Revivalism and Militant Nationalism | Maharashtra State PSC (MPSC): Preparation - MPSC (Maharastra) PDF Download

 Page 1


REVIVALISM AND MILITANT
NATIONALISM
 INTRODUCTION :
You may have by now reaslised that by the middle of the 19th
century , India in general, and Maharashtra in particular, was in a state of
decline.  When a society is in such a state it opens the way to three
possible attitudes towards it revolt, reform or revivalism. These three
attitudes, we ought to remember, are very rarely present as three
watertight compartments, they often overlap and intermingle.  But they
present  three distinct  programmes of thought and action. The first rebels
against the present tradional and outdated structure and outlook of the
society.  The aim of the revolt is to replace the old and traditional with
new ideas and values. The reformer, like the rebel, feels uneasy about
the existing state of affairs in the society and recognises the need for a
change. However, unlike the rebel, he does not break with the past. He
Page 2


REVIVALISM AND MILITANT
NATIONALISM
 INTRODUCTION :
You may have by now reaslised that by the middle of the 19th
century , India in general, and Maharashtra in particular, was in a state of
decline.  When a society is in such a state it opens the way to three
possible attitudes towards it revolt, reform or revivalism. These three
attitudes, we ought to remember, are very rarely present as three
watertight compartments, they often overlap and intermingle.  But they
present  three distinct  programmes of thought and action. The first rebels
against the present tradional and outdated structure and outlook of the
society.  The aim of the revolt is to replace the old and traditional with
new ideas and values. The reformer, like the rebel, feels uneasy about
the existing state of affairs in the society and recognises the need for a
change. However, unlike the rebel, he does not break with the past. He
tries to reform the society from within by using new ideas and introducing
new values. Though he is always a potential rebel, in general he seeks
to work within the framework of the existing society by clearing  the
cobwebs.  For instance, few liberal intellectuals of the nineteenth and
twentieth centuries were uprooted from their own traditional cultural milieu;
they maintained much of their traditional family atmosphere, preserved
their attachment to their ancient poet-saints and often they were inspired
by the heroes of the past and mythology. M.G .Ranade symbolized, the
typical reformer; both progressive and conservative.
The revivalist on the other hand distinguishes himself from the other
two by his fanatical, attachment to the past and concerning himself with
the preservation of the ancient customs, traditions, social and religious
Institutions unchanged. He is inspired by things that belonged to the
past; he is reluctant to accept new ideas  and values and even opposes
them violently. A revialist may be progressive in certain fields, but he
uses antiquity, and not reason, as criterion to judge progress. However,
revivalism is not completely opposed to progress as such and should
not be confused with traditionalism i.e. “uncreative clinging to the past”.
It may, as an attitude, express itself in matters concerning religion, social
life and even politics.  In short, we may define revivalism as an anxious
desire to preserve a vital contact with one’s past, without which the
individuality of a society cannot be preserved. For example. Lokmanya
Bal Gangadhar Tliak based his social philosophy, ethics and his attitude
to social changes on Vedantic philosophy and the traditions of
Manarashtra. He was an orthodox traditionalist; yet he advocated social
reform and renaissance of Indian culture. He was the greatest nationalist
of India that Maharashtra ever produced.
 VISHNUBUVA BRAHMACHARI (1825-1871) :
In Maharastra revivalism started as a counter-action to Christian
influence and secular Western influences. Many Hindus felt that the foreign
influence was threatening their religious and social institutions.  The first
great revivalist in modern Maharashtra was Vishnu Bhikaji Gokhale,
who became famous as Vishnubuva Brahmachari (1825-1871). Born
in a poor Konkanastha Chitpavan Brahmin family, he received scanty
formal education and at the age of sixteen, joined government service.
But he had religious bent of mind, and “familiarized himself with books
like ‘Vivekasindhu’ Jnaneshvari, Eknathi, Bhagvata….” etc. At the age
of 22, he began preaching the vedic religion at Pandharpur, and soon
began lecturing in different parts of Maharashtra. In Bombay , he accepted
the challenge of the missionaries through lectures, debates and journals.
From 1856 to 1871, Brahmachari carried on his activities of counter
Page 3


REVIVALISM AND MILITANT
NATIONALISM
 INTRODUCTION :
You may have by now reaslised that by the middle of the 19th
century , India in general, and Maharashtra in particular, was in a state of
decline.  When a society is in such a state it opens the way to three
possible attitudes towards it revolt, reform or revivalism. These three
attitudes, we ought to remember, are very rarely present as three
watertight compartments, they often overlap and intermingle.  But they
present  three distinct  programmes of thought and action. The first rebels
against the present tradional and outdated structure and outlook of the
society.  The aim of the revolt is to replace the old and traditional with
new ideas and values. The reformer, like the rebel, feels uneasy about
the existing state of affairs in the society and recognises the need for a
change. However, unlike the rebel, he does not break with the past. He
tries to reform the society from within by using new ideas and introducing
new values. Though he is always a potential rebel, in general he seeks
to work within the framework of the existing society by clearing  the
cobwebs.  For instance, few liberal intellectuals of the nineteenth and
twentieth centuries were uprooted from their own traditional cultural milieu;
they maintained much of their traditional family atmosphere, preserved
their attachment to their ancient poet-saints and often they were inspired
by the heroes of the past and mythology. M.G .Ranade symbolized, the
typical reformer; both progressive and conservative.
The revivalist on the other hand distinguishes himself from the other
two by his fanatical, attachment to the past and concerning himself with
the preservation of the ancient customs, traditions, social and religious
Institutions unchanged. He is inspired by things that belonged to the
past; he is reluctant to accept new ideas  and values and even opposes
them violently. A revialist may be progressive in certain fields, but he
uses antiquity, and not reason, as criterion to judge progress. However,
revivalism is not completely opposed to progress as such and should
not be confused with traditionalism i.e. “uncreative clinging to the past”.
It may, as an attitude, express itself in matters concerning religion, social
life and even politics.  In short, we may define revivalism as an anxious
desire to preserve a vital contact with one’s past, without which the
individuality of a society cannot be preserved. For example. Lokmanya
Bal Gangadhar Tliak based his social philosophy, ethics and his attitude
to social changes on Vedantic philosophy and the traditions of
Manarashtra. He was an orthodox traditionalist; yet he advocated social
reform and renaissance of Indian culture. He was the greatest nationalist
of India that Maharashtra ever produced.
 VISHNUBUVA BRAHMACHARI (1825-1871) :
In Maharastra revivalism started as a counter-action to Christian
influence and secular Western influences. Many Hindus felt that the foreign
influence was threatening their religious and social institutions.  The first
great revivalist in modern Maharashtra was Vishnu Bhikaji Gokhale,
who became famous as Vishnubuva Brahmachari (1825-1871). Born
in a poor Konkanastha Chitpavan Brahmin family, he received scanty
formal education and at the age of sixteen, joined government service.
But he had religious bent of mind, and “familiarized himself with books
like ‘Vivekasindhu’ Jnaneshvari, Eknathi, Bhagvata….” etc. At the age
of 22, he began preaching the vedic religion at Pandharpur, and soon
began lecturing in different parts of Maharashtra. In Bombay , he accepted
the challenge of the missionaries through lectures, debates and journals.
From 1856 to 1871, Brahmachari carried on his activities of counter
attacking the Christian missionary propaganda against Hindu customs
and traditions. It is interesting to note that in 1857, he entered into a 6
month long debate (15th Jan. till June 1857) with the Christian
missionaries, on the Chowpatty sea shore.  Hindus, Muslims, and
Christians attended the debates in large numbers. This weekly debate
had such a deep impact on the people that by the middle of 1857, the
government of Bombay, fearing violent explosion of communal passions,
ordered Vishnubuva Brahmachari not to continue it any longer.
Later, he travelled through the length and breadth of India preaching
the superiority and infallibility of the Vedas. According to him, “Veda
means knowledge. It is a part of God himself. He believed that the Vedic
religion leads man on to the moral and spiritual heights. According to
him, the Vedic times were not only far advanced in spiritual insight, but
in scientific and technical knowledge as well, including chemistry and
physics. He said that in ancient times, people all over the world followed
the Vedic religion and received their religious instructions through the
Sanskrit language. Brahmachari did not have a good opinion of other
religions; as for Christianity, he held its teaching as ‘faith created by the
hypocrisy of barbarians.
Vishnubuva Brahmachari was very conservative in his attitude
towards some aspects of Brahmanical Hinduism, such as Vedic
ceremonies, vegetarianism, belief in rebirth, and so on. For him, the
great difference between Hindus, on the one hand and the Jews,
Christians and Muslims, on the other, consisted in the belief of the latter
religion that only human beings have the Soul, not animals; their rejection
of the Idea of re-birth, and their acceptance of a general judgment at the
end of time.
Surprisingly, inspite of his fanatical conformity with traditional ideas,
he showed a remarkable sense of independence of mind in rejecting a
number of traditional ideas and customs. In his view, caste should be
determined by a person’s qualities, and not by his birth.  He favoured
female education, and upheld the right of girls to be consulted in the
choice of their husbands, though he wanted them married before the
age of twelve. He also opposed the custom of Sati and favoured widow
marriage,
He was a prolific writer. Among Vishnubuva Brahmachari’s famous
work was Vedokta Dharmaprakasha (The principle of Hindu Religion),
published in 1864. In a very interesting essay on, “Beneficial Government”
(Marathi) he put forward ideas such as “One home and all citizens as
one family”. He held the view that it is the duty of the king to ensure the
happiness of all his Subjects, and it was the duty of the subjects to obey
Page 4


REVIVALISM AND MILITANT
NATIONALISM
 INTRODUCTION :
You may have by now reaslised that by the middle of the 19th
century , India in general, and Maharashtra in particular, was in a state of
decline.  When a society is in such a state it opens the way to three
possible attitudes towards it revolt, reform or revivalism. These three
attitudes, we ought to remember, are very rarely present as three
watertight compartments, they often overlap and intermingle.  But they
present  three distinct  programmes of thought and action. The first rebels
against the present tradional and outdated structure and outlook of the
society.  The aim of the revolt is to replace the old and traditional with
new ideas and values. The reformer, like the rebel, feels uneasy about
the existing state of affairs in the society and recognises the need for a
change. However, unlike the rebel, he does not break with the past. He
tries to reform the society from within by using new ideas and introducing
new values. Though he is always a potential rebel, in general he seeks
to work within the framework of the existing society by clearing  the
cobwebs.  For instance, few liberal intellectuals of the nineteenth and
twentieth centuries were uprooted from their own traditional cultural milieu;
they maintained much of their traditional family atmosphere, preserved
their attachment to their ancient poet-saints and often they were inspired
by the heroes of the past and mythology. M.G .Ranade symbolized, the
typical reformer; both progressive and conservative.
The revivalist on the other hand distinguishes himself from the other
two by his fanatical, attachment to the past and concerning himself with
the preservation of the ancient customs, traditions, social and religious
Institutions unchanged. He is inspired by things that belonged to the
past; he is reluctant to accept new ideas  and values and even opposes
them violently. A revialist may be progressive in certain fields, but he
uses antiquity, and not reason, as criterion to judge progress. However,
revivalism is not completely opposed to progress as such and should
not be confused with traditionalism i.e. “uncreative clinging to the past”.
It may, as an attitude, express itself in matters concerning religion, social
life and even politics.  In short, we may define revivalism as an anxious
desire to preserve a vital contact with one’s past, without which the
individuality of a society cannot be preserved. For example. Lokmanya
Bal Gangadhar Tliak based his social philosophy, ethics and his attitude
to social changes on Vedantic philosophy and the traditions of
Manarashtra. He was an orthodox traditionalist; yet he advocated social
reform and renaissance of Indian culture. He was the greatest nationalist
of India that Maharashtra ever produced.
 VISHNUBUVA BRAHMACHARI (1825-1871) :
In Maharastra revivalism started as a counter-action to Christian
influence and secular Western influences. Many Hindus felt that the foreign
influence was threatening their religious and social institutions.  The first
great revivalist in modern Maharashtra was Vishnu Bhikaji Gokhale,
who became famous as Vishnubuva Brahmachari (1825-1871). Born
in a poor Konkanastha Chitpavan Brahmin family, he received scanty
formal education and at the age of sixteen, joined government service.
But he had religious bent of mind, and “familiarized himself with books
like ‘Vivekasindhu’ Jnaneshvari, Eknathi, Bhagvata….” etc. At the age
of 22, he began preaching the vedic religion at Pandharpur, and soon
began lecturing in different parts of Maharashtra. In Bombay , he accepted
the challenge of the missionaries through lectures, debates and journals.
From 1856 to 1871, Brahmachari carried on his activities of counter
attacking the Christian missionary propaganda against Hindu customs
and traditions. It is interesting to note that in 1857, he entered into a 6
month long debate (15th Jan. till June 1857) with the Christian
missionaries, on the Chowpatty sea shore.  Hindus, Muslims, and
Christians attended the debates in large numbers. This weekly debate
had such a deep impact on the people that by the middle of 1857, the
government of Bombay, fearing violent explosion of communal passions,
ordered Vishnubuva Brahmachari not to continue it any longer.
Later, he travelled through the length and breadth of India preaching
the superiority and infallibility of the Vedas. According to him, “Veda
means knowledge. It is a part of God himself. He believed that the Vedic
religion leads man on to the moral and spiritual heights. According to
him, the Vedic times were not only far advanced in spiritual insight, but
in scientific and technical knowledge as well, including chemistry and
physics. He said that in ancient times, people all over the world followed
the Vedic religion and received their religious instructions through the
Sanskrit language. Brahmachari did not have a good opinion of other
religions; as for Christianity, he held its teaching as ‘faith created by the
hypocrisy of barbarians.
Vishnubuva Brahmachari was very conservative in his attitude
towards some aspects of Brahmanical Hinduism, such as Vedic
ceremonies, vegetarianism, belief in rebirth, and so on. For him, the
great difference between Hindus, on the one hand and the Jews,
Christians and Muslims, on the other, consisted in the belief of the latter
religion that only human beings have the Soul, not animals; their rejection
of the Idea of re-birth, and their acceptance of a general judgment at the
end of time.
Surprisingly, inspite of his fanatical conformity with traditional ideas,
he showed a remarkable sense of independence of mind in rejecting a
number of traditional ideas and customs. In his view, caste should be
determined by a person’s qualities, and not by his birth.  He favoured
female education, and upheld the right of girls to be consulted in the
choice of their husbands, though he wanted them married before the
age of twelve. He also opposed the custom of Sati and favoured widow
marriage,
He was a prolific writer. Among Vishnubuva Brahmachari’s famous
work was Vedokta Dharmaprakasha (The principle of Hindu Religion),
published in 1864. In a very interesting essay on, “Beneficial Government”
(Marathi) he put forward ideas such as “One home and all citizens as
one family”. He held the view that it is the duty of the king to ensure the
happiness of all his Subjects, and it was the duty of the subjects to obey
the Kings laws. ‘Further, since, according to him, all citizens belonged
to one family, and all land and its produce should be held in common
every person should work ‘for the community, and in exchange the
community must meet his needs.
In social matters, he was in favour of civil marriages and favoured
divorce. In his view, children should remain with their parents upto the
age of five, and then be handed over to the State. He wanted work to be
assigned to each individual according to the person’s capacity, and
grouped the individuals into five castes, corresponding to their
professions. He wanted the state to take care of the old and employ
them as heads of each work- department. This body could work as a
kind of parliament.
Brahmachari envisaged a moneyless economy, and a society
without charitable institutions. He was optimistic that the character of
the people which had degenerated due to corrupted ethics of the law of
many, would improve and all coercion and fraud would come to end. He
was optimistic that the caste system would disappear, and people would
live in peace and happiness without enmity. In 1869, he got 10,000
copies of the essay printed and sent to prominent persons in India as
well as to members of British Parliament, ministers, Queen Victoria and
Prince Edward of  England.
It was indeed surprising that a semi-literate and conservative
person like Vishnubuva Brahmachari should put forward notions of
“Utopian Socialism”. Perhaps, as Lederle has pointed out, ‘‘he may
have derived ideas from Vedantic Monism and the writings of
Jnaneshvara, the great thirteenth century commentator of the
Bhagvadgita’’ . To quote Leaderle, “In developing this philosophy of
society (socialism) based on Vedantic Monism Vishnubuva Brahmachari
thus remained true to a strong trend in the Indian traditions.”
Vishnubuva Brahmachari was a pioneer of the revivalist tendencies
toward social and religious movement. He had full faith in the superiority
of the Indian culture over the Western civilisation and therefore, he
preached that the Indians should look back to the Vedic times for
inspiration and guidance. His social idea was that of human brotherhood
and a welfare state. RC.Majumdar describes him as “a utopian socialist
who based his social ideas on Vedic religion, and may be compared to
the Christian Socialists of Europe.” According to one writer, “He was
socially equalitarian religiously Vedantic, politically socialist, mentally
liberal and independent, morally bold and confident and humanitarian.”
Vishnubuva Brahmachari, though an ardent Hindu, defiantly
challenged Brahmin leadership of his time. In so doing, he created “an
Page 5


REVIVALISM AND MILITANT
NATIONALISM
 INTRODUCTION :
You may have by now reaslised that by the middle of the 19th
century , India in general, and Maharashtra in particular, was in a state of
decline.  When a society is in such a state it opens the way to three
possible attitudes towards it revolt, reform or revivalism. These three
attitudes, we ought to remember, are very rarely present as three
watertight compartments, they often overlap and intermingle.  But they
present  three distinct  programmes of thought and action. The first rebels
against the present tradional and outdated structure and outlook of the
society.  The aim of the revolt is to replace the old and traditional with
new ideas and values. The reformer, like the rebel, feels uneasy about
the existing state of affairs in the society and recognises the need for a
change. However, unlike the rebel, he does not break with the past. He
tries to reform the society from within by using new ideas and introducing
new values. Though he is always a potential rebel, in general he seeks
to work within the framework of the existing society by clearing  the
cobwebs.  For instance, few liberal intellectuals of the nineteenth and
twentieth centuries were uprooted from their own traditional cultural milieu;
they maintained much of their traditional family atmosphere, preserved
their attachment to their ancient poet-saints and often they were inspired
by the heroes of the past and mythology. M.G .Ranade symbolized, the
typical reformer; both progressive and conservative.
The revivalist on the other hand distinguishes himself from the other
two by his fanatical, attachment to the past and concerning himself with
the preservation of the ancient customs, traditions, social and religious
Institutions unchanged. He is inspired by things that belonged to the
past; he is reluctant to accept new ideas  and values and even opposes
them violently. A revialist may be progressive in certain fields, but he
uses antiquity, and not reason, as criterion to judge progress. However,
revivalism is not completely opposed to progress as such and should
not be confused with traditionalism i.e. “uncreative clinging to the past”.
It may, as an attitude, express itself in matters concerning religion, social
life and even politics.  In short, we may define revivalism as an anxious
desire to preserve a vital contact with one’s past, without which the
individuality of a society cannot be preserved. For example. Lokmanya
Bal Gangadhar Tliak based his social philosophy, ethics and his attitude
to social changes on Vedantic philosophy and the traditions of
Manarashtra. He was an orthodox traditionalist; yet he advocated social
reform and renaissance of Indian culture. He was the greatest nationalist
of India that Maharashtra ever produced.
 VISHNUBUVA BRAHMACHARI (1825-1871) :
In Maharastra revivalism started as a counter-action to Christian
influence and secular Western influences. Many Hindus felt that the foreign
influence was threatening their religious and social institutions.  The first
great revivalist in modern Maharashtra was Vishnu Bhikaji Gokhale,
who became famous as Vishnubuva Brahmachari (1825-1871). Born
in a poor Konkanastha Chitpavan Brahmin family, he received scanty
formal education and at the age of sixteen, joined government service.
But he had religious bent of mind, and “familiarized himself with books
like ‘Vivekasindhu’ Jnaneshvari, Eknathi, Bhagvata….” etc. At the age
of 22, he began preaching the vedic religion at Pandharpur, and soon
began lecturing in different parts of Maharashtra. In Bombay , he accepted
the challenge of the missionaries through lectures, debates and journals.
From 1856 to 1871, Brahmachari carried on his activities of counter
attacking the Christian missionary propaganda against Hindu customs
and traditions. It is interesting to note that in 1857, he entered into a 6
month long debate (15th Jan. till June 1857) with the Christian
missionaries, on the Chowpatty sea shore.  Hindus, Muslims, and
Christians attended the debates in large numbers. This weekly debate
had such a deep impact on the people that by the middle of 1857, the
government of Bombay, fearing violent explosion of communal passions,
ordered Vishnubuva Brahmachari not to continue it any longer.
Later, he travelled through the length and breadth of India preaching
the superiority and infallibility of the Vedas. According to him, “Veda
means knowledge. It is a part of God himself. He believed that the Vedic
religion leads man on to the moral and spiritual heights. According to
him, the Vedic times were not only far advanced in spiritual insight, but
in scientific and technical knowledge as well, including chemistry and
physics. He said that in ancient times, people all over the world followed
the Vedic religion and received their religious instructions through the
Sanskrit language. Brahmachari did not have a good opinion of other
religions; as for Christianity, he held its teaching as ‘faith created by the
hypocrisy of barbarians.
Vishnubuva Brahmachari was very conservative in his attitude
towards some aspects of Brahmanical Hinduism, such as Vedic
ceremonies, vegetarianism, belief in rebirth, and so on. For him, the
great difference between Hindus, on the one hand and the Jews,
Christians and Muslims, on the other, consisted in the belief of the latter
religion that only human beings have the Soul, not animals; their rejection
of the Idea of re-birth, and their acceptance of a general judgment at the
end of time.
Surprisingly, inspite of his fanatical conformity with traditional ideas,
he showed a remarkable sense of independence of mind in rejecting a
number of traditional ideas and customs. In his view, caste should be
determined by a person’s qualities, and not by his birth.  He favoured
female education, and upheld the right of girls to be consulted in the
choice of their husbands, though he wanted them married before the
age of twelve. He also opposed the custom of Sati and favoured widow
marriage,
He was a prolific writer. Among Vishnubuva Brahmachari’s famous
work was Vedokta Dharmaprakasha (The principle of Hindu Religion),
published in 1864. In a very interesting essay on, “Beneficial Government”
(Marathi) he put forward ideas such as “One home and all citizens as
one family”. He held the view that it is the duty of the king to ensure the
happiness of all his Subjects, and it was the duty of the subjects to obey
the Kings laws. ‘Further, since, according to him, all citizens belonged
to one family, and all land and its produce should be held in common
every person should work ‘for the community, and in exchange the
community must meet his needs.
In social matters, he was in favour of civil marriages and favoured
divorce. In his view, children should remain with their parents upto the
age of five, and then be handed over to the State. He wanted work to be
assigned to each individual according to the person’s capacity, and
grouped the individuals into five castes, corresponding to their
professions. He wanted the state to take care of the old and employ
them as heads of each work- department. This body could work as a
kind of parliament.
Brahmachari envisaged a moneyless economy, and a society
without charitable institutions. He was optimistic that the character of
the people which had degenerated due to corrupted ethics of the law of
many, would improve and all coercion and fraud would come to end. He
was optimistic that the caste system would disappear, and people would
live in peace and happiness without enmity. In 1869, he got 10,000
copies of the essay printed and sent to prominent persons in India as
well as to members of British Parliament, ministers, Queen Victoria and
Prince Edward of  England.
It was indeed surprising that a semi-literate and conservative
person like Vishnubuva Brahmachari should put forward notions of
“Utopian Socialism”. Perhaps, as Lederle has pointed out, ‘‘he may
have derived ideas from Vedantic Monism and the writings of
Jnaneshvara, the great thirteenth century commentator of the
Bhagvadgita’’ . To quote Leaderle, “In developing this philosophy of
society (socialism) based on Vedantic Monism Vishnubuva Brahmachari
thus remained true to a strong trend in the Indian traditions.”
Vishnubuva Brahmachari was a pioneer of the revivalist tendencies
toward social and religious movement. He had full faith in the superiority
of the Indian culture over the Western civilisation and therefore, he
preached that the Indians should look back to the Vedic times for
inspiration and guidance. His social idea was that of human brotherhood
and a welfare state. RC.Majumdar describes him as “a utopian socialist
who based his social ideas on Vedic religion, and may be compared to
the Christian Socialists of Europe.” According to one writer, “He was
socially equalitarian religiously Vedantic, politically socialist, mentally
liberal and independent, morally bold and confident and humanitarian.”
Vishnubuva Brahmachari, though an ardent Hindu, defiantly
challenged Brahmin leadership of his time. In so doing, he created “an
undesirable split between the upper classes and the masses which
ultimately led to some unfortunate developments in the public life of the
province. (Bombay Province).- The Bombay Journal, ‘Indu Prakash’, in
an Obituary on 20 February,1871, Wrote:
“It is extremely difficult to find an outstanding man like Vishnubuva
Brahmachari. He was an outstanding thinker and one who translated
his precepts into action. He was courageous enough to say or do what
he thought was necessary for the interests and good, of the country.
Therefore, in the death of this good man, not only Bombay but
Maharashtra as a whole, has suffered a great loss. “
 
VISHNUSHASTRI
 
CHIPLUNKAR
 
(1850
 
-
 
1882)
 
:
We have noted that in the first half of the nineteenth century,
Maharashtra witnessed the emergence of a galaxy of outstanding men
like Acharya Jambhekar and Dr. Bhandarkar. Their
 
thought and  activities
has profound influence on the social life of Maharashtra. The second
half of the country also produced equally outstanding personalities like
Vishnu Shastri Chiptunkar, Gopal Krishna Gokhale, Principal Gopal
Ganesh Agarkar and Lokmanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak. But it was
Chiplunkar who during his short span of life of thirty three years shot to
fame as a writer, journalist and fearless Hindu patriot and revivalist.
Through his article in the “Nibandhmala” and “Kesari” he left a deep
impression not only  upon his conternporaries but also on future
generation of writers, journalists and men of public affairs like Tilak. He
is regarded as the one who inspirerd and promoted the modern Marathi.
They hail him as the representative and spokesman of the 19th Century
Maharashtra. But Some others regard him as a literary genius but leader
of Hindu reactionaries.
Vishnu Shastri Chiplunkar was born on 20th May 1850 in Poona.
His father. Krishnashastri Chiplunkar, was a well-known personality. In
1865, at the age of fifteen he passed his matriculation, and four years
later, began editing a journal, “Shalapatrak”. He was graduated from
the University of Bombay in 1872 and two years later began the
publication of his famous periodical, “Nibandhmala.” Besides. he also
established the New English School which produced almost all the