as

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2009.

200 religions of south asia

virtuous as men, if not more (Roy 1947: 127). This egalitarian view of women
was a result of his interaction with the Serampore missionaries (Farquhar
1919: 33). His agitation against sat saw its fruition in Lord Bentincks order in
1829, forbidding its practice (p. 33).
As in the case of the caste system, Keshub was the most active among the
Brahmo leaders regarding the status of women. His biggest accomplishment
in this regard was legalizing the Brhmo Marriage Act in 1872, in which he
legalized widow marriage and inter-caste marriage, and established a new
form of marriage which excluded child marriage and polygamy.4
Ramakrishna, in contrast, saw women as the object of male lust that had
to be renounced in order to attain the realization of God. However, as we have
seen, he was not interested in social reform.
Ramakrishna frequently used the expression women and gold, indicating
that lust and greed were obstacles to be removed (Ramakrishna 1984: 288). His
view of women was spiritually oriented and did not seem to recognize that
there were any social dimensions to the issue.

Bhaktivinoda hkuras Response to the

Nineteenth-Century Bengal Renaissance Movement

The Life of Bhaktivinoda hkura5

Bhaktivinodas life may be largely divided into two periods: in the first half of
his life he was a typical Bhadraloka, and later he became a traditionalist.
Until the age of 30, Bhaktivinodas life was a classical example of a Bhad-
raloka. Born in 1838 as Kedarnath Dutt, he grew up as a son of a rich Kyastha
family. He started his English learning at the age of five and at 14 he left his
village and moved to Calcutta. He stayed with his maternal uncle Kashi Prasad
Ghosh, the editor of an English journal popular among the Bhadralokas. Bhak-
tivinoda continued his education at the Hindu College and became an asso-
ciate of prominent Bhadralokas such as Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar, Keshub
Chandra Sen, Michael Madhusudan Datta, Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay,
and Sisir Kumar Ghosh. He was 18 when he left Calcutta and took up teaching
jobs in rural Orissa and Bengal. He acquired a government post when he was
28, and two years later he became a deputy magistrate. He retired aged 56.
His Bhadraloka life saw a dramatic change at the age of 30, when he read
the Bhgavata and Caitanya-caritmta.6 He immediately became a follower of
the Caitanya tradition. Beginning with his famous speech The Bhagavat: Its

4. Farquhar writes that the 1872 Act abolished child marriage and polygamy (1919: 49).
However, the Act did not attempt to do this, and only established a new form of marriage
with its own rules (Killingley 2003: 521).
5. For a detailed account, see Dasa 1999, Chs 24.
6. A hagiography of Ka Caitanya (14861533), the inaugurator of Caitanya Vaiavism.

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2009.

 Okita A Caitanya Vaiava Response 201

Philosophy, Ethics and Its Theology, which was given when he was 31, he
actively promoted the Caitanya tradition in public. He was officially initiated
into the tradition 12 years later by Bipin Bihari Goswami, and was given the
title Bhaktivinoda at the age of 48. While remaining as a householder and
as a governmental servant, Bhaktivinoda wrote, edited, translated, and pub-
lished more than 100 books on Caitanya Vaiavism until his death in 1914.
His major works include five theological works: r Ka-sahit (1880),
Caitanya-ikmta (1886) Jaiva-dharma (1893), Hari-nma-cintmani (1900), Tattva-
stra (1893) and Tattva-viveka (1893).

Bhaktivinoda hkuras Response

As a Bhadraloka follower of the Caitanya tradition, Bhaktivinoda sought to

establish the authenticity of the tradition against criticism made by the West-
erners and the Bhadraloka reformers, which resulted in his unique response
to the six issues we have discussed above.

Ethics/Morality
Bhaktivinoda was unique in his response to the Christian moral critique of
the Puric tradition. He was a traditionalist in a sense that he supported
Puric tradition. At the same time, he was also a reformer because, like other
Bhadraloka leaders, he did try to purify the tradition by rejecting ethically
unacceptable religious practices.
Bhaktivinoda defended the Caitanya tradition, which is based on the
Bhgavata, claiming that immoral practices were a result of misinterpretation
of the tradition, and in theory there was nothing that supported corrupt prac-
tices in the tradition. Thus, regarding the so-called immoral behavior of Ka
described in the Bhgavata, Bhaktivinoda emphasized that conjugal relation
between Ka and the gops in the Bhgavata must be differentiated from the
relations between men and women in the material world.
In the eighth chapter of Jaiva-dharma, Bhaktivinoda explains the difference
between spiritual rasa7 described in the Bhgavata and mundane rasa in the
material world. According to Bhaktivinoda, there are three levels of rasa: (1)
Vaikuha (spiritual) rasawhich is on the level of spirit, and based on the rela-
tionship between the soul and Ka; (2) Svargya (heavenly) rasawhich is on
the level of emotions in the mind, exemplified in the emotional attachment
between men and women; (3) Prthiva (material) rasawhich is on the level
of material senses, based on the relation between senses and sense objects
(hkura 1995a: 67). In the constitutional state, human beings are pure spirit
souls without material mind and body (p. 65). Therefore, the original rasa is the

7. The term rasa means the taste arising from the contact between the enjoyer and the object
of enjoyment.

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2009.

202 religions of south asia

one happening on the level of the soul, and other rasas on the level of emotion
and material senses are simply reflections of the original spiritual rasa. Bhak-
tivinoda says that the Bhgavata describes Vaikuha-rasa only, which is about
the spiritual attraction between Ka, God, and individual souls. It must be
differentiated from Svargya-rasa and Prthiva rasa, which are about emotional
and physical attachment between male and female. Therefore, Bhaktivinoda
was strongly opposed to the idea that the Bhgavata promotes immoral activi-
ties between men and women:
[H]ow is it possible that a spiritualist of the school of Vysa teaching the best
principles of theism in the whole of the Bhgavatacould have forced upon the
belief of men that the sensual connection between men with certain females is
the highest object of worship! This is impossible, dear critic! Vysa could not have
taught the common vairg to set up an kha (a place of worship) with a number
of females! Vysa, who could teach us repeatedly in the whole of Bhgavata that
sensual pleasures are momentary like the pleasures of rubbing the itching hand
and that mans highest duty is to have spiritual love with God, could never have
prescribed the worship of pleasures.
(hkura 1999: 277)

After explaining the theoretical purity of the Bhgavata, Bhaktivinoda, in

his attempt to re-construct pure Vaiavism, rejected popular religious and
spiritual practices that were ethically unacceptable to the Bhadralokas and
the Westerners. Thus he showed his reformer mentality. First, Bhaktivinoda
differentiated self-claimed Vaiavas into orthodox and heretics. He then
identified groups that practised sexual rituals as heretical, and rejected them
as non-Vaiava (avaiava) (Fuller 2003: 19293):
r Caitanya Mahprabhu considered Himself a member of the Madhva-samp
radya. We therefore belong to that sect. The philosophies of the bulas, sins,
nes, daraveas, karttbhajs, and atibis [attibaris] are those of nondevotees
[avaiava]. Their instructions and activities are most incoherent. Many people
lose respect in Vaiavism by discussing their philosophies. Actually Vaiavism
cannot be held responsible for the defects of all those hypocrites.
(hkura 1995a: 45)

Indeed, when Bhaktivinoda was in Orissa, as a deputy magistrate, he im-

prisoned the leaders of heretic Vaiavas called Attibaris who were accused
of abusing the wives of others (hkura 1871: 1719). According to Jason D.
Fuller, as a result of his differentiating orthodox from unorthodox, Bhak-
tivinoda effectively excluded maybe three-quarters or more of the professed
Vaiava population from the ranks of true Vaiavas (Fuller 2003: 193).
As one of the Bhadralokas, Bhaktivinoda was clearly aware of the Christian
moral critique of Caitanya tradition, and did try to purify it by rejecting mor-
ally unacceptable practices.
Bhaktivinodas attempt to re-construct the pure form of tradition and
his rejection of unethical practices of popular tradition reflected the reform

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2009.

 Okita A Caitanya Vaiava Response 203

tendency of the Bhadralokas. In this sense, he was different from Ramakrishna

who accepted even antinomian left-hand Tantric practices for the sake of
spiritual realization. At the same time, he was also different from other Bhad-
ralokas in that he saw the pure form of tradition in the Puric texts, espe-
cially the Bhgavata.

Monotheism
Regarding the issue of monotheism, Bhaktivinoda made an interesting case
by claiming hierarchical inclusivism based on Ka-monotheism. He was
clearly aware of the Christian critiques of Hindu tradition, and like reform-
ers, advocated monotheism, denouncing the monistic conclusions of Advaita
philosophy. He claimed the superiority of his tradition over Christianity and
other religions too. But unlike reformers, the only true God for him was Ka
of the Bhgavata, not the nirgua brahman of Advaita Vednta. Indeed, Bhak-
tivinoda claimed Ka is parabrahman, the basis of, and therefore higher
than nirgua brahman. Also, instead of rejecting Puric deities entirely like
the reformers did, Bhaktivinoda accepted them as lesser manifestations of
Ka. In this respect, he may be described as a traditionalist. At the same
time, however, the way Bhaktivinoda accommodated the deities differed from
the view of Ramakrishna in that the former made a hierarchy among the
deities whereas the latter did not. In this regard, Bhaktivinodas acceptance
of the traditional hierarchical view of human nature should be noted since
he thought people worshipped different deities according to their spiritual
qualification (adhikra)
In the following part, I will first describe Bhaktivinodas absolute claim
for the Caitanya Vaiava tradition. I will then examine how he arranged
different traditionsboth Indian and non-Indianin a hierarchy in relation
to Ka-monotheism. Finally, I will look at Bhaktivinodas view on Advaita
Vednta and Christianity since these two traditions played significant roles
during the Bengal Renaissance.
In his work Tattva-viveka (hkura 1995b), Bhaktivinoda claims the absolute
value of the Caitanya tradition, and explains its relation to other traditions
based on an epistemological argument. According to Bhaktivinoda, there are
two types of logic: mira-yukti (impure logic) and uddha-yukti (pure logic).
Mira-yukti is applicable only for attaining knowledge regarding the material
world, but spiritual knowledge can be gained only through uddha-yukti.
According to Bhaktivinoda, knowledge in general is attained through sense
perception (pratyaka) and inference (anumna), based on logic or reasoning.
When a soul is self-realized and free from matter, it possesses correct spiritual
knowledge gained through spiritual senses and spiritual logic. However, when
it falls down to the material world, the soul is given a subtle material body,
which consists of mind (manas), intelligence (buddhi), and ego (ahakra),
and a gross material body, which consists of the five material elements. Once
the soul is imprisoned in its body, it starts accumulating information of the

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2009.

204 religions of south asia

external material world through material senses. Then, it attains knowledge

by analysing accumulated data with material logic (mira-yukti). However,
since this knowledge is based on material sense perception and material logic,
it is unfit for attaining spiritual knowledge.
Bhaktivinoda explains that a variety of religious traditions arise when
human beings try to seek the ultimate truth based on material sense percep-
tion and material logic. Since they are imperfect by nature, these traditions
can never be flawless. However, when human beings attain spiritual sense
and spiritual logic, they understand that there exists one perfect path and all
other traditions are lesser manifestations of it.
Bhaktivinoda then identifies that one perfect tradition with Caitanya
Vaiavism, claiming that it is perfect because it is not based on mira-yukti
but on the Bhgavata, which is the manifestation of uddha-yukti, or spiritual
perception of the great sage Vysa. In this regard, he says, Of all the names
and forms of the Lord current in the world, the form of Bhagavn men-
tioned in rmad Bhgavatam [the Bhgavata] is the most pure. That is why the
Paramahasa-sahit [the highest text] is known as the Bhgavata (hkura
1998: 184).
Now, let us observe more closely Bhaktivinodas view of other traditions
in relation to Caitanya Vaiavism. Bhaktivinoda explains that Vaiava-
dharma8 manifests in different ways depending on the spiritual qualifica-
tion (adhikra) of people. Thus, in r Ka-sahit, Bhaktivinoda describes
a hierarchal manifestation of religions, starting from the worship of Kl/
Durg and culminating in the worship of Ka of the Bhgavata in mdhurya-
rasa (hkura 1998: 7).
First, he describes hierarchy among kta-dharma, Saura-dharma, Gapatya-
dharma, aiva-dharma, and Vaiava-dharma. The description of each dharma
is as follows:

(1) kta-dharmathe preliminary stage. The followers enquire about

the truth of the material world and worship the goddess Durg
since she is the predominating deity of the material world. This
dharma is dominated by the quality (gua) of ignorance (tamas)
(2) Saura-dharmathe followers realize the superiority of heat over
dull matter and worship the sun god Srya as the source of heat.
This dharma is dominated by the quality of ignorance and passion
(tamas-rajas)
(3) Gapatya-dharmathe followers realize that animal conscious-
ness is to be superior to heat and worship Gaea. This dharma is
dominated by the quality of passion (rajas)
(4) aiva-dharmathe followers realize the superiority of human con-
sciousness over animal consciousness and worship iva as the

8. I am using the terms religion, philosophy, and dharma interchangeably.

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2009.

 Okita A Caitanya Vaiava Response 205

pure-consciousness of living entities. This dharma is dominated by

the quality of goodness-passion (sattva-rajas)
(5) Vaiava-dharmathe followers realize the existence of the supreme
consciousness that is beyond human consciousness and worship
Viu as the supreme consciousness. This dharma is dominated by
the quality of pure-goodness (uddha-sattva).
Here we may point out that Bhaktivinoda accommodates the Puric deities
in a hierarchical way.
Bhaktivinoda adds to this hierarchy that Buddhism, Jainism and Advaita
Vednta are similar to aiva-dharma, and Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are
similar to Vaiava-dharma. After describing the development from kta-
dharma to Vaiava-dharma, Bhaktivinoda goes on to describe the hierarchy
within Vaiava-dharma. According to Bhaktivinoda, there are two types of
worship of Viu: the worship of Nryaa and the worship of Ka. In the
worship of Nryaa, the Lords majestic (aivarya) aspect is prevalent. There-
fore, the jvas relations with the Lord are limited to either passive adoration
(nta) or servitude (dsya-rasa). In the worship of Ka, however, the Lords
sweetness (mdhurya) is prevalent. Therefore, five kinds of relation with the
Lord, namely, passive adoration (nta), servitude (dsya), friendship (sakhya),
parental love (vtsalya), and conjugal love (mdhurya), are available to the
soul (hkura 1998: 55). Since there is more variety to the exchanges one can
experience with Ka, the worship of Ka is considered higher than that
of Nryaa.
Finally, Bhaktivinoda describes the hierarchy among the above-mentioned
five kinds of rasas. Among them, nta-rasa is the lowest and mdhurya-rasa
is the highest. Bhaktivinoda refers to representatives for each rasa: nta-
rasathe four Kumras, Nrada, and iva; dsya-rasaHanumn and Moses;
sakhya-rasaUddhava, Arjuna, and Mohammed; vtsalya-rasaNanda, Yaod,
and Jesus Christ; mdhurya-rasaRdh and Krishna Caitanya. Interestingly,
among five rasas, Bhaktivinoda classifies Judaism (Moses) as dsya-rasa, Islam
(Muhammad) as sakhya-rasa, and Christianity (Jesus Christ) as vtsalya-rasa.
Then he predicts that since whatever rasa is first found in India then goes
to the West, mdhurya-rasa, the highest rasa exhibited by Caitanya, will also
spread to the West in the future (hkura 1998: 55). Thus, Bhaktivinoda sees
the worship of Ka in mdhurya-rasa as the highest, and at the same time,
other varieties of traditions as lesser manifestations of it.9
Among religions and philosophies mentioned so far, akaras Vednta
and Christianity were particularly influential among the Bhadralokas. There-
fore, we will now examine how Bhaktivinoda claimed the superiority of his
tradition over these traditions.
It may be observed that Bhaktivinodas view on akaras philosophy
shares some similarities with the reformers view in that both re-interpret

9. Here, Bhaktivinoda was using Rpa Gosvms rasa theory (Haberman 2003).

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2009.

206 religions of south asia

it in a dualistic way, which is more convenient for claiming theism. In short,

Bhaktivinoda claims that akara actually accepts theistic dualism, and that
the monistic conclusion (myvda) usually attributed to him is indeed a later
degradation.
According to Bhaktivinoda, the true purpose of akaras philosophy was
to revive the authority of the Vedas by replacing the voidism (nyavda) of
Buddhism with the brahmavda of Advaita philosophy (hkura 2001: 23).
Bhaktivinoda says that since other teachers could build Vaiava-dharma on
the foundation laid by akara, akara can be seen as the pioneer of Vaiava-
dharma. He claims that akara described the oneness of the souls and God
in the sense that they are both spirit, distinct from the matter, but that he
never accepted the ontological identity between them. However, the modern
Advaitins misconstrued its meaning and claimed the ontological oneness of
spiritual entities (p. 25). According to Bhaktivinoda, this idea of ontological
oneness of all cannot be accepted as an authentic conclusion, since it denies
the eternality of love of God, rejecting distinctions between the lover, the
beloved, and the process of love (p. 23).
Furthermore, Bhaktivinoda asserts that even if we see some validity in
the monistic philosophy of Advaitins, nirgua brahman cannot be accepted as
the ultimate conclusion. In this regard, based on the Bhgavata 1.2.1110 that
explains the relation between nirgua brahman, paramtman, and bhagavn,
Bhaktivinoda says that actually bhagavn is parabrahman and the basis of
nirgua brahman and paramtman (hkura 2001: 65). Although Bhaktivinoda
does not entirely dismiss Advaita philosophy, he certainly sees it as a lesser
manifestation of his own tradition.
Bhaktivinodas view of Christianity also reveals his hierarchical under-
standing of religions. In his short essay To Love God, Bhaktivinoda explains a
teaching of Jesus, Love God with all thy heart, with all thy mind, with all thy
soul, and with all thy strength, and love man as thy brother from Caitanya
Vaiava perspective, and claims the superiority of the Caitanya tradition
over Christianity.
Bhaktivinoda explains Christs above precept in terms of the rasa theory.
He says that first, when a soul learns to love God with his heart, he attains
nta-rasa. Second, when he learns to love God with his mind, he attains
dsya-rasa. Third, when he learns to love God with his soul, he attains sakhya-
rasa. According to Bhaktivinoda, to love God with all ones strength means
to actively work for God, which is a general description of devotion (bhakti).
Finally, at the fourth stage, when the soul learns to love all men as brothers
and God as their common Father, he reaches vtsalya-rasa (hkura 1871: 9).
In this way, Bhaktivinoda describes how Christianity proceeds from nta-
rasa to vtsalya-rasa. However, Bhaktivinoda points out that Christianity does

10. vadanti tat tattva-vidas tattva yaj jnam advayam | brahmeti paramtmeti bhagavn ity
abdyate ||

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2009.

 Okita A Caitanya Vaiava Response 207

not discuss mdhurya-rasa, which is the highest among all the rasas and which
is beyond the reach of ordinary theists (hkura 1871: 9). Thus, he claims the
superiority of Caitanya Vaiavism over Christianity, although he sees these
two as very similar in nature.
Thus, regarding theological issues, Bhaktivinoda exhibits a reformer men-
tality in that he claims the validity of Hindu monotheism over Christian mono-
theism and rejects the monistic conclusion. At the same time, he also shows
a traditionalist mentality in that he accepts the hierarchal view of human
nature and accommodates the Puric deities.

The Bhgavata Pura

Bhaktivinoda showed a unique attitude toward the Bhgavata, exhibiting both
reformer and traditionalist tendencies. He was a traditionalist as he defended
the Bhgavata and criticized reformers for rejecting it. At the same time, he
was also a reformer. He tried to accommodate modern empirical scholarship
by adjusting the literal interpretation of scriptural information on the phe-
nomenal world, and thereby sought to present the Caitanya tradition in a way
more intelligible to the Western-influenced Bhadralokas.
Based on an evolutionary view of humanity, Bhaktivinoda accuses the
Bhadraloka reformers who entirely dismiss the Puric tradition. For Bhak-
tivinoda, the Puric tradition of his day is not a result of a degraded Vedic
culture, but is a culmination of human progress. Therefore, Bhaktivinoda
claims that a true reformer should develop the present tradition rather than
reject it:
He is the best critic, who can show the further development of an old thought; but
a mere denouncer is the enemy of progress and consequently of Nature. Begin
anew, says the critic, because the old masonry does not answer at present. Let
the old author be buried because his time is gone. These are shallow expressions
The true critic, on the other hand, advises us to preserve what we have already
obtained, and to adjust our race from that point where we have arrived in the heat
of our progress The great reformers will always assert that they have come out
not to destroy the old law, but to fulfil it The Bhgavatahas suffered from the
imprudent conduct of useless readers and stupid critics.
(hkura 1999: 26061).

As an example of mere denouncer, Bhaktivinoda attacks Ram Mohan Roy:

Rammohun Roy, the founder of the sect of Brahmonism, did not think it worth his
while to study this ornament of the religious library [the Bhgavata]but then, to
speak the truth, he would have done much more if he had commenced his work
of reformation from the point where the last reformer in India [Caitanya] left
it His thought, mighty though it was, unfortunately branched like the Ranigunj
line of the railway, from the barren station of akarcrya, and did not attempt
to be an extension from the Delhi Terminus of the great Bhgavata expounder of
Nadia [Caitanya].
(hkura 1999: 26162)

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2009.

208 religions of south asia

Bhaktivinoda clearly rejects the reformers Renaissance-mentalitytheir

return-to-the-Vedic-past programmebecause it goes against the evolu-
tion of human progress. For Bhaktivinoda, tradition is to be developed and
adjusted, not to be denounced.
Bhaktivinodas attempt to adjust and develop the tradition can be observed
in his r Ka-sahit. In this work Bhaktivinoda tries to make the Caitanya
tradition more accessible to the Bhadralokas by presenting scriptural infor-
mation about the phenomenal world in such a way that it fits contemporary
empirical scholarship:
To Bhaktivinoda, matters of phenomenal knowledge (i.e., Puranic history and
cosmology) are particularly amenable to rational analysis, even if transcendence
(i.e., Krishna, bhakti, etc.) is not [In] Krishna-samhita, thousands of yuga-cycles
of Prajapatis and Manus are compressed to conform to an Indian history of some
6,000 years complete with migrating Aryans, and Mogul and British rule. The same
time frame is linked to a progressive intellectual history encompassing all major
texts, assigning the Bhagavata, for example to an anonymous ninth-century Dra-
vidian origin. Krishna and his abodes supremacy are rationally established, his
incarnations tied to human evolution, his lila framed within a discussion of the
limitations of human language, and his destruction of demons related metaphori-
cally to the removal of corresponding obstacles to devotion.
(Herzig and Valpey 2004: 419)

Indeed, in the conclusion of his work, Bhaktivinoda shows his concern for
modern readers (the Bhadralokas):
We have covered all relevant topics in the verses of this sahit, but we have not
used the method that modern scholars use in considering those topics. Therefore
I fear that many people will reject r Ka-sahit as an old-fashioned book. I
am in dilemma. If I would have used the modern process when I composed the
verses, then the ancient scholars would have certainly disregarded the book. For
this reason, I have composed the main book according to the ancient method, and
I have written the Introduction and Conclusion according to the modern. In this
way, I have tried to satisfy both classes of people.
(hkura 1998: 161)

Bhaktivinoda is unique because unlike other Bhadraloka reformers, he does

not share the Renaissance-mentality, and supports the Bhgavata. But at
the same time, he differs from Ramakrishna in that he was aware of modern
rational empirical critiques of the Puric texts and tries to accommodate
them by adjusting his scriptural interpretation.

Image Worship
Defending the validity of image worship, Bhaktivinodas response in this
regard was entirely traditional. However, his understanding of image worship
differed from that of Ramakrishna in that Bhaktivinoda adhered to the
dualism of Madhva Vednta whereas Ramakrishna followed the monism of

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2009.

 Okita A Caitanya Vaiava Response 209

akara Vednta. Indeed, following Madhva, Bhaktivinoda strongly rejected

Advaitin understanding of image worship.
In the eleventh chapter of Jaiva-dharma, Bhaktivinoda explains that the
worship of the eternal form of God is not idolatry since an image (mrti) is
not the matter with an imaginary shape but God Himself manifested in the
material elements.
According to Bhaktivinoda, Ka is God who possesses six kinds of quali-
ties in full (opulent, powerful, auspicious, beautiful, knowledgeable, and
unattached) (hkura 2001: 264), and His quality as all-powerful includes His
inconceivable potency (acintya-akti) through which He manifests His eternal
spiritual form (sac-cid-nanda-vigraha). In this regard, Bhaktivinoda refutes
Roys argument,11 explaining that regardless of His omnipresence, God can
have a form due to his inconceivable potency (p. 264).
Having established that God has an eternal spiritual form, Bhaktivi-
noda explains the logic of Gods manifestation as a temple image in this
material world, employing the concept of adhikra. According to Bhaktivi-
noda, the eternal form of God is first revealed to the heart of saintly people
(mahjanas) and then reflected to the material world (hkura 2001: 267).
Thus the nature of the form of the image is completely spiritual, and not at
all material. However, people see the image differently according to their
spiritual qualification (adhikra). Thus advanced devotees (uttama-adhikrs)
always conceive the image as spiritual and fully conscious (cinmaya), middle-
class devotees (madhyama-adhikrs) as endowed with perception and aware-
ness (manomaya), and neophytes (kaniha-adhikrs) as material (jaamaya)
(p.267).
According to Bhaktivinoda, image worship is especially beneficial to the
neophytes who cannot perceive God directly. Without having the image,
they are forced to meditate on an imaginary form of God in their mind,
which is material, and thus commit a subtle form of idolatry. Bhaktivi-
noda says that the worship of the image is the foundation of religion for all
humanity because it provides an opportunity to worship the actual form
of God (hkura 2001: 266). For the neophyte follower, the image may look
like an idol. However, by making spiritual advancement through image
worship, a devotee can eventually perceive the eternal spiritual form of God
directly.
Now, Bhaktivinoda clearly distinguishes the worship of the eternal form of
God in the Caitanya tradition from the pacopsana system of Advaita Vednta,
which is employed by Ramakrishna.
As we have seen, Advaita Vednta does accommodate the worship of deities
as sagua-brahman, the lower manifestation of nirgua-brahman. In this system,
the forms of deities are temporal, ultimately dissolving into formless brahman.
According to Bhaktivinoda, this worship of temporal forms of sagua-brahman

11. Roy claimed that God cannot have any form due to his omnipresent nature.

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2009.

210 religions of south asia

should be differentiated from the worship of Ka because Ka is parabrah-

man, the basis of nirgua brahman, and His form is eternal.12
Indeed, Bhaktivinoda rejects the worship based on Advaita Vednta as
idolatry. For Bhaktivinoda, the forms of deities in pacopsana system are
not real images but idols because their forms are only the imagination of
the mind and not the eternal form of parabrahman, Ka. Bhaktivinoda also
points out that even the meditation on the formless brahman in the mind is
material since one is merely imagining the all-pervading brahman in the form
of the sky, which is material. It is limited in time too (only for the duration
of ones meditation) (hkura 2001: 270). Therefore, Bhaktivinoda concludes
that whether a practitioner worships images in the pacopsana system or
worships the formless brahman, he is bound to commit idolatry as long as he
follows Advaita Vednta and rejects the eternal form of God.
Although Bhaktivinoda was a traditionalist regarding image worship, his
position clearly differed from that of Ramakrishna owing to their two differ-
ent theological backgrounds.

The Caste System

Regarding the caste system, Bhaktivinodas stance was rather traditional in
that he supported the varrama system, the traditional hierarchal social
system based on texts such as Manu-smti, and emphasized spiritual realiza-
tion more than social reform. At the same time, however, he was aware of the
Bhadraloka critique, and thus attacked the caste system.
Bhaktivinoda accepts the varrama system because it is designed in such
a way that people can make gradual spiritual advancement to the ultimate
goal of life, love of Ka (prema):
In order to maintain social order, the ryans divided society into four castes and
four social orders [varrama]. If the social system is protected, then good associa-
tion and discussion will nourish peoples spiritual lives. Therefore, the varrama
system should be accepted in all respects. By this arrangement, it becomes possible
to gradually attain love for Ka. The main purpose of this arrangement is to cul-
tivate spiritual life, love for Ka.
(hkura 2003: 263)

According to Bhaktivinoda, anyone can perform devotional service to Ka,

and thereby develop spiritual qualification (adhikra) regardless of ones
vara.13 However, this universal availability of bhakti does not lead Bhaktivi-
noda to reject the varrama-dharma system. Bhaktivinoda says that a devotee
should not violate it because the qualification for performing spiritual activi-

12. Hierarchy from the lower to the higher stage according to Bhaktivinoda: sagua brahman
(the temporal form) nirgua brahman (formless) parabrahman/bhagavn (the eternal form).
13. The four divisions of class in the varrama system, namely, brhmaa, katriya, vaiya, and
dra.

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2009.

 Okita A Caitanya Vaiava Response 211

ties (paramrthika) has nothing to do with material qualification (vyvahrika).

A person who has attained spiritual qualification does not necessarily qualify
himself materially (hkura 2001: 112). Therefore, as long as he is staying in
society as a ghastha, he should follow the norm of the society (varrama-
dharma). This means, for instance, that at the societal level, a non-brahmaa
Vaiava should remain subordinate to a non-Vaiava brahmaa, even
though the former is spiritually more qualified than the latter (pp. 11232).
Although he supports the varrama system, he criticizes the modern
caste system as a perversion of the original varrama system. According
to Bhaktivinoda, the varas of people should be decided according to their
quality (gua) and not by their birth (jti).14 He explains that the system col-
lapsed due to the degradation of the brhmaas and other leaders of the society
who decided the varas of the children in their community (hkura 1998:
17475). In fact, opposing the current caste system, he rejects the wearing
of the sacred thread by Brahmanas as a sign of superiority (Hopkins 1989:
49), which reminds us of the Bhadraloka reformers such as Debendranath and
Keshub.
Thus, Bhaktivinoda exhibited both traditionalist and reformer aspects
by supporting the varrama system and rejecting the contemporary caste
system. Ultimately, however, his stance was close to Ramakrishnaa tradi-
tionalistin that his emphasis was on spiritual realization and he was not
involved in social reform. Thus, Shukavak Dasa describes:
Bhaktivinodas practice of Caitanyas teachings was far more spiritual and less
socially and politically activist. Bhaktivinoda and Sisir Kumar15 jointly edited a
Vaiava periodical entitled Viu-priy-patrik, until Bhaktivinoda withdrew on
the grounds that his esteemed friend was mixing too many secular and topical
issues into the journal.
(Dasa 1999: 5)

The Status of Women

As in the case of the caste system, Bhaktivinodas stance in this regard was
primarily traditional. Yet, again, as a Bhadraloka, he was concerned about the
deprived status of women.
Bhaktivinodas spiritually oriented, and therefore traditional view of
women can be observed in his instruction regarding association (saga) with
women (str). Like Ramakrishna, Bhaktivinoda sees women as the object of
lust, which is to be renounced for the sake of spiritual advancement. In this
respect, Bhaktivinoda repeatedly prohibits practitioners to associate with
women (str-saga) and with non-devotees (avaiava) who are attached to
women (str-sags):

14. Cf. Bhagavad-gt 4.13: ctur-varya may sa gua-karma-vibhgaa | tasya kartram api
m viddhy akartram avyayam ||
15. A famous Bhadraloka journalist.

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2009.

212 religions of south asia

When there is no marital relationship and one converses with a women with evil
intentions, it is called str-saga. Such saga is sinful and is detrimental to devo-
tional service.

Those who are attached to associating with women are called str-sags. The
materialists who are fond of gold and women, the sahajiys, buls, sins, and other
so-called religiously minded persons who are greedy for women, as well as the
woman-loving tntrics, are all examples of str-sags. The main point is that any
men who are attached to womanly association are str-sags. By all means the
Vaiavas should give up the company of such stri-sags. This is r Caitanya
Mahprabhus order.
(hkura 2002: 21112)

Similar to Ramakrishna, here Bhaktivinoda also says that women and

gold, signifying lust and greed, have to be renounced because they hinder
devotional service. Thus Bhaktivinoda displays a spiritual approach to the
issue of women.
At the same time, however, Bhaktivinoda also shares the more socially-
oriented Bhadraloka view of the issue. In his English essay The Marriage
System of Bengal, Bhaktivinoda opposes child marriage and polygamy.
According to Bhaktivinoda, marriage should be celebrated after a girls
puberty:
Marriage among the Hindus in former times was generally celebrated after the age
of puberty. Unless a girl arrived at maturity, she was not entitled to marry; for says,
the Hindu Shastra [scripture], a girl should not take a husband until she can appre-
ciate her duties to him. Verily, a girl cannot face an idea of her duties and obliga-
tion to her lord, unless she arrives at a mature age.
(hkura 1871: 4647)

Also, like Ram Mohan Roy, Bhaktivinoda points out the evil of polygamy prac-
tised by the Kulna brhmaas:
Polygamy is the bane of native societya curse that enslaves many of the softer
sex. The Kulina Brahmanas are inseparable companions of polygamy. In their
society, it is as firmly advocated as is American slavery in the Southern States.
The Kulina women are no better off than the African black. But an African black
has many advocates around: he has a voice in the Anti-Slavery League, whilst a
Kulina Brahmani has no zealous friend to tell of her sorrows and relieve them
The Legislature ought to hear the cries of the people as far as their interest is con-
cerned. Reform in everything is sought for and as the first movement, we desire
the removal of polygamy by an enactment.
(hkura 1871: 52)

Here, it is clearly shown that Bhaktivinoda shares with the Bhadraloka

reformers a more socially-oriented understanding of the exploited situation
of women.

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2009.

 Okita A Caitanya Vaiava Response 213

Even though he was a deputy magistrate, however, Bhaktivinoda did not

join the Bhadralokas anti-polygamy/anti-child-marriage movement. Again,
as we have seen in his dealing with the caste system, Bhaktivinoda ulti-
mately took a spiritually-oriented traditionalist stance regarding the status
of women.

Conclusion

In this article, we have examined a unique stance taken by Bhaktivinoda

hkura, a Caitanya Vaiava reformer, in the context of the nineteenth-cen-
tury Bengal Renaissance movement.
Bhaktivinoda was unique because he was a reformer and a traditionalist
simultaneously. Let us summarize Bhaktivinodas views briefly, according to
six points we have examined above (p. 196).
Bhaktivinoda was a reformer because he: tried to reconstruct Hindu tradi-
tion which was ethically and theologically comparable with or even superior
to Christianity (1 and 2); adjusted scriptural interpretation in accordance with
modern scholarship (3); recognized the need for social reform (5 and 6).
At the same time, he was also a traditionalist because he: defended Puric
tradition, its texts as well as practices (1 through 4); showed a hierarchical
view of human nature (2, 4, and 5); taught the primacy of spiritual realization
over social reform (5 and 6). In the light of the above, it is clear that Bhak-
tivinoda makes an interesting case among the figures of nineteenth-century
Bengal.

KIYOKAZU OKITA is a doctoral candidate at the Faculty of Theology, Univer-

sity of Oxford. His doctoral research focuses on Baladeva Vidybhaas phi-
losophy and its relation to other Vedntic schools. He holds a BA in Religious
Studies from International Christian University (Tokyo) and a Masters degree
in the Study of Religion from Oxford.
Oxford Centre for Hindu Studies, 13-15 Magdalen St, Oxford OX1 3AE; kiyokazu.
okita@googlemail.com

References

Dasa, Shukavak N. 1999. Hindu Encounter with Modernity: Kedarnath Datta Bhaktivinoda, Vaisnava
Theologian. Los Angeles: Sanskrit Religions Institute.
Farquhar, J. N. 1919. Modern Religious Movements in India: Hartford-Lamson Lectures on the Religions of
the World. New York: Macmillan.
Fuller, Jason D. 2003. Re-Membering the Tradition: Bhaktivinoda hkura's Sajjanaosan [sic, for
Sajjanatoa] and the Construction of a Middle-Class Vaiava Sampradya in Nineteenth-
Century Bengal. In Copley, Antony (ed.), Hinduism in Public and Private: Reform, Hindutva, Gender,
and Sampraday: 173-210. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2009.

214 religions of south asia

Haberman, David L. (trans.). 2003. The Bhaktirasmtasindhu of Rpa Gosvmin. New Delhi: Indira
Gandhi National Centre for the Arts.
Halbfass, Wilhelm. 1988. India and Europe: An Essay in Understanding. Albany, NY: State University
of New York Press.
Herzig, Thomas, and Valpey, Kenneth. 2004. Re-Visioning ISKCON: Constructive Theologizing
for Reform and Renewal. In Bryant, Edwin F., and Ekstrand, Maria L. (eds.), The Hare Krishna
Movement: The Postcharismatic Fate of a Religious Transplant: 416-30. New York: Columbia Univer-
sity Press.
Hopkins, Thomas J. 1989. The Social and Religious Background for Transmission of Gaudiya Vais-
navism to the West. In Bromley, David G., and Shinn,Larry D. (ed.), Krishna Consciousness in the
West: 35-54. London: Bucknell University Press.
Killingley, Dermot. 2003. Modernity, Reform and Revival. In The Blackwell Companion to Hinduism:
509-25. Ed. Gavin Flood; Oxford: Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9780470998694.ch25
Kopf, David. 1969. British Orientalism and the Bengal Renaissance: The Dynamics of Indian Moderniza-
tion, 17731835. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Lipner, Julius. 2001. Brahmabandhab Upadhyay: The Life and Thought of a Revolutionary. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Ramakrishna. 1984. The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna. New York: Ramakrishna-Vivekananda Center.
Roy, Rammohun. 1947. The English Works of Raja Rammohun Roy, Part III. Calcutta: Sadharan
Brahmo Samaj.
hkura, Bhaktivinoda. 1871. Bhaktivinoda Thakuras English Writings: A Collection of Poems, Essays,
Articles, and Reviews. Trans. Dasaratha Suta Dasa; Georgia: Nectar Books.
1995a. Prema Pradpa. Vridavana: Vrajraj Press.
1995b. rla Bhaktivinoda hkura's Tattva-Viveka: Discerning the Truth. Trans. Kusakratha dasa;
Alachua: The Krsna Institute.
1998. r Ka-Samhit. Trans. Bhumipati Dsa; New Delhi: Vrajraj Press.
1999. The Bhagavat: Its Philosophy, Its Ethics and Its Theology. In Dasa, Hindu Encounter with
Modernity: 259-82.
2001. Jaiva-Dharma: The Essential Function of the Soul. Trans. rpda Bhaktivednta Araya
Mahrja; New Delhi: Gaudiya Vedanta Publications.
2002. r Bhaktivinoda V Vaibhva: Sambandha. Trans. Bhumipati dsa; Mathura: Touchstone
Media.
2003. r Bhaktivinoda V Vaibhva: Abhidheya and Prayojana. Trans. Bhumipati dsa; Mathura:
Touchstone Media.

Equinox Publishing Ltd 2009.