Jesus as Guru: The Image of Christ among Hindus and Christians in India

Jesus as Guru The Image of Christ among Hindus and Christians in India

CURRENTS OF ENCOUNTER STUDIES ON THE CONTACT BETWEEN CHRISTIANITY AND OTHER RELIGIONS, BELIEFS, AND CULTURES VOL. 36

GENERAL EDITORS Jerald D. Gort Henry Jansen Lourens Minnema Hendrik M. Vroom Anton Wessels Advisory Board Leonard Fernando (Delhi) James Haire (Canberra) James W. Heisig (Nagoya) Mechteld M. Jansen (Amsterdam) Kang Phee Seng (Hong Kong) Oddbjørn Leirvik (Oslo) Francis Anekwe Oborji (Rome) Jayakiran Sebastian (Philadelphia, PA) Nelly van Doorn-Harder (Valparaiso) Ulrich Winkler (Salzburg)

Jesus as Guru

The Image of Christ among Hindus and Christians in India

Jan Peter Schouten Translated by Henry and Lucy Jansen

Amsterdam - New York, NY 2008

Cover design: Aart Jan Bergshoeff The paper on which this book is printed meets the requirements of “ISO 9706:1994, Information and documentation - Paper for documents - Requirements for permanence”. ISBN: 978-90-420-2443-4 ©Editions Rodopi B.V., Amsterdam - New York, NY 2008 Printed in the Netherlands

ForȱourȱchildrenȱWillemȱandȱBernd –ȱbecauseȱinspirationȱknowsȱnoȱboundariesȱ–ȱ

Iȱamȱgratefulȱtoȱtheȱfollowingȱfoundationsȱforȱmakingȱtheȱtranslation ofȱthisȱbookȱpossible: LiteratuurfondsȱLocher StichtingȱVanȱEijkfonds StichtingȱdeȱDoopsgezindeȱZending StichtingȱNederlandsȱProtestantsȱConvent C.J.ȱdeȱVogelstichtingȱvoorȱOecumenischeȱstudies StichtingȱSolidairȱmetȱIndia

TableȱofȱContents CHAPTERȱ1 Introduction ..................................................................................... 1 CHAPTERȱ2 TheȱGuideȱtoȱPeaceȱandȱHappiness:ȱRammohanȱRoyȱ .............. 5 CHAPTERȱ3

FromȱFalseȱProphetȱtoȱDemonstrableȱDivinity: NehemiahȱGorehȱ ........................................................................... 35 CHAPTERȱ4

TheȱSaviourȱofȱAll:ȱPanditaȱRamabaiȱ ......................................... 55 CHAPTERȱ5

TheȱYogaȱMaster:ȱTheȱRamakrishnaȱMissionȱ ............................ 81 CHAPTERȱ6

JesusȱtheȱAvatara:ȱV.ȱChakkarai .................................................. 115 INTERMEZZO

FrankȱWesley ................................................................................ 127 CHAPTERȱ7

TheȱSufferingȱChristȱasȱanȱExample: MahatmaȱGandhiȱ ........................................................................ 131 INTERMEZZO

NandalalȱBoseȱ .............................................................................. 159 CHAPTERȱ8

TheȱEternalȱChristȱinȱtheȱAshramȱMovement .......................... 163 INTERMEZZO

AlfredȱThomas .............................................................................. 199

CHAPTERȱ9

ChristȱbetweenȱtheȱReligions TheȱGreatȱThree:ȱPanikkar,ȱThomas,ȱSamarthaȱ ...................... 205 INTERMEZZO

JyotiȱSahiȱ ....................................................................................... 229 CHAPTERȱ10

JesusȱasȱLiberatorȱinȱtheȱTheologyȱofȱtheȱDalitsȱ ...................... 235 INTERMEZZO

SusheilaȱWilliamsȱ ........................................................................ 255 CHAPTERȱ11

Postscript ....................................................................................... 259 BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................ 281 INDEXȱOFȱNAMES ............................................................................ 301 INDEXȱOFȱSUBJECTS ......................................................................... 307

CHAPTERȱ1

Introduction Whoeverȱ exploresȱ theȱ religionȱ andȱ cultureȱ ofȱ Indiaȱ comesȱ face toȱ faceȱ withȱ aȱ differentȱ world.ȱ Fromȱ aȱ Christianȱ perspective, Hinduismȱseems,ȱatȱfirstȱglance,ȱtoȱbeȱaȱreligionȱwithȱbeliefsȱand aȱspiritualityȱthatȱareȱveryȱdifferentȱfromȱourȱWesternȱvariants. Indianȱcultureȱasȱaȱwholeȱseemsȱtoȱhaveȱlittleȱinȱcommonȱwith Westernȱ culture.ȱ Artȱ andȱ science,ȱ moralityȱ andȱ India’sȱ social structureȱhaveȱclearlyȱdevelopedȱdifferentlyȱfromȱhowȱtheyȱdeȬ velopedȱinȱEurope.ȱEvenȱtheȱChristianȱfaithȱinȱIndiaȱisȱunique, stronglyȱ influencedȱ byȱ thatȱ differentȱ culture.ȱ Indiaȱ isȱ aȱ world apart. Theȱ differenceȱ betweenȱ Europeanȱ andȱ Asianȱ culture,ȱ of whichȱIndiaȱisȱtheȱmostȱstrikingȱexample,ȱcanȱbeȱarticulatedȱin variousȱ ways.ȱ Theȱ followingȱ linesȱ fromȱ aȱ nineteenthȬcentury poemȱhaveȱbecomeȱproverbialȱandȱareȱoftenȱcitedȱtoȱemphasize thatȱ weȱ areȱ dealingȱ withȱ twoȱ differentȱ worldsȱ here,ȱ eachȱ of whichȱisȱdoomedȱtoȱremainȱestrangedȱfromȱtheȱother: Oh,ȱEastȱisȱEast,ȱandȱWestȱisȱWest, andȱneverȱtheȱtwainȱshallȱmeet.

Butȱthereȱisȱalsoȱsomethingȱremarkableȱaboutȱthisȱquotation.ȱIt doesȱseemȱtoȱexcludeȱtheȱpossibilityȱthatȱ“East”ȱandȱ“West”ȱcan comeȱtogether,ȱdividingȱhumanityȱintoȱtwoȱcampsȱthatȱhaveȱno pointsȱofȱcontact.ȱThatȱisȱalsoȱhowȱtheseȱlinesȱareȱusuallyȱunderȬ stood.ȱButȱifȱweȱreadȱtheseȱwellȬknownȱlinesȱinȱtheirȱcontext,ȱit appearsȱ thatȱ theȱ poetȱ meantȱ somethingȱ elseȱ entirely:ȱ itȱ isȱ preȬ ciselyȱcontact,ȱmeetingȱandȱappreciationȱthatȱheȱhasȱinȱmind! Theȱ quotationȱ comesȱ fromȱ aȱ lengthyȱ poemȱ byȱ theȱ British writerȱRudyardȱKiplingȱ(1865Ȭ1936).ȱWrittenȱinȱ1889,ȱtheȱpoem isȱcalledȱ“TheȱBalladȱofȱEastȱandȱWest.”1ȱTheȱballadȱhasȱaȱmarȬ tialȬromanticȱcharacterȱthatȱwillȱnotȱappealȱtoȱmanyȱinȱourȱtime butȱwasȱquiteȱpopularȱinȱtheȱnineteenthȱcentury.ȱTheȱpoemȱtells

ȱRudyardȱKipling,ȱRudyardȱKipling’sȱVerse:ȱDefinitiveȱEditionȱ(LonȬ don:ȱHodderȱandȱStoughton,ȱ1949),ȱpp.ȱ234Ȭ38. 1

1

2

JESUSȱASȱGURU

theȱ storyȱ ofȱ theȱ confrontationȱ betweenȱ anȱ Indianȱ chieftainȱ and brigandȱ calledȱ Kamalȱ andȱ aȱ youngȱ Englishȱ soldier.ȱ Kamalȱ has ledȱanȱattackȱonȱtheȱBritishȱfortȱandȱstolenȱtheȱcolonel’sȱfavorite horse.ȱ Theȱ colonel’sȱ sonȱ pursuesȱ himȱ andȱ setsȱ offȱ onȱ aȱ foolȬ hardyȱrideȱacrossȱdangerousȱterrain,ȱfarȱoutsideȱtheȱareaȱunder Britishȱcontrol.ȱKamalȱisȱimpressedȱbyȱtheȱcourageȱandȱenthusiȬ asmȱofȱtheȱyoungȱsoldierȱandȱsparesȱhisȱlife.ȱHeȱalsoȱreturnsȱhis father’sȱ horseȱ toȱ himȱ and,ȱ moreover,ȱ entrustsȱ hisȱ ownȱ sonȱ to himȱsoȱthatȱheȱcanȱbeȱenlistedȱinȱtheȱcolonialȱarmy. Thisȱ longȱ narrativeȱ poemȱ startsȱ andȱ concludesȱ withȱ aȱ reȬ frainȱ thatȱ beginsȱ withȱ theȱ famousȱ linesȱ justȱ cited,ȱ i.e.ȱ thatȱ East andȱ Westȱ willȱ neverȱ meet.ȱ Butȱ theȱ linesȱ thatȱ followȱ relativize thisȱforcefulȱbeginning.ȱAlthoughȱEastȱandȱWestȱareȱsituatedȱin differentȱ placesȱ onȱ theȱ mapȱ andȱ seemȱ toȱ representȱ twoȱ comȬ pletelyȱ differentȱ worlds,ȱ Godȱ willȱ ultimatelyȱ bringȱ themȱ togeȬ therȱ atȱ theȱ endȱ ofȱ history.ȱ Andȱ peopleȱ canȱ alreadyȱ anticipate thatȱ finalȱ meetingȱ byȱ steppingȱ acrossȱ theȱ linesȱ ofȱ divisionȱ and meetingȱeachȱotherȱbravelyȱandȱappreciatively: Oh,ȱEastȱisȱEast,ȱandȱWestȱisȱWest, andȱneverȱtheȱtwainȱshallȱmeet, TillȱEarthȱandȱSkyȱstandȱpresently atȱGodȇsȱgreatȱJudgmentȱSeat; ButȱthereȱisȱneitherȱEastȱnorȱWest, Border,ȱnorȱBreed,ȱnorȱBirth, Whenȱtwoȱstrongȱmenȱstandȱfaceȱtoȱface, thoughȱtheyȱcomeȱfromȱtheȱendsȱofȱtheȱearth!

Forȱ me,ȱ thisȱ poemȱ byȱ Kiplingȱ hasȱ acquiredȱ aȱ certainȱ programȬ maticȱmeaning.ȱApparently,ȱitȱisȱworthwhileȱtoȱsearchȱforȱwhat canȱconnectȱpeopleȱfromȱdifferentȱworldsȱwithȱeachȱother.ȱReliȬ gionsȱ andȱ culturesȱ mayȱ differȱ greatlyȱ fromȱ oneȱ anotherȱ and evenȱseemȱtoȱexcludeȱoneȱanotherȱatȱtimes.ȱButȱinȱtheȱendȱthey willȱ allȱ proveȱ toȱ haveȱ theirȱ ownȱ placeȱ beforeȱ God:ȱ opposites loseȱtheirȱabsoluteȱcharacterȱsubȱspecieȱaeternitatis.ȱAndȱitȱisȱclear thatȱ peopleȱ fromȱ differentȱ worldsȱ canȱ oftenȱ recognizeȱ andȱ apȬ preciateȱ muchȱ inȱ oneȱ anotherȱ whenȱ theyȱ meet—evenȱ thoughȱ I amȱnotȱthinkingȱhereȱsoȱmuchȱofȱtheȱmartialȱvirtuesȱthatȱsoȱocȬ cupiedȱKiplingȱbutȱofȱfaith,ȱinspirationȱandȱmysticism. Kipling’sȱ poemȱ teachesȱ us,ȱ moreover,ȱ thatȱ textsȱ require thoroughȱstudy.ȱSometimes,ȱatȱfirstȱglance,ȱtheȱtextȱmayȱyieldȱa

INTRODUCTION

3

certainȱmeaningȱwhich,ȱuponȱcloserȱexamination,ȱappearsȱtoȱbe completelyȱwrong.ȱApparently,ȱthatȱcanȱhappenȱeasilyȱwithȱan Englishȱ poemȱ ofȱ moreȱ thanȱ aȱ hundredȱ yearsȱ old.ȱ Howȱ much moreȱdoȱweȱrunȱthatȱriskȱwhenȱreadingȱtextsȱfromȱanotherȱculȬ ture.ȱ Carefullyȱ reconstructingȱ whatȱ wordsȱ meantȱ inȱ another contextȱcanȱalsoȱyieldȱunexpectedȱinsights. OurȱsubjectȱinȱthisȱstudyȱisȱtheȱimageȱofȱJesusȱChristȱinȱInȬ dia.ȱ Peopleȱ inȱ India,ȱ bothȱ Hindusȱ andȱ Christians,ȱ formȱ anȱ imȬ ageȱ ofȱ Christȱ forȱ themselves.ȱ Itȱ isȱ onlyȱ inȱ thatȱ wayȱ thatȱ heȱ can receiveȱmeaningȱinȱtheȱcontextȱofȱtheirȱownȱculture.ȱTheȱ“WestȬ ern”ȱimageȱofȱJesus,ȱwhichȱtookȱshapeȱoverȱseveralȱcenturiesȱof theologicalȱreflectionȱandȱpiousȱimaginationȱinȱEurope,ȱwill,ȱafȬ terȱall,ȱalwaysȱbeȱstrangeȱtoȱthem.ȱItȱisȱaȱdivineȱformȱthatȱcomes fromȱaȱdifferentȱcultureȱandȱisȱtailoredȱtoȱotherȱpeople;ȱitȱisȱthe redeemerȱ ofȱ others.ȱ Andȱ thoseȱ “others”ȱ wereȱ theȱ colonizersȱ of IndiaȱfromȱEurope. Ofȱ course,ȱ duringȱ theȱ fewȱ centuriesȱ ofȱ Christianȱ missions inȱIndia,ȱthereȱhaveȱbeenȱmanyȱwhoȱconvertedȱtoȱtheȱreligionȱof theȱ Europeans.ȱ Butȱ overȱ theȱ courseȱ ofȱ timeȱ almostȱ allȱ sought someȱ connectionȱ betweenȱ theȱ proclamationȱ ofȱ theȱ Christian faithȱandȱtheirȱownȱbackground,ȱtheȱcultureȱofȱtheirȱownȱcounȬ try.ȱ Andȱ overȱ againstȱ theȱ converts,ȱ thereȱ areȱ alsoȱ numerous peopleȱ inȱ Indiaȱ whoȱ haveȱ remainedȱ faithfulȱ toȱ theirȱ ownȱ reliȬ gionȱ andȱ cultureȱ butȱ nonethelessȱ exploredȱ theȱ meaningȱ that thisȱChristȱcouldȱhaveȱforȱthem. Thus,ȱ anȱ encounterȱ betweenȱ peopleȱ fromȱ twoȱ different worldsȱ occurredȱ aroundȱ theȱ personȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ Christ.ȱ Sinceȱ the beginning,ȱmissionariesȱhadȱtoȱaccountȱforȱtheȱculturalȱandȱreliȬ giousȱworldȱtheyȱhadȱentered.ȱTheȱquestionȱwhatȱtheȱmeaning ofȱ Christȱ couldȱ beȱ inȱ thatȱ worldȱ wasȱ inevitable.ȱ Butȱ Hindus wereȱ alsoȱ challengedȱ byȱ theȱ messageȱ Christiansȱ wereȱ proȬ claimingȱinȱtheirȱcountry.ȱAlthoughȱtheyȱwantedȱtoȱcontinueȱto findȱ directionȱ forȱ theirȱ livesȱ inȱ theȱ religionȱ ofȱ theirȱ forefathers, theyȱ hadȱ toȱ determineȱ theirȱ positionȱ withȱ respectȱ toȱ theȱ new proclamationȱthatȱnowȱconfrontedȱthem.ȱTheyȱcouldȱnotȱescape theȱquestionȱasȱtoȱtheȱplaceȱChristȱcouldȱhaveȱinȱtheirȱreligious world. Sinceȱ theȱ beginningȱ ofȱtheȱnineteenthȱ centuryȱJesusȱChrist hasȱ becomeȱ aȱ factorȱ inȱ Indianȱ society.ȱ Itȱ wasȱ inȱ hisȱ nameȱ that Westernȱmissionaries,ȱandȱlaterȱIndianȱconverts,ȱresistedȱdeeply

JESUSȱASȱGURU

4

ingrainedȱ culturalȱ phenomenaȱ likeȱ theȱ casteȱ system.ȱ Andȱ in churchȱ communities,ȱ howeverȱ Westernȱ inȱ intention,ȱ Indians madeȱ theȱ Christianȱ faithȱ theirȱ own.ȱ Butȱ thereȱ areȱ alsoȱ Hindus whoȱexploreȱtheȱdoctrineȱofȱChristȱandȱsearchȱforȱtheȱrelevance ofȱ theȱ Gospelȱ forȱ theirȱ religionȱ andȱ theirȱ society.ȱ Weȱ canȱ thus speakȱ ofȱ anȱ inculturationȱ ofȱ theȱ Christianȱ faithȱ inȱ India.ȱ Since then,ȱitȱisȱnoȱlongerȱpossibleȱtoȱimagineȱIndianȱsocietyȱandȱculȬ tureȱwithoutȱChrist.ȱȱButȱheȱhasȱreceivedȱaȱdifferentȱface:ȱitȱisȱno longerȱ theȱ Europeanȱ formȱ ofȱ theȱ Saviorȱ thatȱ theȱ missionaries broughtȱbutȱthatȱofȱanȱEasternȱteacherȱwhoȱspeaksȱtoȱIndians.ȱIt isȱ remarkableȱ thatȱ itȱ isȱ Hindusȱ whoȱ haveȱ playedȱ anȱ important roleȱinȱthisȱnaturalizationȱofȱChrist.ȱAȱmodernȱAsianȱtheologian observed:ȱ “Interestingly,ȱ theȱ firstȱ personsȱ toȱ undertakeȱ serious theologicalȱreflectionȱonȱJesusȱfromȱtheȱperspectiveȱofȱAsia’sȱreȬ ligiousȱ traditionsȱ wereȱ notȱ Asianȱ Christiansȱ butȱ Indianȱ HinȬ dus.”2 Inȱ thisȱ studyȱ weȱ willȱ discussȱ Hindusȱ andȱ Christiansȱ fromȱ the lastȱtwoȱcenturiesȱwhoȱhaveȱcontributedȱtoȱtheȱdevelopmentȱof ChristologyȱinȱIndia.ȱTheyȱshareȱaȱfascinationȱwithȱtheȱfigureȱof Jesusȱ Christȱ butȱ haveȱ veryȱ differentȱ viewsȱ asȱ toȱ whatȱ heȱ can meanȱinȱtheȱIndianȱcontext.ȱThereȱareȱvariousȱwaysȱtoȱsketchȱan imageȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ Christ,ȱ butȱ atȱ heartȱ itȱ alwaysȱ concernsȱ aȱ fertile encounterȱbetweenȱWesternȱpreachersȱofȱtheȱGospelȱandȱadherȬ entsȱ ofȱ Easternȱ religions,ȱ betweenȱ Hindusȱ andȱ Christians,ȱ beȬ tweenȱEuropeanȱandȱIndianȱchurchȱmembers.ȱTheȱdialogueȱon theȱ meaningȱ ofȱ Christȱ appearsȱ toȱ beȱ ableȱ toȱ setȱ aȱ greatȱ dealȱ in motion.ȱ Whatȱ thatȱ dialogueȱ hasȱ producedȱ inȱ Indiaȱ canȱ alsoȱ be ofȱgreatȱimportanceȱforȱtheȱWest.ȱInȱanyȱcase,ȱthatȱisȱtheȱconvicȬ tionȱthatȱliesȱatȱtheȱfoundationȱofȱthisȱstudy.ȱEastȱandȱWestȱhave somethingȱtoȱtellȱeachȱother. ȱ ȱ R.S.ȱ Sugirtharajahȱ (ed.),ȱ Asianȱ Facesȱ ofȱ Jesus,ȱ 4thȱ ed.ȱ (Maryknoll: OrbisȱBooks,ȱ1999),ȱp.ȱ3. 2

CHAPTERȱ2

TheȱGuideȱtoȱPeaceȱandȱHappiness RammohanȱRoy Theȱ firstȱ timeȱ thatȱ theȱ meaningȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ becameȱ theȱ topicȱ of publicȱ debateȱ inȱ Indiaȱ wasȱ atȱ theȱ beginningȱ ofȱ theȱ nineteenth century.ȱTheȱoccasionȱwasȱaȱsmallȱbookȱonȱtheȱteachingȱofȱJesus calledȱTheȱGuideȱtoȱPeaceȱandȱHappiness,ȱwhichȱwasȱpublishedȱat theȱbeginningȱofȱtheȱyearȱ1820ȱinȱKolkataȱ(Calcutta).ȱTheȱwork containedȱ aȱ largeȱ numberȱ ofȱ Jesus’ȱ sayings,ȱ carefullyȱ singled outȱfromȱtheȱNewȱTestamentȱandȱgivenȱanȱamenableȱintroducȬ tion.ȱ Theȱ writer’sȱ nameȱ wasȱ notȱ indicated,ȱ butȱ forȱ manyȱ in KolkataȱthereȱwasȱnoȱquestionȱasȱtoȱwhoȱwasȱbehindȱthisȱpubȬ lication—itȱ couldȱ notȱ beȱ anyoneȱ elseȱ butȱ Rammohanȱ Roy.ȱ The critiquesȱ ofȱ theȱ bookȱ thatȱ quicklyȱ appearedȱ attributedȱ authorȬ shipȱ toȱ him,ȱ andȱ heȱ didȱ notȱ denyȱ it.ȱ Thatȱ meantȱ thatȱ aȱ Hindu, andȱnotȱaȱChristian,ȱhadȱriskedȱaȱpublicationȱonȱtheȱBible.ȱThat aloneȱwasȱtheȱtopicȱofȱmuchȱcommentary. AȱScholarlyȱBanker Rammohanȱ Royȱ (1772Ȭ1833)ȱ cameȱ from aȱprominentȱHinduȱfamilyȱthatȱbelonged toȱ theȱ priestlyȱ casteȱ ofȱ theȱ brahmans. Likeȱmanyȱofȱtheȱmembersȱofȱthatȱcaste, hisȱforefathersȱhadȱgivenȱupȱtheirȱpriestȬ lyȱofficeȱforȱaȱcareerȱinȱmanagement.ȱBut theyȱ continuedȱ toȱ beȱ veryȱ strictȱ inȱ the applicationȱ ofȱ casteȱ rulesȱ thatȱ hadȱ to guaranteeȱ theirȱ ritualȱ purity.ȱ RammoȬ han’sȱ fatherȱ wasȱ aȱ highlyȱ placedȱ civil servantȱ underȱ theȱ princeȱ ofȱ Bengal,ȱ the nawab,ȱ andȱ theȱ familyȱ alsoȱ enjoyedȱ a substantialȱ incomeȱ fromȱ theirȱ estate.ȱ As aȱ boy,ȱ Rammohanȱ wasȱ givenȱ theȱ educationȱ appropriateȱ toȱ his status.ȱHeȱlearnedȱPersianȱfirstȱofȱall,ȱwhichȱatȱthatȱtimeȱwasȱthe languageȱofȱtheȱcourtȱandȱtheȱcivilȱservice.ȱForȱthatȱpurpose,ȱhe spentȱ someȱ timeȱ inȱ Patna,ȱ aȱ cityȱ whereȱ manyȱ Muslimȱ scholars 5

JESUSȱASȱGURU

6

hadȱ settled.ȱ Heȱ alsoȱ learnedȱ Arabicȱ thereȱ andȱ acquiredȱ conȬ siderableȱ knowledgeȱ ofȱ theȱ Qur’anȱ andȱ otherȱ Islamicȱ writings. Heȱ wasȱ subsequentlyȱ sentȱ forȱ aȱ timeȱ toȱ Varanasiȱ (Benares)ȱ for furtherȱ educationȱ inȱ thisȱ centreȱ ofȱ Hinduȱ religionȱ andȱ scholȬ arship.ȱHereȱheȱenlargedȱhisȱknowledgeȱofȱSanskritȱandȱstudied theȱsacredȱbooksȱofȱtheȱHindus. AtȱtheȱendȱofȱhisȱlifeȱRammohanȱwouldȱstillȱenterȱtheȱcivil service,ȱwhenȱheȱwouldȱbeȱsentȱtoȱLondonȱbyȱtheȱMoghulȱemȬ perorȱAkbarȱII.ȱAtȱthatȱtimeȱheȱalsoȱreceivedȱtheȱaristocraticȱtitle “Raja,”ȱbyȱwhichȱheȱlaterȱbecameȱgenerallyȱknown.1ȱButȱasȱyet theȱfutureȱRajaȱwasȱaȱscholarȱandȱaȱbanker,ȱandȱoneȱofȱtheȱmost colourfulȱfiguresȱinȱtheȱculturalȱeliteȱofȱKolkata.ȱAlreadyȱwhen heȱwasȱsixteen,ȱheȱhadȱbrokenȱwithȱtheȱorthodoxȱHinduȱenvirȬ onmentȱofȱtheȱvillageȱwhereȱheȱhadȱgrownȱup.ȱHeȱwroteȱaȱpamȬ phletȱatȱtheȱtimeȱinȱwhichȱheȱdenouncedȱtheȱvenerationȱofȱimaȬ gesȱ inȱ Hinduismȱ andȱ arguedȱ forȱ aȱ moreȱ rational,ȱ monotheistic formȱ ofȱ religion.ȱ Unfortunately,ȱ thisȱ workȱ fromȱ hisȱ youthȱ has notȱ beenȱ preserved,ȱ butȱ weȱ knowȱ aboutȱ itȱ fromȱ theȱ factȱ thatȱ it ledȱtoȱaȱbreakȱwithȱhisȱfather.ȱAȱgoodȱrelationshipȱforȱtheȱmost partȱ wasȱ restoredȱ yearsȱ laterȱ andȱ Rammohanȱ wasȱ allowedȱ a shareȱ inȱ theȱ realȱ estateȱ thatȱhisȱ fatherȱ dividedȱamongȱ hisȱ sons. Rammohanȱ Royȱ settledȱ inȱ Kolkata,ȱ whereȱ heȱ fulfilledȱ various secretarialȱfunctionsȱforȱtheȱBritishȱEastȱIndiaȱCompanyȱandȱits directors.ȱ Heȱ alsoȱ madeȱ aȱ fortuneȱ throughȱ moneylendingȱ to Britishȱtradersȱandȱfunctionaries. Inȱadditionȱtoȱhisȱsuccessfulȱcommercialȱactivities,ȱRammoȬ hanȱRoyȱoccupiedȱhimselfȱwithȱtheȱstudyȱofȱreligion,ȱpublishing manyȱworksȱinȱdifferentȱlanguages.ȱHisȱfirstȱimportantȱpublicaȬ tionȱ wasȱ writtenȱ inȱ Persian,ȱ withȱ aȱ forewordȱ inȱ Arabic,ȱ called TuhfatȱalȬMuwahhidinȱ(“AȱPresentȱtoȱtheȱBelieversȱinȱOneȱGod”). Asȱtheȱlanguagesȱusedȱalreadyȱindicate,ȱRammohanȱRoyȱdiscusȬ sesȱtheȱmonotheismȱofȱtheȱMuslimsȱhere.ȱȱCentralȱtoȱthisȱbookȱis theȱideaȱthatȱallȱpeopleȱofȱwhateverȱreligiousȱbackgroundȱhave theȱ naturalȱ tendencyȱ toȱ turnȱ toȱ theȱ oneȱ Divineȱ Being.ȱ Theȱ nuȬ merousȱdifferencesȱandȱcontradictionsȱbetweenȱtheȱdifferentȱreȬ ligionsȱ rested,ȱ therefore,ȱ notȱ onȱ natureȱ butȱ onȱ conventionȱ and ȱ“Raja”ȱwasȱoriginallyȱaȱhereditaryȱtitle,ȱtranslatedȱasȱ“king.”ȱBut inȱtheȱnineteenthȱcenturyȱthisȱtitleȱwasȱdevaluedȱtoȱaȱroyalȱdistinction bestowedȱonȱcitizensȱofȱexceptionalȱmerit,ȱcomparableȱtoȱaȱknighthood inȱEngland.ȱȱ 1

THEȱGUIDEȱTOȱPEACEȱANDȱHAPPINESS:ȱRAMMOHANȱROY

7

tradition.ȱ Theȱ focusȱ inȱ thisȱ naturalȱ religionȱ isȱ toȱ seeȱ whatȱ is basedȱonȱtrueȱknowledgeȱandȱwhatȱrestsȱonȱhumanȱtraditionȱas farȱ asȱ religionȱ isȱ concerned.ȱ Confusingȱ thisȱ humanȱ tradition withȱ theȱ trueȱ knowledgeȱ ofȱ Godȱ canȱ onlyȱ beȱ bad.ȱ Rammohan Royȱprovidesȱanȱillustrationȱhere:ȱifȱsomeoneȱconsumesȱpoison thinkingȱitȱisȱcandy,ȱitȱwillȱneverthelessȱhaveȱitsȱusualȱeffectȱand killȱhim.ȱRammohanȱRoyȱaddsȱaȱprayerȱhere:ȱ“OȱGod,ȱgiveȱme trueȱpowerȱforȱmakingȱdistinctionȱbetweenȱhabitȱandȱnature.”2 EvenȱthoughȱitȱwasȱflatteringȱforȱMuslimsȱtoȱbeȱpraisedȱby thisȱ Hinduȱ forȱ theirȱ monotheism,ȱ thisȱ bookȱ didȱ notȱ meanȱ that Islamȱ hadȱ gainedȱ aȱ convert.ȱ Rammohanȱ Royȱ hadȱ beenȱ imȬ pressedȱbyȱIslamȱthroughȱhisȱIslamicȱschoolingȱinȱPatna,ȱbutȱhe maintainedȱ aȱ greatȱ distanceȱ fromȱ thisȱ religionȱ asȱ itȱ hadȱ develȬ opedȱ historically.ȱ Heȱ wasȱ interestedȱ inȱ theȱ religionȱ behindȱ the religions.ȱHeȱwasȱlookingȱforȱaȱreligiousȱtruthȱthatȱwasȱuniverȬ sallyȱvalid,ȱthatȱcouldȱbeȱtracedȱviaȱtheȱrevelationsȱofȱtheȱdifferȬ entȱ religions.ȱ Heȱ addressedȱ theȱ Muslimsȱ withȱ respectȱ toȱ that truthȱofȱtheȱnaturalȱreligionȱinȱtheirȱreligion.ȱButȱtheyȱwereȱnot hisȱonlyȱintendedȱreaders. Rammohanȱ Royȱ wasȱ aȱ Hinduȱ andȱ remainedȱ aȱ Hindu.ȱ He demonstratedȱthis,ȱinȱparticular,ȱbyȱstudyingȱtheȱoldȱHinduȱlitȬ eratureȱ andȱ alsoȱ publishingȱ someȱ ofȱ theseȱ sacredȱ textsȱ inȱ SanȬ skritȱandȱtranslatingȱthemȱintoȱBengali,ȱtheȱlinguaȱfrancaȱofȱthat area.3ȱ Thatȱ wasȱ new—even,ȱ inȱ aȱ certainȱ sense,ȱ revolutionary. TheȱsacredȱtextsȱinȱSanskrit,ȱtheȱlanguageȱofȱtheȱpriestsȱwere,ȱafȬ terȱ all,ȱ underȱ theȱ controlȱ ofȱ theȱ brahmansȱ andȱ carefullyȱ proȬ tectedȱfromȱtheȱlowerȱcastes.ȱTheȱpublicationȱofȱsuchȱtextsȱwas thusȱviewedȱnegatively.ȱRammohanȱalsoȱwantedȱtoȱlookȱforȱthe religionȱ behindȱ theȱ religionsȱ inȱ hisȱ ownȱ Hinduȱ faith.ȱ Andȱ he wantedȱtoȱpublishȱtheȱresultsȱofȱhisȱsearch!ȱHeȱwasȱlookingȱfor aȱ conceptȱ ofȱ Godȱ thatȱ correspondedȱ toȱ natureȱ andȱ reasonȱ and offeredȱ theȱ resultsȱ ofȱ hisȱ researchȱ forȱ theȱ formationȱ ofȱ public ȱ Rammohanȱ Roy,ȱ Theȱ Englishȱ Worksȱ ofȱ Rajaȱ Rammohunȱ Roy,ȱ ed. Jogendraȱ Chunderȱ Ghose,ȱ vol.ȱ IVȱ (Newȱ Delhi:ȱ Cosmoȱ Publications, 1982),ȱp.ȱ949ȱ(theȱEnglishȱtranslationȱofȱTuhfatȱalȬMuwahhidin). 2

ȱThatȱtheȱBengaliȱworksȱbyȱtheȱRajaȱonȱHinduismȱconstituteȱhis mostȱimportantȱworkȱisȱarguedȱinȱparticularȱbyȱBruceȱC.ȱRobertsonȱinȱhis studyȱRajaȱRammohanȱRay:ȱTheȱFatherȱofȱModernȱIndia,ȱ2ndȱed.ȱ(Delhi:ȱOxȬ fordȱUniversityȱPress,ȱ1999).ȱButȱheȱundervaluesȱtheȱimportanceȱofȱhis worksȱinȱPersianȱandȱEnglish.ȱ 3

8

JESUSȱASȱGURU

opinion.ȱHeȱwasȱthinkingȱinȱparticularȱhereȱofȱtheȱurbanȱeliteȱin Kolkata,ȱwhich,ȱlikeȱhim,ȱwasȱsupposedȱtoȱbeȱopenȱtoȱaȱnewȱreȬ formedȱwayȱofȱexperiencingȱreligion.ȱAsȱwasȱtoȱbeȱexpected,ȱin additionȱtoȱtheȱappreciationȱforȱhisȱwork,ȱthereȱwasȱalsoȱharsh criticismȱbyȱtheȱmoreȱconservativeȱsideȱofȱtheȱbrahmanȱcaste. Rammohanȱ opposedȱ superstitionȱ andȱ theȱ externalȱ religiȬ osityȱofȱhisȱfellowȱbelieversȱvehemently.ȱHeȱwasȱsurprisedȱthat “Hinduism”ȱ seemedȱ almostȱ toȱ beȱ aȱ synonymȱ forȱ “diet.”ȱ High casteȱHindusȱdidȱindeedȱplaceȱgreatȱemphasisȱonȱritualȱpurity, whichȱwasȱmaintainedȱprimarilyȱbyȱeatingȱtheȱrightȱfood.ȱThis wasȱnotȱjustȱaȱmatterȱofȱcertainȱtypesȱofȱfoodȱbutȱalsoȱofȱrefusȬ ingȱfoodȱandȱdrinkȱthatȱhadȱbeenȱpreparedȱorȱhandedȱoverȱby someoneȱfromȱaȱlowerȱcaste. Overȱ againstȱ thisȱ externalȱ religiousȱ practice,ȱ Rammohan Royȱ placedȱ newȱ emphasisȱ onȱ whatȱ heȱ consideredȱ theȱ heartȱ of theȱreligionȱofȱIndia.ȱHeȱdidȱnotȱfindȱthisȱinȱtheȱpopularȱmythoȬ logicalȱ writings,ȱ suchȱ asȱ theȱ Puranas,ȱ andȱ notȱ atȱ allȱ inȱ theȱ anȬ cient,ȱdarkȱsacrificeȱsayingsȱfoundȱinȱtheȱVedas.ȱForȱRammohan theȱheartȱofȱHinduismȱwasȱfoundȱinȱtheȱphilosophicalȱwritings thatȱconcludedȱtheȱperiodȱofȱtheȱVedas,ȱtheȱVedanta,ȱwhichȱinȬ cludedȱtheȱUpanishadsȱandȱtheȱBrahmaȱSutra.ȱRammohanȱhad publishedȱ andȱ translatedȱ someȱ ofȱ theseȱ writingsȱ andȱ comȬ mentedȱonȱthem.ȱItȱwasȱinȱthisȱpartȱofȱtheȱsacredȱtextsȱofȱHinduȬ ismȱ thatȱ heȱ foundȱ theȱ monotheisticȱ conceptȱ ofȱ God.ȱ Indeed, Brahmanȱisȱcentralȱtoȱmanyȱofȱtheseȱbooks.ȱInȱRammohan’sȱinȬ terpretation,ȱthisȱcreative,ȱdivineȱprincipleȱbehindȱallȱrealityȱreȬ ceivedȱ theȱ faceȱofȱaȱGodȱwhoȱcouldȱbeȱworshipped—orȱbetter: theȱoneȱGodȱwhomȱeveryoneȱmustȱworship. Rammohanȱ agreedȱ withȱ theȱ interpretationȱ givenȱ by Shankara,ȱtheȱgreatȱeighthȬcenturyȱthinkerȱwhoȱdefendedȱpure monismȱ (kevalaȱ advaita):ȱ ultimateȱ realityȱ isȱ one.ȱ Theȱ essenceȱ of theȱhumanȱbeingȱ(atman)ȱisȱtheȱsameȱasȱBrahmanȱandȱallȱapparȬ entȱdifferenceȱisȱmerelyȱanȱillusionȱ(maya).ȱForȱRammohan,ȱthe heartȱofȱtheȱteachingȱinȱtheseȱoldȱHinduȱwritingsȱisȱtheȱadvaita: theȱ individualȱ couldȱ becomeȱ partȱ ofȱ theȱ oneȱ ultimateȱ reality. Butȱ heȱ disagreesȱ withȱ Shankaraȱ onȱ theȱ practicalȱ consequences ofȱthisȱteaching.ȱShankaraȱsawȱtheȱbreakȱwithȱtheȱworldȱasȱthe highestȱ formȱ ofȱ religiousȱ practice:ȱ onlyȱ thoseȱ whoȱ withdrew fromȱordinaryȱlifeȱandȱbecameȱhermitsȱorȱmonksȱwouldȱbeȱable toȱ experienceȱultimateȱ truthȱ inȱtheirȱ ownȱlives.ȱ Suchȱ anȱascetic wayȱ ofȱ lifeȱ wasȱ notȱ atȱ allȱ positivelyȱ received,ȱ ofȱ course,ȱ inȱ the

THEȱGUIDEȱTOȱPEACEȱANDȱHAPPINESS:ȱRAMMOHANȱROY

9

beauȱ mondeȱ ofȱ nineteenthȬcenturyȱ Kolkata.ȱ Therefore,ȱ RammoȬ hanȱ Royȱ pointsȱ toȱ anotherȱ way:ȱ theȱ connectionȱ withȱ theȱ SuȬ premeȱBeingȱisȱtoȱbeȱexperiencedȱinȱone’sȱexistenceȱinȱtheȱordinȬ aryȱworld.ȱToȱthatȱend,ȱaȱrationalȱformȱofȱworship,ȱwithoutȱthe worshipȱ ofȱ imagesȱ orȱ anyȱ otherȱ externalities,ȱ hadȱ toȱ beȱ develȬ oped.ȱReligiousȱbeliefȱhadȱtoȱleadȱtoȱaȱmoralȱattitudeȱofȱservice inȱsocietyȱandȱtoleranceȱforȱtheȱadherentsȱofȱallȱtraditions. Rammohanȱ Royȱ alsoȱ gaveȱ concreteȱ formȱ toȱ thisȱ renewed worship.ȱ Heȱ foundedȱ aȱ “Circleȱ ofȱ Friends”ȱ (Atmiyaȱ Sabha), whichȱ metȱweeklyȱforȱ aȱnewȱformȱ ofȱ religiousȱ practice.ȱSacred textsȱ wereȱ recited,ȱ religiousȱ songsȱ wereȱ sungȱ byȱ aȱ singerȱ and theȱ membersȱ alsoȱ engagedȱ inȱ discussionsȱ withȱ oneȱ anotherȱ on religiousȱ andȱ socialȱ issues.ȱ Thisȱ closedȱ societyȱ wasȱ laterȱ transȬ formedȱ intoȱ aȱ societyȱ withȱ itsȱ ownȱ temple,ȱ whereȱ everyone couldȱ attendȱ services.ȱ Thisȱ wasȱ theȱ Brahmoȱ Samajȱ (theȱ Society ofȱ God’sȱ Worshippers),ȱ whichȱ stillȱ existsȱ today.ȱ Althoughȱ its teachingȱ isȱ clearlyȱ basedȱ onȱ theȱ Hinduȱ tradition,ȱ albeitȱ inȱ a monotheisticȱform,ȱtheȱformȱofȱtheȱserviceȱdisplaysȱChristianȱinȬ fluences.4ȱThatȱshouldȱnotȱcauseȱanyȱsurprise.ȱViaȱhisȱworkȱfor theȱBritishȱinȱtheȱEastȱIndiaȱCompany,ȱRammohanȱRoyȱhadȱalso comeȱintoȱcontactȱwithȱaȱnumberȱofȱChristianȱmissionariesȱwho wereȱworkingȱinȱKolkataȱandȱtheȱsurroundingȱarea.ȱHeȱvisited themȱ atȱ theȱ missionȱ postȱ inȱ Seramporeȱ butȱ alsoȱ sometimesȱ at homeȱ andȱ thusȱ alsoȱ attendedȱ homeȱ servicesȱ sometimes.ȱ Butȱ it wasȱ inȱ theȱ areaȱ ofȱ socialȱ work,ȱ ratherȱ thanȱ spirituality,ȱ thatȱ he feltȱtheȱgreatestȱaffinityȱwithȱtheȱmissionaries. AȱSocialȱActivist Forȱ Rammohanȱ Roy,ȱ religionȱ meansȱ notȱ onlyȱ worshippingȱ the oneȱ Godȱ butȱ alsoȱ “doingȱ good”ȱ inȱ society.ȱ Accordingȱ toȱ him, theȱ teachingȱ ofȱ theȱ Vedantaȱ didȱ notȱ callȱ peopleȱ toȱ withdraw fromȱ societyȱ asȱ theȱ oldȱ asceticsȱ did.ȱ Rather,ȱ beliefȱ inȱ Godȱ inȬ cludedȱ anȱ activistȱ attitudeȱ inȱ theȱ world.ȱ Whoeverȱ hadȱ risen aboveȱtheȱignoranceȱandȱillusionȱofȱtheȱworldȱshouldȱalsoȱdediȬ cateȱ himselfȱ toȱ spreadingȱ theȱ truthȱ andȱ fightingȱ againstȱ everyȬ thingȱ thatȱ restrictedȱ andȱ subjugatedȱ theȱ humanȱ spirit.ȱ And ȱCf.ȱJ.ȱGonda,ȱDeȱIndischeȱgodsdienstenȱ(TheȱHague:ȱServire,ȱs.a.),ȱp. 94:ȱ“AȱmeetingȱonȱSaturdayȱeveningȱtoȱreadȱpassagesȱfromȱtheȱUpanȬ ishads,ȱtoȱlistenȱtoȱaȱsermonȱandȱtoȱsing—thisȱisȱChristian,ȱnotȱIndian.” 4

10

JESUSȱASȱGURU

thereȱwas,ȱRammohanȱRoyȱheld,ȱmuchȱtoȱdo.ȱTheȱdegeneration ofȱ religionȱ thatȱ hadȱ becomeȱ visibleȱ inȱ theȱ worshipȱ ofȱ images hadȱ alsoȱ ledȱ toȱ abusesȱ inȱ theȱ socialȱ area.ȱ Heȱ referredȱ regularly inȱ thisȱ contextȱ toȱ superstition,ȱ inadequateȱ education,ȱ poverty andȱtheȱrepressionȱofȱwomen. Rammohanȱ thereforeȱ labouredȱ withȱ hisȱ Circleȱ ofȱ Friends forȱtheȱfoundationȱofȱschools.ȱThisȱbroughtȱhimȱintoȱdirectȱconȬ tactȱwithȱtheȱChristianȱmissionariesȱinȱtheȱareaȱwhoȱwereȱworkȬ ingȱonȱsimilarȱprojects,ȱevenȱthoughȱtheyȱdidȱnotȱhaveȱaȱ“Hindu College”ȱ inȱ mind.ȱ Likeȱ theȱ missionaries,ȱ Rammohanȱ Royȱ also becameȱactiveȱinȱtheȱareaȱofȱjournalism.ȱTheȱfirstȱnewspaperȱin theȱ Indianȱ languageȱ wasȱ begunȱ byȱ Baptistȱ missionariesȱ who hadȱsettledȱinȱtheȱDanishȱcolonyȱofȱSerampore,ȱtwentyȱkilomeȬ tresȱnorthȱofȱKolkata.ȱTheȱEnglishȱEastȱIndiaȱCompanyȱhadȱiniȬ tiallyȱ forbiddenȱ theȱ activitiesȱ ofȱ missionariesȱ inȱ Kolkataȱ itself. ButȱtheȱmessageȱofȱtheȱGospelȱreachedȱKolkataȱfromȱSerampore by,ȱamongȱotherȱthings,ȱthisȱpaper,ȱSamacharȱDarpanȱ(Mirrorȱof theȱ News).ȱ Followingȱ thisȱ example,ȱ Rammohanȱ Royȱ beganȱ a PersianȬlanguageȱ newspaperȱ thatȱ wasȱ publishedȱ weeklyȱ andȱ a similarȱ weeklyȱ inȱ Bengali.ȱ Heȱ alsoȱ madeȱ generousȱ useȱ ofȱ the possibilitiesȱ thatȱ aȱ journalistȱ fromȱ oneȱ ofȱ theȱ Englishȱ language newspapersȱ offeredȱ himȱ toȱ presentȱ hisȱ insights.ȱ Finally,ȱ he himselfȱstartedȱpublishingȱaȱperiodicalȱinȱEnglish.ȱButȱthereȱwas oneȱareaȱinȱwhichȱRammohanȱRoyȱandȱtheȱmissionariesȱofȱSerȬ amporeȱ wereȱ trueȱ allies.ȱ Rammohanȱ supportedȱ themȱ inȱ the struggleȱ againstȱ whatȱ heȱ consideredȱ theȱ worstȱ excessȱ ofȱ a wronglyȱunderstoodȱHinduism:ȱtheȱsati. Theȱ termȱ satiȱ meansȱ “virtuousȱ woman.”ȱ Butȱ inȱ Indiaȱ itȱ is usedȱparticularlyȱforȱtheȱextremeȱactȱbyȱwhichȱaȱwomanȱwould demonstrateȱherȱvirtueȱafterȱherȱhusband’sȱdeath.ȱInȱtraditional Hinduȱcircles,ȱitȱwasȱseenȱasȱespeciallyȱmeritoriousȱif,ȱafterȱthe deathȱ ofȱ herȱ husband,ȱ aȱ womanȱ choseȱ toȱ throwȱ herselfȱ onȱ the funeralȱ pyreȱ duringȱ theȱ cremation.ȱ Inȱ someȱ castes,ȱ whichȱ preȬ ferredȱ burialȱtoȱcremation,ȱitȱalsoȱhappened,ȱwithȱfirmȱconsistȬ ency,ȱ thatȱ theȱ widowȱ wasȱ buriedȱ aliveȱ withȱ herȱ husband’s body.ȱ Theȱ notionȱ ofȱ meritoriousnessȱ entailedȱ thatȱ theȱ woman herselfȱhadȱtoȱchooseȱthisȱvoluntarily.ȱButȱthereȱwereȱexamples ofȱ situationsȱ inȱ whichȱ womenȱ wereȱ compelledȱ toȱ performȱ this “heroic”ȱ actȱ throughȱ psychologicalȱ pressureȱ orȱ evenȱ physical violence.ȱInȱparticular,ȱinȱtheȱhigherȱcastes,ȱespeciallyȱtheȱbrahȬ mans,ȱaȱwidowȱwasȱoftenȱtreatedȱinsultinglyȱandȱhumiliatingly.

THEȱGUIDEȱTOȱPEACEȱANDȱHAPPINESS:ȱRAMMOHANȱROY

11

Manyȱ womenȱ thusȱ hadȱ noȱ otherȱ realȱ choiceȱ afterȱ theirȱ husȬ band’sȱdeathȱthanȱtoȱthrowȱthemselvesȱonȱtheȱfire. Itȱisȱcertainlyȱtrueȱthatȱsatiȱwasȱnotȱuniversallyȱpractisedȱin India.ȱ Butȱ itȱ occurredȱ regularly,ȱ alsoȱ inȱ Kolkata.ȱ Inȱ general,ȱ in thisȱ newȱ urbanȱ society,ȱ thereȱ wasȱ theȱ inclinationȱ amongȱ the higherȱ castesȱ toȱ emphasizeȱ theirȱ Hinduȱ identityȱ byȱ adhering strictlyȱtoȱtheȱrulesȱofȱritualȱpurity,ȱandȱaȱwidowȱwhoȱcontinued toȱliveȱwasȱanȱimpureȱelementȱinȱsociety.ȱInȱtheȱlimitedȱareaȱof Kolkataȱ andȱ theȱ surroundingȱ regionȱ thatȱ wasȱ administeredȱ by theȱBritishȱaȱfewȱhundredȱcasesȱofȱsatiȱperȱyearȱwereȱreported. Theȱ peakȱwasȱreachedȱinȱ 1818ȱ withȱ 554ȱoccurrences.5ȱ Itȱwasȱin thatȱ yearȱ precisely,ȱ however,ȱ thatȱ theȱ protestȱ movementȱ really gotȱ offȱ theȱ ground—asȱ aȱ cooperativeȱ effortȱ betweenȱ Christian missionariesȱandȱreformȬmindedȱHindus.ȱRammohanȱRoyȱpubȬ lishedȱaȱbrochureȱinȱwhichȱaȱfictionalȱsupporterȱofȱtheȱpractice engagesȱ inȱ debateȱ withȱ anȱ opponent,ȱ easilyȱ recognizableȱ as RammohanȱRoyȱhimself.6ȱHeȱwasȱalsoȱinvitedȱbyȱtheȱeditorsȱof theȱBengaliȱnewspaperȱofȱtheȱmissionaries,ȱSamacharȱDarpan,ȱto expoundȱonȱhisȱviewȱconcerningȱthisȱburningȱissue.ȱTheȱleader ofȱ theȱ missionaryȱ postȱ inȱ Serampore,ȱ Williamȱ Carey,ȱ hadȱ alȬ readyȱestablishedȱhimselfȱasȱaȱstrongȱopponentȱofȱsatiȱsinceȱthe beginningȱ ofȱ theȱ nineteenthȱ century.ȱ Heȱ hadȱ appealedȱ toȱ the Britishȱ authoritiesȱ aȱ ȱ numberȱ ofȱ times,ȱ butȱ inȱ vain.ȱ Theȱ British officialsȱthoughtȱlittleȱofȱmissionaryȱworkȱanywayȱandȱcertainly fearedȱaȱdecisionȱthatȱcouldȱprovokeȱunrestȱinȱtheȱHinduȱcomȬ munity.ȱTheȱmatterȱchangedȱwhenȱdebateȱonȱthisȱissueȱstarted withinȱ theȱ Hinduȱ communityȱ asȱ wellȱ becauseȱ ofȱ Rammohan Roy’sȱ publications.ȱ Itȱ wouldȱ takeȱ someȱ years,ȱ butȱ Governor GeneralȱWilliamȱBentinckȱfinallyȱmadeȱtheȱhistoricalȱdecisionȱin 1829ȱ toȱ prohibitȱ theȱ burningȱ ofȱ widowsȱ andȱ toȱ makeȱ itȱ subject toȱ punishmentȱ byȱ law.ȱ Williamȱ Carey,ȱ whoȱ alsoȱ workedȱ asȱ a translatorȱ forȱ theȱ British,ȱ receivedȱ aȱ requestȱ earlyȱ onȱ aȱ Sunday morningȱ toȱtranslateȱitȱ intoȱBengali.ȱApparently,ȱheȱ hadȱsomeȬ ȱM.C.ȱKotnala,ȱRajaȱRamȱMohunȱRoyȱandȱIndianȱAwakeningȱ(New Delhi:ȱGitanjaliȱPrakashan,ȱ1975),ȱȱpp.ȱ52Ȭ53;ȱseeȱalsoȱp.ȱ67. 5

ȱ Rammohanȱ Roy,ȱ Aȱ Conferenceȱ betweenȱ anȱ Advocateȱ for,ȱ andȱ an OpponentȱofȱtheȱPracticeȱofȱBurningȱWidowsȱAlive,ȱin:ȱTheȱEnglishȱWorksȱof RammohunȱRoy,ȱvol.ȱII,ȱpp.ȱ321Ȭ32.ȱSeeȱalsoȱtheȱworksȱthatȱfollowȱinȱthis volumeȱofȱhisȱcollectedȱworks.ȱ 6

JESUSȱASȱGURU

12

oneȱ elseȱ takeȱ overȱ hisȱ churchȱ serviceȱ andȱ beganȱ workȱ onȱ the translationȱ immediatelyȱ inȱ orderȱ toȱ ensureȱ thatȱ theȱ decision wouldȱtakeȱeffectȱimmediatelyȱandȱthatȱthereȱwouldȱbeȱnoȱmore victims.ȱTheȱstoryȱgoesȱthatȱitȱwasȱtheȱfirstȱtimeȱinȱhisȱlifeȱthat heȱwasȱabsentȱfromȱchurch. Theȱburningȱofȱwidowsȱwasȱprohibited,ȱbutȱtheȱcruelȱpracȬ ticeȱ didȱ notȱ disappearȱ entirelyȱ fromȱ India.ȱ Rightȱ upȱ untilȱ the presentȱoneȱstillȱreadsȱtheȱoccasionalȱreportȱofȱaȱcaseȱofȱsati.ȱOn 11ȱ Novemberȱ 1999,ȱ inȱ Mahobaȱ Dt.,ȱ forȱ example,ȱ aȱ desperate womanȱthrewȱherselfȱonȱtheȱfuneralȱpyreȱwhereȱherȱhusband’s bodyȱwasȱburning.ȱItȱisȱcharacteristicȱthatȱtheȱstoryȱofȱtheȱproȬ testsȱ byȱ Rammohanȱ andȱ Williamȱ Careyȱ wasȱ immediatelyȱ reȬ calledȱinȱtheȱpublicityȱsurroundingȱthisȱevent.ȱInȱthisȱcontextȱa leadingȱIndianȱnewspaperȱwroteȱaboutȱRammohan:ȱ“TheȱmanȬ nerȱ inȱwhichȱ heȱ foughtȱsatiȱshowedȱhowȱ theȱ zealȱ ofȱ theȱ ChrisȬ tianȱ missionaryȱ andȱ theȱ idealismȱ ofȱ theȱ Hinduȱ reformerȱ could beȱcombinedȱtoȱstrikeȱatȱtheȱrootsȱofȱaȱsocialȱmalaise.”7 RammohanȱRoyȱplayedȱaȱdecisiveȱroleȱinȱtheȱprotestȱmoveȬ mentȱagainstȱsati.ȱHowȱpreciselyȱdidȱitȱcomeȱaboutȱthatȱheȱacted soȱdecisivelyȱonȱthisȱissue?ȱItȱisȱfascinatingȱtoȱseeȱhowȱtheȱmyth aroundȱthisȱeventȱgrew.ȱInȱanyȱcase,ȱitȱseemsȱtoȱbeȱestablished thatȱ inȱ 1811,ȱ whenȱ Rammohan’sȱ brotherȱ died,ȱ hisȱ wifeȱ threw herselfȱintoȱtheȱcremationȱfire.ȱSomeȱwritersȱdescribeȱglowingly howȱ Rammohanȱ wasȱ presentȱ andȱ immediatelyȱ becameȱ an avowedȱ opponentȱ ofȱ thisȱ practice.ȱ Accordingȱ toȱ others,ȱ heȱ reȬ ceivedȱaȱletterȱtellingȱhimȱaboutȱtheȱevent—ifȱheȱhadȱbeenȱpresȬ ent,ȱthenȱheȱwouldȱcertainlyȱhaveȱsavedȱhisȱsisterȬinȬlaw.8ȱThis isȱ aȱniceȱexampleȱ ofȱhowȱaȱlaterȱpositionȱcanȱinfluenceȱ theȱ imȬ ageȱofȱtheȱyoungerȱyearsȱofȱaȱgreatȱman.ȱOneȱwriterȱwhoȱgoes quiteȱ farȱ inȱ thisȱ portraysȱ theȱ youngȱ studentȱ Rammohanȱ inȱ BeȬ naresȱ asȱ anȱ itinerantȱ preacherȱ whoȱ wasȱ constantlyȱ visitingȱ the cremationȱ placesȱ toȱ keepȱ peopleȱ fromȱ attendingȱ theseȱ terrible events.9ȱItȱisȱofȱcourseȱveryȱpossibleȱthatȱtheȱdeathȱofȱhisȱsisterȬ inȬlawȱledȱtoȱhisȱabhorrenceȱofȱthisȱoldȱpractice.ȱButȱitȱwasȱyears beforeȱ heȱ actuallyȱ tookȱ anyȱ action.ȱ Heȱ firstȱ attemptedȱ toȱ influȬ ȱA.J.ȱPhilipȱinȱTheȱIndianȱExpressȱ(17ȱNovemberȱ1999).

7

ȱExamplesȱcanȱbeȱfoundȱinȱKotnala,ȱRajaȱRamȱMohanȱRoy,ȱp.ȱ26.

8

9 ȱB.N.ȱDasgupta,ȱTheȱLifeȱandȱTimesȱofȱRajahȱRammohanȱRoyȱ(New Delhi:ȱAmbikaȱPublications,ȱ1980),ȱp.ȱ93.

THEȱGUIDEȱTOȱPEACEȱANDȱHAPPINESS:ȱRAMMOHANȱROY

13

enceȱ publicȱ opinionȱ inȱ otherȱ areas,ȱ suchȱ asȱ inȱ hisȱ struggle againstȱ worshippingȱ idolsȱ andȱ polytheism.ȱ Butȱ theȱ experience thatȱheȱacquiredȱinȱpublicȱdebateȱdidȱcomeȱinȱveryȱhandyȱwhen heȱlaterȱbeganȱhisȱfightȱagainstȱtheȱburningȱofȱwidows. Thisȱ takesȱ usȱ toȱ whatȱ nowȱ wasȱ actuallyȱ modernȱ about RammohanȱRoyȱandȱwhyȱheȱrightlyȱdeservesȱtheȱhonoraryȱtitle “theȱfatherȱofȱmodernȱIndia.”10ȱWhatȱwasȱnewȱwasȱthatȱheȱsaw theȱ importanceȱ ofȱ publicȱ opinionȱ andȱ attemptedȱ toȱ instigate publicȱdebatesȱonȱcertainȱquestions.ȱForȱthatȱpurpose,ȱheȱwasȱin theȱ rightȱ placeȱ inȱ theȱ Kolkataȱ ofȱ theȱ earlyȱ nineteenthȱ century. Withȱ theȱ comingȱ ofȱ theȱ British,ȱ thisȱ negligibleȱ placeȱ grewȱ into anȱ importantȱ city.ȱ Itȱ wasȱ theȱ capitalȱ ofȱ Britishȱ administration andȱ theȱ placeȱ whereȱ aȱ newȱ urbanȱ eliteȱ ofȱ businessȱ peopleȱ and intellectualsȱ originated.ȱ Nowhereȱ wasȱ thereȱ moreȱ contact betweenȱtheȱIndiansȱandȱtheȱEnglishȱasȱthere.ȱInȱtheȱpastȱeighȬ teenthȱ centuryȱ aȱ cultureȱ hadȱ grownȱ upȱ inȱ Englandȱ especially whereȱ publicȱ opinionȱ becameȱ aȱ factorȱ inȱ allȱ areas,ȱ andȱ the governmentȱhadȱtoȱtakeȱitȱdulyȱintoȱaccount.11ȱRammohanȱwas sensitiveȱ toȱ thisȱ and,ȱ withȱ greatȱ creativity,ȱ broughtȱ important mattersȱ upȱ forȱ discussionȱ inȱ numerousȱ brochures,ȱ pamphlets andȱ newspaperȱ articles.ȱ Andȱ heȱ wasȱ successfulȱ manyȱ timesȱ in involvingȱseveralȱinȱtheȱformationȱofȱpublicȱideas,ȱofȱwhichȱthe satiȱ questionȱ isȱ aȱ goodȱ example.ȱ Williamȱ Careyȱ andȱ hisȱ fellow missionariesȱ hadȱ turnedȱ mainlyȱ directlyȱ toȱ theȱ government withȱrequestsȱtoȱintervene.ȱThatȱwasȱnotȱhowȱRammohanȱdidȱit. Heȱ expectedȱ littleȱ fromȱ governmentsȱ asȱ such—heȱ wantedȱ to changeȱtheȱopinionȱofȱtheȱcityȱpopulationȱandȱonlyȱlaterȱdidȱhe turnȱdirectlyȱtoȱtheȱgovernmentȱhimselfȱasȱwell.ȱThatȱwasȱwhen aȱgroupȱofȱtraditionalȱHindusȱprotestedȱtheȱdecisionȱtoȱprohibit theȱ practice.ȱ Inȱ response,ȱ Rammohanȱ Roy,ȱ withȱ aȱ numberȱ of supporters,ȱ offeredȱ anȱ addressȱ toȱ theȱ governorȱ generalȱ andȱ a petitionȱtoȱtheȱParliamentȱinȱLondon.ȱButȱRammohanȱRoy’sȱpriȬ ȱThisȱisȱtheȱsubtitleȱofȱRobertson’sȱbook,ȱRajaȱRammohanȱRoyȱ(cf. noteȱ3).ȱRammohanȱRoyȱwasȱrepeatedlyȱcalledȱthisȱinȱIndiaȱafterȱIndeȬ pendence. 10

ȱAȱgoodȱdescriptionȱofȱthisȱcanȱbeȱfoundȱinȱtheȱclassicȱstudyȱby JürgenȱHabermas,ȱStrukturwandelȱderȱÖffentlichkeit:ȱUntersuchungenȱȱzu einerȱ Kategorieȱ derȱ bürgerlichenȱ Gesellschaft,ȱ 6thȱ ed.ȱ (Neuwied/Berlin: Luchterhand,ȱ1974),ȱespeciallyȱpp.ȱ76Ȭ87ȱ(“DerȱModellfallȱderȱenglischen Entwicklung”).ȱ 11

JESUSȱASȱGURU

14

maryȱconcernȱwasȱtoȱhaveȱhisȱfellowȱbelieversȱseeȱwhatȱreforms wereȱ neededȱ inȱ theirȱ tradition.ȱ Hereȱ heȱ couldȱ workȱ together withȱtheȱBaptistȱmissionariesȱinȱSeramporeȱonȱtheȱsatiȱissue.ȱBut thatȱwasȱnotȱalwaysȱtheȱcase. TheȱPreceptsȱofȱJesus Inȱ theȱ beginningȱ ofȱ 1820ȱ Rammohanȱ Royȱ publishedȱ aȱ modest bookȱ thatȱ wouldȱ causeȱ anȱ enormousȱ tumult.ȱ Thatȱ is,ȱ atȱ first glance,ȱ remarkable.ȱ Afterȱ all,ȱ itsȱ contentȱ isȱ notȱ newȱ orȱ surprisȬ ingȱ atȱ all:ȱ allȱ itȱ containedȱ wasȱ aȱ collectionȱ ofȱ Jesus’ȱ sayings, takenȱwordȱforȱwordȱfromȱtheȱstandardȱEnglishȱtranslation,ȱthe Kingȱ Jamesȱ Version.ȱ Theȱ collectionȱ wasȱ precededȱ byȱ anȱ introȬ duction,ȱwhichȱrecommendedȱtheseȱtextsȱasȱaȱsimpleȱbutȱedifyȬ ingȱ instructionȱ forȱ religionȱ andȱ morality.ȱ Theȱ completeȱ titleȱ of theȱ publicationȱwasȱTheȱ PreceptsȱofȱJesus:ȱ Theȱ Guideȱtoȱ Peaceȱ and Happiness.ȱExtractedȱfromȱtheȱBooksȱofȱtheȱNewȱTestamentȱAscribed toȱ theȱ Fourȱ Evangelists,ȱ withȱ Translationsȱ intoȱ Sungscritȱ and Bengalee.12ȱ Itȱ wasȱ publishedȱ anonymously;ȱ noȱ author’sȱ nameȱ is reportedȱ inȱ theȱ book.ȱ Itȱ isȱ remarkableȱ thatȱ theȱ translationsȱ in Sanskritȱ andȱ Bengaliȱ thatȱ areȱ mentionedȱ onȱ theȱ titleȱ pageȱ are missing:ȱapparently,ȱthisȱwasȱaȱpiousȱintentionȱforȱanotherȱediȬ tion.13 Alreadyȱ inȱ Februaryȱ 1820,ȱ shortlyȱ afterȱ itsȱ publication, thereȱ wasȱ aȱ sharpȱ critiqueȱ inȱ Theȱ Friendȱ ofȱ India,ȱ theȱ English languageȱperiodicalȱ putȱoutȱ byȱ theȱ Baptistȱmissionariesȱ inȱ SerȬ ampore.ȱItȱwasȱinȱthisȱcircleȱthatȱtheȱhardȱcoreȱofȱtheȱresistance toȱ Rammohan’sȱ bookȱ wouldȱ beȱ foundȱ andȱ wouldȱ continueȱ for someȱyears.ȱItȱwasȱJoshuaȱMarshmanȱinȱparticular,ȱtheȱchiefȱedȬ ȱRammahanȱRoy,ȱTheȱPreceptsȱofȱJesus:ȱTheȱGuideȱtoȱPeaceȱandȱHapȬ piness.ȱExtractedȱfromȱtheȱBooksȱofȱtheȱNewȱTestamentȱAscribedȱtoȱtheȱFour Evangelists,ȱwithȱTranslationsȱintoȱSungscritȱandȱBengaleeȱ(Calcutta:ȱBaptist Missionȱ Press,ȱ 1820).ȱ Seeȱ alsoȱ Rammohanȱ Roy,ȱ Theȱ Englishȱ Worksȱ of RammohunȱRoy,ȱvol.ȱIII,ȱpp.ȱ481Ȭ543. 12

ȱOnlyȱaȱfewȱcopiesȱofȱtheȱfirstȱprintingȱhaveȱbeenȱpreserved.ȱThe copyȱinȱtheȱBibliothèqueȱNationaleȱdeȱFranceȱinȱParisȱthatȱIȱconsulted containsȱtheȱEnglishȱtextȱonly,ȱIVȱplusȱ82ȱpages.ȱTheȱcopyȱinȱtheȱBodleian LibraryȱinȱOxfordȱlikewiseȱhasȱnoȱtranslationsȱinȱIndianȱlanguages.ȱIȱam gratefulȱtoȱDr.ȱGillianȱEvisonȱforȱsupplyingȱmeȱwithȱinformationȱfrom thisȱlibrary. 13

THEȱGUIDEȱTOȱPEACEȱANDȱHAPPINESS:ȱRAMMOHANȱROY

15

itorȱ ofȱ theȱ periodical,ȱ whoȱ emergedȱ asȱ aȱ fierceȱ andȱ uncomȬ promisingȱ hereticȱ hunter.14ȱ Rammohanȱ Royȱ respondedȱ toȱ the reviewȱ inȱ theȱ Seramporeȱ periodicalȱ aȱ shortȱ timeȱ laterȱ withȱ an againȱanonymouslyȱpublishedȱbrochureȱcalledȱAnȱAppealȱtoȱthe ChristianȱPublicȱinȱDefenceȱofȱ“TheȱPreceptsȱofȱJesus”ȱbyȱaȱFriendȱto Truth.15ȱTheȱpseudonymȱheȱchoseȱwasȱaȱdigȱatȱtheȱmissionaries: aȱ playȱ onȱ theȱ titleȱ ofȱ theȱ Christianȱ periodical.ȱ Rammohanȱ Roy seemedȱ toȱ beȱ sayingȱ thatȱ oneȱ couldȱ betterȱ beȱ aȱ friendȱ ofȱ Truth thanȱaȱfriendȱofȱIndiaȱwhoȱdidȱviolenceȱtoȱtheȱtruth.ȱMarshman againȱrespondedȱstronglyȱinȱTheȱFriendȱofȱIndiaȱandȱRammohan, nowȱsimplyȱunderȱhisȱownȱname,ȱwroteȱhisȱSecondȱAppealȱtoȱthe Christianȱ Publicȱ inȱ Defenceȱ ofȱ “Theȱ Preceptsȱ ofȱ Jesus.”16ȱ When Marshmanȱwasȱagainȱnotȱconvincedȱbutȱratherȱhardenedȱinȱhis resistance,ȱ Rammohanȱ Royȱ wroteȱ hisȱ Finalȱ Appealȱ toȱ theȱ ChrisȬ tianȱ Publicȱ inȱ Defenceȱ ofȱ “Theȱ Preceptsȱ ofȱ Jesus.”17ȱ Itȱ was,ȱ inȱ the meantime,ȱ 1823;ȱ Rammohan’sȱ writingsȱ inȱ defenceȱ ofȱ hisȱ work becameȱ continuallyȱ fatterȱ andȱ moreȱ scholarlyȱ andȱ theȱ gulfȱ beȬ tweenȱtheȱpartiesȱwasȱpermanentlyȱunbridgeable. Theȱ discussionȱ betweenȱ Royȱ andȱ Marshmanȱ hasȱ beenȱ deȬ scribedȱ manyȱ times,ȱ andȱ theȱ apologeticȱ writingsȱ ofȱ theȱ former haveȱ receivedȱ aȱ greatȱ dealȱ ofȱ attention.18ȱ Inȱ thisȱ battleȱ ofȱ pens, ȱ Dr.ȱJoshuaȱMarshmanȱ(1768Ȭ1837),ȱaȱteacher,ȱwasȱoneȱ ofȱthree missionariesȱinȱSerampore.ȱTheȱothersȱwereȱtheȱpreacherȱandȱtranslator WilliamȱCareyȱandȱtheȱprinterȱWilliamȱWard.ȱTheyȱwereȱcalledȱ“theȱSerȬ amporeȱtrio.” 14

ȱIncludedȱinȱRammohanȱRoy,ȱTheȱEnglishȱWorksȱofȱRammohunȱRoy, vol.ȱIII,ȱpp.ȱ545Ȭ64. 15

ȱIncludedȱinȱRammohanȱRoy,ȱTheȱEnglishȱWorksȱofȱRajaȱRammohun Roy,ȱvol.ȱIII,ȱpp.ȱ565Ȭ675. 16

ȱIncludedȱinȱRammohanȱRoy,ȱTheȱEnglishȱWorksȱofȱRajaȱRammohun Roy,ȱvol.ȱIII,ȱpp.ȱ677Ȭ874. 17

ȱ Cf.,ȱ e.g.,ȱ M.M.ȱ Thomas,ȱ Theȱ Acknowledgedȱ Christȱ ofȱ theȱ Indian Resistanceȱ(London:ȱSCMȱPress,ȱ1969),ȱpp.ȱ1Ȭ37;ȱS.J.ȱSamartha,ȱTheȱHindu Responseȱ toȱ theȱ Unboundȱ Christȱ (Madras:ȱ Christianȱ Literatureȱ Society, 1974),ȱpp.ȱ19Ȭ41;ȱCromwellȱCrawford,ȱ“RajaȱRamȱMohanȱRoy’sȱAttitude towardȱChristiansȱandȱChristianity,”ȱin:ȱA.ȱSharma,ȱNeoȬHinduȱViewsȱof Christianityȱ(Leiden:ȱE.J.ȱBrill,ȱ1988),ȱpp.ȱ16Ȭ65;ȱCraigȱW.ȱLivermoreȱetȱal., “ChristologyȱofȱResponse,”ȱStudiesȱinȱInterreligiousȱDialogueȱ4ȱ(1994):ȱ5Ȭ31; R.S.ȱ Sugirtharajah,ȱ “Theȱ Indianȱ Textualȱ Mutinyȱ ofȱ 1820,”ȱ in:ȱ R.S. 18

16

JESUSȱASȱGURU

thereȱwereȱsomeȱtheologicalȱcontroversiesȱwithȱrespectȱtoȱChrisȬ tology,ȱinȱparticularȱconcerningȱtheȱdivinityȱofȱJesusȱandȱtheȱnaȬ tureȱofȱtheȱreconciliation,ȱthatȱwereȱexploredȱinȱdepth.ȱTheȱFinal Appealȱ especially,ȱ consistingȱ ofȱ moreȱ thanȱ twoȱ hundredȱ pages, isȱanȱimpressiveȱstudy,ȱinterspersedȱwithȱexegeticalȱnotesȱonȱa numberȱ ofȱ biblicalȱ texts,ȱ completeȱ withȱ referencesȱ toȱ theȱ HeȬ brewȱ andȱ Greekȱ texts.ȱ Itȱ wouldȱ alreadyȱ haveȱ beenȱ aȱ major achievementȱ forȱ aȱ Christianȱ theologianȱ toȱ presentȱ suchȱ aȱ thorȬ oughȱstudy—howȱmuchȱmoreȱsoȱforȱanȱoutsider,ȱaȱHindu.ȱBut thisȱworkȱtakesȱusȱfarȱfromȱtheȱoriginalȱwork,ȱbothȱwithȱrespect toȱsubjectȱandȱatmosphere,ȱwithȱwhichȱitȱallȱbegan,ȱTheȱPrecepts ofȱJesus.ȱWhatȱwasȱtheȱinitialȱissue? Rammohanȱ Roy’sȱ primaryȱ intentionȱ withȱ hisȱ bookletȱ on theȱ Gospelȱ wasȱ toȱ giveȱ hisȱ compatriots,ȱ bothȱ Hindusȱ and Muslims,ȱ anȱ ideaȱ ofȱ theȱ teachingȱ ofȱ Jesus.ȱ Toȱ underscoreȱ that intention,ȱ theȱ Englishȱ textȱ hadȱ toȱ beȱ accompaniedȱ byȱ translaȬ tionsȱinȱSanskrit,ȱtheȱholyȱlanguageȱofȱtheȱpriests,ȱandȱBengali, theȱ languageȱ ofȱ theȱ people.ȱ Thatȱ didȱ notȱ happenȱ withȱ theȱ first printing,ȱbutȱinȱtheȱmeantimeȱRammohanȱRoyȱwentȱaheadȱwith theȱ Englishȱ version.ȱ Theȱ educatedȱ Indiansȱ forȱ whomȱ heȱ inȬ tendedȱ hisȱ workȱ did,ȱ afterȱ all,ȱ knowȱ English.ȱ Andȱ Rammohan wanted,ȱ perhaps,ȱ toȱ goȱ beyondȱ themȱ toȱ addressȱ theȱ English peopleȱinȱKolkataȱtoȱshowȱthemȱthatȱanȱoutsiderȱtookȱanȱinterȬ estȱ inȱ theirȱ religion.ȱ Rammohanȱ attemptedȱ toȱ presentȱ theȱ sayȬ ingsȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ inȱ hisȱ selectionȱ asȱ objectivelyȱ asȱ possibleȱ toȱ the peopleȱinȱIndia,ȱhavingȱnoȱotherȱpurposeȱthanȱtoȱshowȱwhatȱJeȬ susȱhadȱsaid.ȱHeȱdidȱnotȱinterpret,ȱletȱaloneȱmakeȱanyȱcomparȬ isonȱ withȱ textsȱ fromȱ otherȱ religions.ȱ Heȱ merelyȱ offeredȱ toȱ his readersȱJesus’ȱsayingsȱasȱsuch:ȱtakeȱandȱread! Rammohanȱ Royȱ has,ȱ ofȱ course,ȱ aȱ specificȱ purposeȱ inȱ his choiceȱofȱtheȱBibleȱtextsȱinȱquestion.ȱHeȱincludesȱtheȱoneȱandȱexȬ cludesȱtheȱother,ȱsomethingȱofȱwhichȱheȱisȱwellȱaware.ȱHeȱgives hisȱreasonsȱforȱthisȱchoiceȱinȱaȱshortȱintroductionȱofȱfourȱpages. Itȱ isȱ aȱ personal,ȱ congenialȱ work,ȱ inȱ whichȱ weȱ canȱ clearlyȱ see whatȱRammohanȱRoyȱisȱdoing.ȱInȱorderȱtoȱpersevereȱinȱlife,ȱhe begins,ȱ aȱ personȱ needsȱ twoȱ things.ȱ First,ȱ thereȱ isȱ theȱ underȬ Sugirtharajah,ȱAsianȱBiblicalȱHermeneuticsȱandȱPostcolonialism:ȱContesting theȱInterpretations,ȱTheȱBibleȱ&ȱLiberationȱSeriesȱ(Maryknoll:ȱOrbisȱBooks, 1998),ȱ pp.ȱ 29Ȭ53.ȱ Allȱ otherȱ booksȱ onȱ Rammohanȱ Royȱ alsoȱ contain descriptionsȱofȱthisȱremarkableȱpublicȱdebateȱofȱcourse.

THEȱGUIDEȱTOȱPEACEȱANDȱHAPPINESS:ȱRAMMOHANȱROY

17

standingȱ thatȱ thereȱ isȱ aȱ Creatorȱ andȱ Preserverȱ ofȱ theȱ universe. ThatȱbeliefȱinȱGodȱisȱpassedȱonȱandȱtaughtȱtoȱus,ȱandȱweȱcanȱalȬ soȱ discoverȱ thisȱ byȱ carefullyȱ studyingȱ theȱ miraclesȱ ofȱ nature. Theȱsecondȱthingȱthatȱpeopleȱneedȱisȱtheȱlaw,ȱwhichȱteachesȱus toȱ treatȱ othersȱ asȱ weȱ ourselvesȱ wouldȱ likeȱ toȱ beȱ treated.ȱ RamȬ mohanȱwritesȱconcerningȱthisȱthatȱtheȱlawȱisȱpartiallyȱpresentȱin allȱreligionsȱbutȱprincipallyȱtaughtȱbyȱChristianity.19ȱHeȱwasȱunȬ ableȱtoȱdiscoverȱearlierȱthatȱthisȱwasȱtheȱessenceȱofȱChristianity becauseȱ ofȱ allȱ theȱ doctrinesȱ withȱ whichȱ Christiansȱ presented him.ȱ Heȱ understoodȱ fromȱ manyȱ thatȱ oneȱ couldȱ beȱ calledȱ a Christianȱ onlyȱ ifȱ oneȱ believedȱ inȱ theȱ divinityȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ andȱ the HolyȱSpirit.ȱOthersȱwereȱmoreȱgenerousȱinȱhisȱviewȱandȱlimited themselvesȱ toȱ theȱ requirementȱ thatȱ oneȱ viewȱ theȱ Bibleȱ asȱ the revealedȱ willȱ ofȱ God.ȱ But,ȱ accordingȱ toȱ some,ȱ oneȱ couldȱ call oneselfȱ aȱ Christianȱ alreadyȱ ifȱ oneȱ intendedȱ toȱ followȱ the teachingȱofȱChristȱasȱheȱhimselfȱtaughtȱit.ȱItȱisȱobviouslyȱinȱthis lastȱsenseȱthatȱRammohanȱRoyȱwantsȱtoȱincludeȱhimselfȱamong Christians.ȱAndȱthusȱheȱwantsȱtoȱpresentȱthisȱteachingȱofȱJesus. Whatȱ theȱ apostlesȱ allȱ wantedȱ toȱ teachȱ isȱ notȱ importantȱ inȱ his view;ȱ heȱ hasȱ lookedȱ atȱ allȱ theȱ differencesȱ betweenȱ textsȱ inȱ the NewȱTestamentȱlettersȱandȱinȱActsȱandȱconcludedȱthatȱtheyȱare notȱinfallible. Rammohanȱ thenȱ declaresȱ thatȱ heȱ wasȱ veryȱ hesitantȱ toȱ enȬ gageȱinȱdiscussionȱonȱreligiousȱissuesȱwithȱarguments.ȱAfterȱall, peopleȱdoȱnotȱlistenȱtoȱargumentsȱveryȱwell,ȱevenȱifȱtheyȱagreed withȱtheȱnaturalȱlawsȱandȱcorrespondedȱtoȱwhatȱhumanȱreason andȱdivineȱrevelationȱprescribed.ȱHeȱthusȱclearlyȱindicatesȱwhat isȱ decisiveȱ forȱ himȱ withȱ respectȱ toȱ theȱ knowledgeȱ ofȱ God:ȱ naȬ ture,ȱreasonȱandȱrevelationȱsupplementingȱoneȱanother.ȱTheȱinȬ fluenceȱ ofȱ theȱ Enlightenmentȱ thatȱ stampedȱ theȱ precedingȱ cenȬ turyȱcanȱbeȱseenȱhere.ȱIfȱthisȱbookȱdoesȱnotȱmakeȱanyȱargument, whatȱdoesȱitȱdo?ȱHeȱconsidersȱaȱsimpleȱlistingȱofȱtheȱpurposes ofȱtheȱdifferentȱreligionsȱtoȱbeȱmoreȱmeaningful.ȱThenȱeveryone couldȱ decideȱ forȱ himselfȱ whatȱ wasȱ “theȱ mostȱ consistentȱ with

ȱRammohanȱRoy,ȱTheȱPreceptsȱofȱJesus,ȱpp.ȱIȬII:ȱ“...ȱalthoughȱitȱis partiallyȱ taughtȱ alsoȱ inȱ everyȱ systemȱ ofȱ religionȱ withȱ whichȱ Iȱ amȱ acȬ quainted,ȱisȱprincipallyȱinculcatedȱbyȱChristianity.”ȱCf.ȱTheȱEnglishȱWorks ofȱRammohunȱRoy,ȱvol.ȱIII,ȱp.ȱ483.ȱ 19

JESUSȱASȱGURU

18

theȱsacredȱtraditions,ȱandȱmostȱacceptableȱtoȱcommonȱsense.”20 RammohanȱRoyȱthusȱindicatesȱthatȱheȱdoesȱnotȱwantȱtoȱlookȱat Christianityȱ inȱ isolation.ȱ Hereȱ tooȱ heȱ isȱ concernedȱ withȱ the religionȱ behindȱ theȱ religions,ȱ withȱ religiousȱ insightȱ thatȱ canȱ be valuableȱ forȱ Hindusȱ andȱ Muslimsȱ asȱ wellȱ becauseȱ itȱ isȱ uniȬ versallyȱvalid.ȱAndȱthatȱmeans:ȱnotȱinȱconflictȱwithȱotherȱtradiȬ tionsȱandȱpassingȱtheȱtestȱofȱreason. ThatȱisȱhowȱRammohanȱpresentsȱtheȱGospelȱtoȱHindusȱand Muslims.ȱ Heȱ choosesȱ deliberatelyȱ forȱ theȱ sayingsȱ ofȱ Christ,ȱ for thereȱ everyoneȱ willȱ gainȱ somethingȱ forȱ hisȱ ownȱ life.ȱ Heȱ isȱ less certainȱofȱthisȱwithȱrespectȱtoȱtheȱnarrativeȱpartsȱofȱtheȱGospel. Theȱhistoricalȱpassagesȱcouldȱeasilyȱinvokeȱdoubtȱandȱcriticism byȱfreethinkersȱandȱopponentsȱofȱChristianity.ȱTheȱmiracleȱstorȬ iesȱ inȱ particularȱ heȱ doesȱ notȱ wantȱ toȱ presentȱ toȱ hisȱ fellow countrymen.ȱTheyȱwouldȱmakeȱlittleȱimpression,ȱforȱtheȱAsians wereȱaccustomedȱtoȱthingsȱthatȱwereȱmuchȱmoreȱmiraculousȱin theirȱ ownȱ fabrications.ȱ Notȱ withoutȱ humourȱ andȱ selfȬmockery withȱrespectȱtoȱhisȱownȱculture,ȱheȱaddsȱaȱfootnoteȱinȱwhichȱhe refersȱ toȱ theȱ mythȱ ofȱ Agastiȱ whoȱ swallowedȱ upȱ theȱ oceanȱ that hadȱinsultedȱhimȱandȱthenȱurinatedȱallȱthatȱwaterȱoutȱagain.ȱIt willȱbeȱapparentȱfromȱwhatȱfollowsȱbelowȱthatȱnotȱeveryȱChrisȬ tianȱsawȱtheȱhumourȱinȱthis. RammohanȱRoyȱwantsȱtoȱpresentȱJesus’ȱteaching: Thisȱ simpleȱ codeȱ ofȱ Religionȱ andȱ moralityȱ isȱ soȱ admirably calculatedȱtoȱelevateȱmen’sȱideasȱtoȱhighȱandȱliberalȱnotions ofȱoneȱGODȱ...ȱandȱisȱalsoȱsoȱwellȱfittedȱtoȱregulateȱtheȱconȬ ductȱofȱtheȱhumanȱraceȱinȱtheȱdischargeȱofȱtheirȱvariousȱdutȬ iesȱtoȱGOD,ȱtoȱthemselves,ȱandȱtoȱSociety,ȱthatȱIȱcannotȱbut hopeȱ theȱ bestȱ effectsȱ fromȱ itsȱ promulgationȱ inȱ theȱ present form.21

Afterȱ theȱ shortȱ butȱ veryȱ revealingȱ introduction,ȱ theȱ sayingsȱ of Jesusȱ follow,ȱ extensivelyȱ andȱ withoutȱ Rammohanȱ interrupting theȱ evangelists.ȱ Theȱ processȱ isȱ veryȱ simple:ȱ Rammohanȱ Roy tookȱhisȱEnglishȱBibleȱandȱsimplyȱstartedȱatȱtheȱbeginningȱofȱthe ȱRammohanȱRoy,ȱTheȱPreceptsȱofȱJesus,ȱp.ȱIII;ȱTheȱEnglishȱWorksȱof RammohunȱRoy,ȱvol.ȱIII,ȱp.ȱ484. 20

21 ȱRammohanȱRoy,ȱTheȱPreceptsȱofȱJesus,ȱp.ȱIV;ȱTheȱEnglishȱWorksȱof RammohunȱRoy,ȱvol.ȱIII,ȱp.ȱ485.

THEȱGUIDEȱTOȱPEACEȱANDȱHAPPINESS:ȱRAMMOHANȱROY

19

NewȱTestamentȱwithȱcopyingȱallȱtheȱpartsȱthatȱcontainedȱJesus’ longerȱ speeches.ȱ Suchȱ aȱ processȱ bringsȱ oneȱ firstȱ toȱ theȱ Sermon onȱtheȱMountȱinȱMatthewȱ5.ȱThingsȱthatȱJesusȱsaidȱpriorȱtoȱthat areȱobviouslyȱnotȱincludedȱbecauseȱtheyȱareȱsimplyȱdisconnecȬ tedȱtextsȱinȱnarratives,ȱi.e.ȱsomeȱtextsȱinȱtheȱstoryȱofȱhisȱbaptism, hisȱ temptationȱ inȱ theȱ wildernessȱ andȱ hisȱ firstȱ appearance.ȱ The centralȱ text,ȱ “Repentȱ ye:ȱ forȱ theȱ kingdomȱ ofȱ heavenȱ isȱ at hand,”22ȱisȱalsoȱleftȱoutȱbecauseȱofȱthisȱcriterion. Inȱ Rammohan’sȱ view,ȱ Jesus’ȱ realȱ teachingȱ beginsȱ withȱ the SermonȱonȱtheȱMount.ȱThisȱwasȱnotȱwithoutȱsignificanceȱforȱthe receptionȱofȱtheȱmessageȱofȱtheȱGospelȱinȱIndia.ȱItȱisȱknownȱon theȱ basisȱ ofȱ variousȱ nineteenthȬcenturyȱ convertsȱ thatȱ theyȱ beȬ cameȱ acquaintedȱ withȱ Christianȱ teachingȱ throughȱ Rammohan Roy’sȱbook,ȱandȱthereforeȱtheȱfirstȱthingȱtheyȱreadȱwasȱtheȱSerȬ monȱonȱtheȱMount.23ȱTheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMountȱwillȱalsoȱprove laterȱ toȱ beȱ theȱ passageȱ thatȱ wasȱ theȱ mostȱ appealingȱ toȱ Hindus andȱ hasȱ remainedȱ extraordinarilyȱ popularȱ rightȱ upȱ toȱ theȱ preȬ sent.ȱRammohan’sȱbookȱcertainlyȱplayedȱaȱroleȱinȱthis. Afterȱ theȱ Sermonȱ onȱ theȱ Mount,ȱ Rammohanȱ presentsȱ the restȱ ofȱ Jesus’ȱ sayingsȱ asȱ foundȱ inȱ theȱ gospelȱ ofȱ Matthew, skippingȱvirtuallyȱnothing.ȱTheȱconversationȱwithȱtheȱdisciples inȱ Matthewȱ 16ȱ isȱ includedȱ inȱ itsȱ entirety,ȱ alongȱ withȱ Peter’s confession,ȱ “Thouȱ artȱ theȱ Christ,ȱ theȱ Sonȱ ofȱ theȱ Livingȱ God,” andȱ Jesus’ȱ predictionȱ ofȱ hisȱ sufferingȱ thatȱ follows.ȱ Butȱ the secondȱandȱthirdȱpredictionsȱofȱhisȱsufferingȱareȱleftȱout,ȱasȱare someȱ ofȱ theȱ parallelȱ passagesȱ inȱ theȱ otherȱ gospels.ȱ Theȱ writer doesȱ notȱ wantȱ toȱ emphasizeȱ theȱ passionȱ tooȱ much.ȱ Itȱ isȱ very strikingȱthatȱtheȱprecedingȱandȱsucceedingȱstatementsȱbyȱJesus inȱMatthewȱ20ȱareȱincluded,ȱbutȱtheȱpredictionȱofȱhisȱpassionȱis veryȱdeliberatelyȱexcluded.ȱThatȱtheȱconversationȱonȱtheȱtemple taxȱ isȱ omittedȱ isȱ certainlyȱ dueȱ toȱ theȱ miracleȱ thatȱ isȱ connected withȱit.ȱAndȱtheȱspeechȱonȱtheȱlastȱthingsȱ(Matthewȱ24)ȱisȱproȬ bablyȱtooȱfarȱoutsideȱtheȱexperienceȱofȱthisȱIndianȱthinkerȱtoȱbe appreciatedȱbyȱhim.ȱThus,ȱitȱisȱnotȱincluded,ȱwhereasȱtheȱthree ȱInȱkeepingȱwithȱtheȱtranslationȱthatȱRammohanȱRoyȱhimselfȱused, theȱquotationsȱfromȱtheȱBibleȱhereȱareȱfromȱtheȱKingȱJamesȱVersion. 22

ȱSeeȱM.M.ȱThomas,ȱTheȱAcknowledgedȱChrist,ȱpp.ȱ10Ȭ11.ȱNehemiah Gorehȱ(seeȱtheȱfollowingȱchapter)ȱwasȱalsoȱfirstȱmovedȱbyȱtheȱSermonȱon theȱMount. 23

20

JESUSȱASȱGURU

pericopesȱinȱMatthewȱ25ȱare,ȱbyȱwayȱofȱconcludingȱtheȱfirstȱgosȬ pel.ȱ Thusȱ theȱ Matthewȱ seriesȱ endsȱ withȱ theȱ judgementȱ byȱ the SonȱofȱMan,ȱwhichȱwillȱlaterȱproveȱtoȱhaveȱgreatȱsignificanceȱfor RammohanȱRoy. Matthewȱ takesȱ upȱ mostȱ ofȱ theȱ publicationȱ sinceȱ it,ȱ ofȱ the threeȱ synopticȱ gospels,ȱ containsȱ theȱ mostȱ sayingsȱ ofȱ Jesus.ȱ But MarkȱandȱLukeȱareȱalsoȱusedȱcarefully.ȱAfterȱMatthewȱ25,ȱRamȬ mohanȱ continuesȱ withȱ Markȱ 3:31ȱ andȱ whateverȱ ofȱ Jesus’ȱ sayȬ ingsȱ follow,ȱ theȱ firstȱ ofȱ whichȱ isȱ Jesus’ȱ sayingȱ aboutȱ hisȱ relaȬ tives:ȱ“ForȱwhosoeverȱshallȱdoȱtheȱwillȱofȱGod,ȱtheȱsameȱisȱmy brother,ȱandȱmyȱsister,ȱandȱmother”—aȱtextȱthatȱcanȱsoundȱposȬ itivelyȱshockingȱinȱIndia,ȱbecauseȱcasteȱandȱfamilyȱrulesȱgiveȱa veryȱ differentȱ orientation.ȱ Thisȱ partȱ wasȱ alsoȱ alreadyȱ included inȱtheȱMatthewȱseries.ȱOneȱwouldȱexpectȱRammohanȱtoȱexclude parallelsȱofȱtextsȱthatȱhadȱalreadyȱbeenȱlisted,ȱbutȱthatȱisȱnotȱthe case.ȱThusȱweȱfindȱtheȱparableȱofȱtheȱsowerȱthreeȱtimesȱasȱwell asȱallȱdiscussionsȱonȱeatingȱwithȱtaxȱcollectorsȱandȱsinners.ȱAnd thatȱ isȱ significant!ȱ Thoseȱ sayingsȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ areȱ inȱ directȱ conflict withȱ Hinduȱ purityȱ rituals,ȱ inȱ whichȱ peopleȱ ofȱ differentȱ castes doȱ notȱ eatȱ togetherȱ atȱ all.ȱ ȱ Inȱ theȱ sameȱ wayȱ theȱ praiseȱ ofȱ the widowȱ whoȱ gaveȱ herȱ smallȱ giftȱ and,ȱ inȱ doingȱ so,ȱ gaveȱ more thanȱ others,ȱ isȱ alwaysȱ included.ȱ Thisȱ wouldȱ alsoȱ beȱ aȱ striking textȱinȱIndia,ȱcertainlyȱagainstȱtheȱbackgroundȱofȱtheȱsatiȱissue. HeȱalsoȱworksȱthroughȱtheȱgospelȱofȱLukeȱsystematically.ȱIt isȱ remarkableȱ hereȱ thatȱ oneȱ healingȱ narrativeȱ isȱ includedȱ as well,ȱi.e.ȱtheȱhealingȱofȱaȱmanȱsufferingȱfromȱdropsyȱinȱLukeȱ14. Thisȱ isȱ certainlyȱ becauseȱ itȱ servesȱ asȱ theȱ occasionȱ forȱ someȱ reȬ marksȱonȱtheȱSabbathȱthatȱRammohanȱincludesȱeveryȱtime:ȱthe issueȱofȱsacredȱtimesȱandȱassociatedȱtaboosȱisȱveryȱmuchȱpartȱof hisȱ environment.ȱ Itȱ isȱ strangeȱ thatȱ theȱ closingȱ ofȱ Lukeȱ 17ȱ is missing.ȱOfȱcourse,ȱtheȱapocalypticȱreportȱonȱtheȱterrifyingȱday thatȱ isȱ comingȱ wouldȱ notȱ haveȱ appealedȱ toȱ Rammohan,ȱ any moreȱthanȱtheȱdiscourseȱonȱtheȱlastȱthings.ȱButȱthisȱsectionȱdoes containȱ theȱ textȱ thatȱ wouldȱ laterȱ playȱ aȱ centralȱ roleȱ inȱ theȱ diaȬ logueȱbetweenȱHindusȱandȱChristians:ȱ“theȱkingdomȱofȱGodȱis withinȱyou”(Lukeȱ17:21). Afterȱ Rammohanȱ Royȱ hasȱ completedȱ hisȱ journeyȱ through theȱ synopticȱ gospels,ȱ heȱ doesȱ somethingȱ remarkable:ȱ heȱ inȬ cludesȱonlyȱaȱfewȱpassagesȱfromȱtheȱgospelȱofȱJohn.ȱSayingsȱby Jesusȱ thatȱ areȱ veryȱ wellȱ known,ȱ suchȱ asȱ hisȱ Goodȱ Shepherd speech,ȱareȱnotȱincluded.ȱHeȱchoosesȱonlyȱtheȱconversationȱwith

THEȱGUIDEȱTOȱPEACEȱANDȱHAPPINESS:ȱRAMMOHANȱROY

21

NicodemusȱfromȱJohnȱ3,ȱincludingȱtheȱfamousȱtext:ȱ“ForȱGodȱso lovedȱ theȱ world,ȱ thatȱ heȱ gaveȱ hisȱ onlyȱ begottenȱ Sonȱ ....”ȱ From theȱ conversationȱ withȱ theȱ Samaritanȱ womanȱ heȱ takesȱ onlyȱ a singleȱ text,ȱ butȱ thatȱ oneȱ isȱ exceptionallyȱ suitedȱ toȱ hisȱ purpose, “Butȱ theȱ hourȱ cometh,ȱ andȱ nowȱ is,ȱ whenȱ theȱ trueȱ worshipers shallȱ worshipȱ theȱ Fatherȱ inȱ spiritȱ andȱ inȱ truth,”ȱ andȱ whatȱ folȬ lows.ȱ Rammohanȱ consideredȱ himselfȱ andȱ hisȱ Circleȱ ofȱ Friends toȱbeȱsuchȱtrueȱworshippers.ȱHeȱthenȱchoseȱtheȱpassageȱonȱthe womanȱ caughtȱ inȱ adultery;ȱ itȱ againȱ appearsȱ thatȱ theȱ improveȬ mentȱofȱtheȱpositionȱofȱwomenȱwasȱcloseȱtoȱhisȱheart.ȱAfterȱthe closingȱversesȱinȱJohnȱ9ȱonȱseeingȱtruly,ȱJohnȱ15:1Ȭ17ȱfollowsȱas theȱ closing.ȱ Thisȱ isȱ undoubtedlyȱ aȱ veryȱ deliberateȱ choice.ȱ His presentationȱ ofȱ theȱ sayingsȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ thusȱ endsȱ withȱ theȱ text: “TheseȱthingsȱIȱcommandȱyou,ȱthatȱyeȱloveȱoneȱanother.”ȱThat, inȱRammohanȱRoy’sȱeyes,ȱwasȱtheȱheartȱofȱtheȱmessage. JesusȱasȱGuru AȱcertainȱimageȱofȱJesusȱemergesȱfromȱTheȱPreceptsȱofȱJesus,ȱand itȱisȱthatȱimageȱthatȱevokedȱsuchȱaȱstrongȱrejectionȱbyȱtheȱBapȬ tistȱmissionariesȱinȱSerampore.ȱInȱaȱcertainȱsense,ȱthatȱisȱsomeȬ whatȱ surprising.ȱ Thisȱ imageȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ isȱ notȱ givenȱ sharpȱ conȬ tours:ȱRammohanȱRoyȱdoesȱnotȱindicateȱhisȱopinionȱinȱhisȱown wordsȱasȱtoȱwhoȱChristȱis.ȱStoriesȱaboutȱJesus’ȱlifeȱdoȱnotȱplay anyȱroleȱandȱinterpretationsȱofȱwhatȱheȱsaidȱandȱdidȱareȱlacking entirely.ȱ Theȱ onlyȱ materialȱ thatȱ isȱ usedȱ areȱ Jesus’ȱ sayingsȱ acȬ cordingȱ toȱ theȱ literalȱ textȱ ofȱ theȱ gospels.ȱ Becauseȱ Rammohan neverthelessȱbecameȱengagedȱinȱaȱfierceȱconflict,ȱitȱisȱoftenȱsugȬ gestedȱ inȱ laterȱ accountsȱ thatȱ heȱ didȱ muchȱ moreȱ thanȱ simply presentȱwhatȱJesusȱsaid.ȱȱWeȱreadȱ thatȱ Rammohan,ȱ likeȱTatian inȱ hisȱ Diatessaron,ȱ “integratedȱ theȱ Gospelȱ narrativesȱ intoȱ aȱ sinȬ gleȱnarrative”ȱandȱthatȱitȱwasȱRammohanȱRoyȱratherȱthanȱD.F. Straussȱwhoȱdidȱtheȱfirstȱmodernȱresearchȱintoȱtheȱgospels.24ȱȱIt isȱ statedȱ elsewhereȱ thatȱ Theȱ Preceptsȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ consistsȱ ofȱ “Roy’s ȱThusȱSugirtharajah,ȱ“TheȱIndianȱTextualȱMutinyȱofȱ1820,”ȱp.ȱ33. InȱtheȱsecondȱcenturyȱTatianȱwroteȱaȱ“harmonyȱofȱtheȱgospels”ȱinȱwhich theȱpassagesȱfromȱtheȱdifferentȱgospelsȱwereȱcombinedȱwithȱoneȱanother. DavidȱFriedrichȱStraussȱ(1808Ȭ1874),ȱwasȱtheȱinitiatorȱofȱtheȱLifeȬofȬJesus Research,ȱinȱwhichȱtheȱhistoricalȱreliabilityȱofȱtheȱgospelsȱwasȱaȱpointȱof dispute. 24

JESUSȱASȱGURU

22

ownȱtranslationȱofȱtheȱGospelsȱofȱtheȱNewȱTestamentȱinȱwhich Royȱ ...ȱ usesȱ theȱ interpretiveȱ toolȱ ofȱ translationȱ toȱ expoundȱ his viewȱ ofȱ Christ.”25ȱ Andȱ moreȱ thanȱ oneȱ authorȱ wouldȱ haveȱ us believeȱthatȱRammohanȱworkedȱthroughȱtheȱwholeȱBibleȱinȱthe originalȱHebrewȱandȱGreek.26ȱHereȱasȱwellȱtheȱmythȱdeveloped quickly.ȱ Afterȱ all,ȱ itȱ isȱ notȱ true,ȱ asȱ canȱ beȱ observedȱ byȱ anyone whoȱ takesȱ theȱ troubleȱ toȱ readȱ Rammohan’sȱ book.ȱ Heȱ didȱ noȬ thingȱ elseȱ thanȱ takeȱ hisȱ Englishȱ Bibleȱ andȱ copyȱ theȱ passages whereȱJesusȱhimselfȱwasȱspeaking. Nevertheless,ȱRammohan’sȱmethodȱofȱchoosingȱaȱselection fromȱtheȱGospelȱdoesȱentailȱclearȱchoices.ȱAndȱitȱisȱnotȱstrange atȱ allȱ thatȱ suchȱ choicesȱ meetȱ withȱ agreementȱ byȱ oneȱ andȱ opȬ positionȱ byȱ another.ȱ Theȱ imageȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ thatȱ emergesȱ from Rammohan’sȱselectionȱofȱGospelȱtextsȱisȱprimarilyȱthatȱofȱJesus asȱ theȱ teacherȱ ofȱ wisdom:ȱ theȱ readerȱ constantlyȱ encountersȱ a Jesusȱwhoȱgivesȱinstruction.ȱRammohanȱhadȱprimarilyȱIndians inȱmindȱasȱhisȱreaders:27ȱtoȱthemȱtheȱfigureȱofȱtheȱteacherȱofȱwisȬ domȱwasȱaȱveryȱfamiliarȱone.ȱTheȱparallelȱwithȱtheȱHinduȱguru whoȱinstructedȱaȱcircleȱofȱstudentsȱinȱtrueȱinsightȱandȱtheȱpropȬ erȱwayȱofȱlifeȱisȱobvious.

ȱLivermoreȱetȱal.,ȱ“ChristologyȱofȱResponse,”ȱp.ȱ9.

25

ȱ Crawford,ȱ “Rajaȱ Ramȱ Mohanȱ Roy’sȱ Attitude,”ȱ p.ȱ 18.ȱ Similar statementsȱ canȱ beȱfoundȱinȱDasgupta,ȱTheȱLifeȱandȱTimesȱofȱRajaȱRamȬ mohunȱRoy,ȱp.ȱ236. 26

ȱThisȱisȱdeniedȱbyȱDermotȱKillingley.ȱHeȱstatesȱ(RammohunȱRoyȱin HinduȱandȱChristianȱTraditions:ȱTheȱTeapeȱLecturesȱ1990ȱ(Newcastleȱupon Tyne:ȱGrevattȱ&ȱGrevatt,ȱ1993),ȱp.ȱ141)ȱthatȱRammohanȱwasȱaddressing hisȱfellowȱIndiansȱonlyȱinȱappearance;ȱinȱactualȱfact,ȱheȱwasȱaddressing Christiansȱ (andȱ theȱ missionariesȱ inȱ particular)ȱ “becauseȱ anȱ appealȱ to HindusȱrestingȱonȱChristianȱscripturesȱwasȱcontraryȱtoȱhisȱusualȱmethod, whichȱ wasȱ toȱ presentȱ eachȱ traditionȱ withȱ argumentsȱ fromȱ itsȱ own scriptures,ȱnotȱfromȱthoseȱofȱanother.”ȱButȱtheȱintroductionȱtoȱRammoȬ han’sȱbookȱdoesȱindicateȱasȱitsȱpurposeȱ“theȱtaskȱofȱlayingȱbeforeȱmy fellowȬcreaturesȱtheȱwordsȱofȱChrist”ȱandȱheȱspeaksȱaboutȱ“peopleȱofȱdifȬ ferentȱpersuasions.”ȱInȱhisȱfirstȱdefense,ȱheȱleavesȱnoȱdoubtȱthatȱtheȱbook wasȱintendedȱforȱhisȱfellowȱIndians—MuslimsȱandȱHindus—whoȱwere unacquaintedȱwithȱChristianȱteachingȱ(e.g.ȱp.ȱ559).ȱTheȱannouncedȱtransȬ lationsȱ ofȱ Jesus’ȱ sayingsȱ inȱ Sanskritȱ andȱ Bengaliȱ pointȱ inȱ theȱ same direction. 27

THEȱGUIDEȱTOȱPEACEȱANDȱHAPPINESS:ȱRAMMOHANȱROY

23

Whatȱoneȱcanȱlearnȱformȱthisȱguruȱisȱsomewhatȱclearȱfrom theȱ subtitleȱ ofȱ Rammohan’sȱ book:ȱ Theȱ Guideȱ toȱ Peaceȱ andȱ HapȬ piness.ȱTheȱstrongȱbeginningȱwithȱtheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMountȱcolȬ oursȱ theseȱ wordsȱ immediately—itȱ is,ȱ afterȱ all,ȱ theȱ Beatitudes thatȱ areȱ quotedȱ asȱ Jesus’ȱ firstȱ instructions.ȱ Thus,ȱ atȱ theȱ very beginningȱ isȱ theȱ promiseȱ ofȱ happinessȱ toȱ thoseȱ forȱ whomȱ itȱ is notȱ atȱ allȱ obvious:ȱ theȱ poorȱ inȱ spirit,ȱ thoseȱ whoȱ mourn,ȱ the meek,ȱ etc.ȱ Correspondingȱ sayingsȱ inȱ theȱ sacredȱ textsȱ ofȱ Islam andȱHinduismȱareȱnotȱeasyȱtoȱfind.ȱJesus’ȱinstructionȱinȱthisȱpreȬ sentationȱwouldȱthusȱalsoȱstimulateȱtheȱreaderȱimmediately. Theȱ ethicsȱ ofȱ dispositionȱ inȱ theȱ longȱ followingȱ sectionȱ of theȱ Sermonȱ wouldȱ beȱ striking.ȱ Itȱ isȱ notȱ soȱ muchȱ aȱ matterȱ of obeyingȱ commandmentsȱ becauseȱ theyȱ wereȱ traditionallyȱ forȬ mulatedȱ thatȱ wayȱ butȱ moreȱ aȱ matterȱ ofȱ howȱ aȱ humanȱ being standsȱinternallyȱoverȱagainstȱtheȱother.ȱItȱisȱnotȱobedienceȱtoȱa formalȱruleȱsuchȱasȱ“Doȱnotȱkill,”ȱhoweverȱjustifiedȱitȱmightȱbe, thatȱ isȱ primary.ȱ Rather,ȱ itȱ isȱ aȱ questionȱ ofȱ havingȱ theȱ right dispositionȱtowardsȱtheȱotherȱinȱwhichȱallȱnegativeȱexpressions, suchȱasȱangerȱandȱcursing,ȱareȱsubjectȱtoȱcriticism.ȱSuchȱaȱproȬ clamationȱisȱremarkableȱinȱaȱcultureȱthatȱisȱstronglyȱorientedȱto theȱ observanceȱ ofȱ externalȱ rulesȱ forȱ behaviour.ȱ Thatȱ obtained somewhatȱforȱtheȱJewishȱworldȱofȱJesus’ȱdayȱbutȱveryȱmuchȱso forȱ Rammohanȱ Roy’sȱ India.ȱ Theȱ instructionȱ inȱ theȱ Sermonȱ on theȱ Mountȱ endsȱ inȱ theȱ soȬcalledȱ goldenȱ rule:ȱ “Thereforeȱ all thingsȱwhatsoeverȱyeȱwouldȱthatȱmenȱshouldȱdoȱtoȱyou,ȱdoȱye evenȱsoȱtoȱthem.”ȱItȱisȱobviousȱfromȱRammohan’sȱintroduction thatȱpreciselyȱthisȱruleȱhasȱspecialȱsignificanceȱforȱhim.ȱAndȱin hisȱ presentationȱ Jesusȱ emergesȱ primarilyȱ asȱ theȱ teacherȱ ofȱ huȬ manity. InȱtheȱrestȱofȱJesus’ȱinstruction,ȱaccordingȱtoȱthisȱselection, aȱ strongȱ accentȱ alsoȱ comesȱ toȱ lieȱ onȱ humanȱ motivesȱ andȱ one’s ownȱresponsibilityȱoverȱagainstȱtheȱexternalityȱofȱfollowingȱtraȬ ditionalȱrules.ȱHowȱthisȱguideȱpointsȱtoȱpeaceȱobviouslyȱhasȱto doȱwithȱbreakingȱthroughȱtheȱlinesȱofȱdivisionȱbetweenȱgroups ofȱpeople.ȱThatȱisȱnotȱonlyȱclearȱinȱtheȱwordsȱthatȱJesusȱspeaks butȱ alsoȱ inȱ howȱ heȱ acts.ȱ Rammohanȱ thusȱ presentsȱ onlyȱ briefly somethingȱ ofȱ theȱ narrativesȱ ofȱ Jesus’ȱ deeds,ȱ butȱ whatȱ heȱ does includeȱ isȱ thenȱ givenȱ extraȱ significance.ȱ Aȱ guruȱ cannotȱ be knownȱonlyȱthroughȱhisȱwords;ȱhowȱheȱtreatsȱpeopleȱisȱjustȱas illustrative.ȱThatȱbecomesȱclearȱinȱanȱevocativeȱwayȱwhenȱJesus dinesȱ withȱ taxȱ collectorsȱ andȱ sinners.ȱ Itȱ isȱ certainlyȱ aȱ shocking

JESUSȱASȱGURU

24

imageȱ forȱ theȱ rigidȱ casteȱ societyȱ ofȱ earlyȱ nineteenthȬcentury India.ȱ Thatȱ peopleȱ fromȱ differentȱ groupsȱ inȱ theȱ population wouldȱ eatȱ togetherȱ wasȱ tabooȱ inȱ allȱ respects.ȱ Rammohanȱ Roy wasȱseverelyȱcriticizedȱbyȱtraditionalȱHindusȱforȱgivingȱfoodȱto Englishȱ peopleȱ inȱ hisȱ home—andȱ heȱ didȱ notȱ evenȱ eatȱ with them! TheȱliberalȱattitudeȱJesusȱandȱhisȱdisciplesȱhadȱtowardsȱthe Sabbathȱ lawsȱ receivesȱ extraȱ significanceȱ againstȱ theȱ Indian backgroundȱinȱwhichȱtheȱholyȱisȱstronglyȱdemarcatedȱfromȱthe profane,ȱcertainlyȱinȱconnectionȱwithȱsacredȱtimes.ȱWhatȱisȱwritȬ tenȱaboutȱtheȱpositionȱofȱwomenȱisȱalsoȱstrikingȱinȱthisȱselection fromȱtheȱGospel.ȱRammohanȱdoesȱnotȱskipȱanythingȱhere,ȱeven includingȱtheȱpassageȱfromȱtheȱgospelȱofȱJohnȱaboutȱtheȱwoman caughtȱ inȱ adultery,ȱ which,ȱ forȱ theȱ rest,ȱ isȱ onlyȱ brieflyȱ repreȬ sented.ȱWithȱtheȱsectionsȱonȱwidows,ȱdivorceȱandȱtheȱanointing ofȱ Jesus,ȱ anȱ imageȱ ofȱ theȱ Lordȱ aroseȱ thatȱ showedȱ particular attentionȱforȱwomenȱandȱascribedȱtoȱthemȱtheirȱownȱdignity. Jesusȱprovedȱtoȱbeȱtheȱteacherȱwhoȱshowsȱthoseȱpeopleȱthe wayȱ toȱ peaceȱ andȱ happiness.ȱ Withȱ theȱ Beatitudesȱ asȱ opening theȱ workȱ andȱ theȱ commandmentȱ toȱ loveȱ oneȱ anotherȱ asȱ the conclusion,ȱhisȱinstructionȱisȱcharacterizedȱbyȱhumanityȱandȱsoȬ lidarity.ȱJesusȱbecomesȱknownȱasȱaȱteacherȱofȱwisdomȱprimarily inȱhisȱwords;ȱtheseȱformȱtheȱbasisȱofȱeveryȱbeliefȱinȱwhichȱheȱis central.ȱ Rammohan’sȱ bookȱ seemsȱ toȱ underscoreȱ thatȱ heȱ canȱ be takenȱatȱhisȱword. Butȱ aȱ guruȱ isȱ alsoȱ moreȱ thanȱ aȱ humanȱ beingȱ whoȱ speaks wiseȱwords.ȱItȱisȱclassicallyȱHinduȱtoȱsurroundȱtheȱteacherȱwith divineȱhonour.28ȱTheȱdivineȱpresenceȱinȱtheȱworldȱisȱthusȱvisible inȱtheȱguru.ȱTheȱgospelȱtextsȱinȱRammohan’sȱbookȱthatȱreferȱto JesusȱasȱtheȱSonȱofȱGodȱareȱthusȱgivenȱaȱspecialȱnuance.ȱInȱthe laterȱ battleȱ ofȱ pensȱ itȱ wouldȱ becomeȱ apparentȱ thatȱ Rammohan didȱnotȱattachȱanyȱontologicalȱsignificanceȱtoȱthis,ȱbutȱJesusȱwas thusȱwellȱplacedȱtoȱbeȱseenȱasȱaȱtrueȱgurudeva,ȱaȱdivineȱguru. GodȱalsoȱcomesȱupȱinȱJesus’ȱsayings,ȱaccordingȱtoȱRammoȬ hanȱRoy’sȱselection.ȱGodȱisȱtheȱoneȱwhoȱintendedȱlifeȱasȱaȱway toȱ peaceȱ andȱ happinessȱ andȱ gaveȱ hisȱ commandmentsȱ toȱ that ȱ Taittiriyaȱ Upanishadȱ I.11.2:ȱ “Beȱ oneȱ toȱ whomȱ theȱ teacherȱ isȱ a god.”ȱ Cf.ȱ S.ȱ Radhakrishnanȱ (ed.ȱ andȱ transl.),ȱ Theȱ Principalȱ Upanishads (London/NewȱYork:ȱGeorgeȱAllenȱ&ȱUnwin/HumanitiesȱPress,ȱ1974),ȱp. 538.ȱ 28

THEȱGUIDEȱTOȱPEACEȱANDȱHAPPINESS:ȱRAMMOHANȱROY

25

end.ȱInȱthisȱHeȱisȱveryȱexplicitlyȱtheȱoneȱwhoȱdoesȱnotȱexclude anyoneȱ andȱ forgivesȱ anyoneȱ whoȱ repents.ȱ Itȱ isȱ alsoȱ clearȱ with respectȱ toȱ God,ȱ evenȱ withoutȱ theȱ storiesȱ ofȱ Jesus’ȱ healingȱ and liberatingȱ actsȱ andȱ hisȱ suffering,ȱ thatȱ Heȱ intendsȱ theȱ goodȱ for peopleȱ andȱ isȱ intentȱ onȱ savingȱ them,ȱ despiteȱ theȱ realityȱ ofȱ sin andȱguilt.ȱJesus,ȱtheȱteacherȱofȱwisdom,ȱshowsȱpeopleȱtheȱway inȱwhichȱtheyȱcanȱmeetȱthisȱgraciousȱGod.ȱThatȱis,ȱofȱcourse,ȱnot theȱwholeȱmessageȱofȱtheȱGospel,ȱbut,ȱoneȱwouldȱthink,ȱthereȱis littleȱthatȱcanȱbeȱbroughtȱagainstȱit. EnteringȱtheȱFieldȱofȱBattle Directlyȱ afterȱ Rammohanȱ Roy’sȱ bookȱ appeared,ȱ theȱ attackȱ on himȱ wasȱ openedȱ inȱ theȱ Englishȱ periodicalȱ ofȱ theȱ Baptistȱ misȬ sionariesȱ inȱ Serampore,ȱ withȱ the—inȱ thisȱ context—somewhat cynicalȱtitleȱTheȱFriendȱofȱIndia.ȱOneȱofȱtheȱmissionariesȱwroteȱa criticalȱreview,ȱbutȱitȱwasȱprimarilyȱtheȱchiefȱeditorȱofȱtheȱperiȬ odical,ȱDr.ȱJoshuaȱMarshman,ȱwhoȱexpressedȱhimselfȱinȱanȱexȬ tremelyȱ negativeȱ way.ȱ Heȱ wouldȱ continueȱ theȱ disputeȱ with RammohanȱRoyȱforȱthreeȱyears. Marshmanȱ(1768Ȭ1837)ȱwasȱresponsibleȱforȱeducationȱatȱthe missionsȱ post.ȱ Butȱ heȱ himselfȱ hadȱ receivedȱ aȱ considerably broaderȱeducationȱthanȱoneȱwouldȱperhapsȱexpectȱwithȱaȱteachȬ er.ȱ Heȱ wasȱ proficientȱ inȱ variousȱ Easternȱ languages,ȱ likeȱ SansȬ krit,ȱ Bengaliȱ andȱ evenȱ Chinese.ȱ Heȱ publishedȱ translationsȱ of Confuciusȱ andȱ hisȱ ownȱ Chineseȱ grammar.ȱ Butȱ Marshmanȱ was notȱblessedȱwithȱanȱopenȱmindȱtowardsȱAsianȱculture.ȱHeȱhad writtenȱinȱaȱpamphletȱheȱpublishedȱsomeȱyearsȱbefore: Itȱisȱmyȱopinionȱthatȱtoȱtheȱveryȱendȱofȱtime,ȱthroughȱtheir imbecilityȱ ofȱ characterȱ whichȱ Christianityȱ itselfȱ willȱ never remove,ȱ theyȱ willȱ beȱ dependentȱ onȱ someȱ otherȱ nation;ȱ and happyȱ willȱ itȱ beȱ forȱ themȱ shouldȱ Providenceȱ continueȱ to keepȱ themȱ underȱ theȱ mildȱ andȱ fosteringȱ careȱ ofȱ Great Britain.29

RammohanȱRoyȱdeservedȱaȱbetterȱopponent.

ȱCitedȱinȱSamartha,ȱTheȱHinduȱResponseȱtoȱtheȱUnboundȱChrist,ȱp.ȱ24 (fromȱMarshman’sȱpamphletȱAdvantagesȱofȱChristianityȱinȱPromotingȱthe EstablishmentȱandȱProsperityȱofȱtheȱBritishȱEmpireȱinȱIndia). 29

JESUSȱASȱGURU

26

Joshuaȱ Marshmanȱ openedȱ theȱ attackȱ inȱ hisȱ periodicalȱ by describingȱRammohanȱasȱanȱintelligentȱheathenȱbutȱoneȱwhose mindȱ ranȱ completelyȱ counterȱ toȱ theȱ exaltedȱ incarnationȱ ofȱ the Saviour.ȱAndȱheȱjudgedȱthisȱheathen’sȱbookȱtoȱbeȱaȱdanger,ȱfor itȱ“couldȱgreatlyȱinjureȱtheȱcauseȱofȱtruth.”30ȱButȱallȱthisȱwasȱsufȬ ficientȱ forȱ Rammohanȱ Royȱ toȱ beginȱ aȱ powerfulȱ counterattack. Heȱdidȱthisȱinȱhisȱfirstȱdefenseȱinȱwhichȱheȱtookȱtheȱguiseȱofȱan anonymousȱ outsiderȱ withȱ theȱ pseudonymȱ “Aȱ Friendȱ to Truth.”31ȱThisȱallowedȱhimȱtoȱgiveȱanȱapparentlyȱobjectiveȱcritȬ icalȱreflectionȱfromȱtheȱsidelinesȱonȱtheȱwayȱinȱwhichȱ“theȱEditȬ or”ȱdealsȱwithȱ“theȱCompiler”ȱ(ofȱtheȱpublicatonȱTheȱPreceptsȱof Jesus).ȱ Withȱ controlledȱ indignation,ȱ heȱ callsȱ theȱ publicȱ toȱ a judgementȱonȱ“theȱunchristianlike,ȱasȱwellȱasȱuncivilȱmannerȱin whichȱtheȱEditorȱhasȱadducedȱhisȱobjectionsȱto,ȱbyȱintroducing personality,ȱ andȱ applyingȱ theȱ termȱ ofȱ heathenȱ toȱ theȱ CompilȬ er.”32ȱ Theȱ bookȱ had,ȱ afterȱ all,ȱ beenȱ publishedȱ anonymousȬ ly—howȱ couldȱ Marshmanȱ thenȱ comeȱ toȱ ascribeȱ itȱ toȱ anȱ “heaȬ then”?ȱ Theȱ “Friendȱ toȱ Truth”ȱ explainsȱ atȱ lengthȱ thatȱ nothing elseȱ canȱ beȱ concludedȱ fromȱ theȱ textȱ ofȱ theȱ workȱ thanȱ thatȱ the Compilerȱ notȱ onlyȱ believesȱ inȱ oneȱ Godȱ butȱ alsoȱ inȱ theȱ truths thatȱ haveȱ beenȱ revealedȱ inȱ theȱ Christianȱ faith.ȱ Didȱ theȱ Editor haveȱ accessȱ toȱ otherȱ informationȱ thatȱ allowedȱ himȱ toȱ callȱ the Compilerȱ aȱ heathen?ȱ Hereȱ theȱ writerȱ admitsȱ magnanimously thatȱtheȱȱCompilerȱisȱnoneȱotherȱthanȱtheȱbrahmanȱRammohan Roy—theȱchiefȱEditorȱhadȱguessedȱright!ȱ Butȱ itȱ isȱ impossibleȱ toȱ callȱ suchȱ aȱ person,ȱ whoȱ defends monotheismȱatȱtheȱpriceȱofȱdisturbedȱfamilyȱrelationsȱandȱhate byȱhisȱcompatriots,ȱaȱheathen.ȱThisȱisȱfollowedȱbyȱanȱargument thatȱ wasȱ fatalȱ forȱ Marshman.ȱ Itȱ isȱ understandableȱ thatȱ such happens,ȱgivenȱthatȱChristiansȱoftenȱseeȱoneȱanotherȱasȱheretics orȱsomethingȱsimilarȱifȱtheyȱareȱnotȱinȱagreement.ȱBut

ȱ Citedȱ by,ȱ amongȱ others,ȱ Dasgupta,ȱ Theȱ Lifeȱ andȱ Timesȱ ofȱ Rajah RammohanȱRoy,ȱp.ȱ238. 30

ȱ[RammohunȱRoy],ȱȱAnȱAppealȱtoȱtheȱChristianȱPublicȱinȱDefenceȱof “TheȱPreceptsȱofȱJesus”ȱbyȱaȱFriendȱtoȱTruth,ȱin:ȱTheȱEnglishȱWorksȱofȱRamȬ mohunȱRoy,ȱvol.ȱIII,ȱpp.ȱ545Ȭ64. 31

ȱRammohunȱRoy,ȱTheȱEnglishȱWorksȱofȱRammohunȱRoy,ȱvol.ȱIII,ȱp.

32

547.ȱ

THEȱGUIDEȱTOȱPEACEȱANDȱHAPPINESS:ȱRAMMOHANȱROY

27

VeryȱdifferentȱconductȱisȱinculcatedȱinȱtheȱPreceptsȱofȱJesus ...ȱ saying,ȱ “Heȱ thatȱ isȱ notȱ againstȱ usȱ isȱ onȱ ourȱ part.”ȱ Mark, ch.ȱ ix,ȱ ver.ȱ 40.ȱ Theȱ Compiler,ȱ havingȱ obviouslyȱ inȱ viewȱ at leastȱ oneȱ objectȱ inȱ commonȱ withȱ theȱ Reviewerȱ andȱ Editor, thatȱ ofȱ procuringȱ respectȱ forȱ theȱ Preceptsȱ ofȱ Christ,ȱ might haveȱ reasonablyȱ expectedȱ moreȱ charityȱ fromȱ professed teachersȱofȱhisȱdoctrine.33

Rammohanȱpassesȱoverȱtheȱfactȱthatȱtheȱtermȱ“heathen”ȱwasȱalȬ soȱ usedȱ byȱ Christiansȱ forȱ severalȱ centuriesȱ toȱ referȱ toȱ anyone whoȱwasȱnotȱJewish,ȱChristianȱorȱMuslimȱwithoutȱanyȱnegative implications.34ȱ Butȱ withȱ hisȱ appealȱ toȱ Jesus’ȱ ownȱ words,ȱ he providesȱ aȱ convincingȱ argument.ȱ Inȱ hisȱ response,ȱ Marshman attemptsȱtoȱstateȱthatȱheȱhadȱnotȱmeantȱitȱnegatively,ȱbutȱfrom thatȱpointȱonȱheȱnoȱlongerȱwritesȱaboutȱ“anȱintelligentȱheathen” butȱaboutȱ“anȱintelligentȱHindu.” Butȱ theirȱ viewsȱ withȱ respectȱ toȱ contentȱ remainedȱ diaȬ metricallyȱ opposed.ȱ Marshmanȱ thoughtȱ thatȱ Rammohanȱ Roy didȱ violenceȱ toȱ theȱ truth.ȱ Whatȱ Marshmanȱ andȱ hisȱ fellowȱ misȬ sionariesȱ missedȱ isȱ clear:ȱ theȱ workȱ ofȱ Christ,ȱ asȱ interpretedȱ in theȱ doctrineȱofȱreconciliation,ȱ cannotȱ beȱfoundȱ inȱ Rammohan’s book.ȱAndȱthatȱwasȱpreciselyȱtheȱcentralȱpointȱinȱtheȱmissionary preachingȱ ofȱ theȱ Baptists:ȱ thatȱ peaceȱ withȱ Godȱ couldȱ beȱ found onlyȱ throughȱ theȱ deathȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ onȱ theȱ cross.ȱ Itȱ isȱ very understandableȱthatȱtheȱBaptistsȱmissedȱthisȱcentralȱdoctrineȱin Rammohan’sȱwork,ȱbutȱitȱisȱstrangeȱthatȱtheirȱfrustrationȱonȱthis pointȱ preventedȱ themȱ fromȱ seeingȱ anythingȱ goodȱ atȱ allȱ inȱ this book.ȱ Marshmanȱ writesȱ thatȱ theȱ sayingsȱ ofȱ Christȱ areȱ useless withoutȱ theȱ doctrineȱ ofȱ reconciliation.ȱ Thatȱ givesȱ Rammohan theȱ opportunityȱ toȱ useȱ theȱ sayingsȱ ofȱ Christȱ toȱ takeȱ aimȱ time andȱ timeȱ againȱ atȱ anȱ openȱ target.ȱ Heȱ quotesȱ extensively,ȱ from moreȱthanȱoneȱevangelist,ȱtheȱdoubleȱcommandȱtoȱlove,ȱasȱwell asȱtheȱgoldenȱrule,ȱandȱheȱevenȱprintedȱtheȱclosingȱtextsȱinȱcapȬ itals:ȱ“Thisȱisȱtheȱlawȱandȱtheȱprophets”ȱandȱ“Thisȱdoȱandȱthou ȱRammohunȱRoy,ȱTheȱEnglishȱWorksȱofȱRammohunȱRoy,ȱvol.ȱIII,ȱp.

33

549. ȱThisȱusageȱwasȱmaintainedȱuntilȱfarȱintoȱtheȱtwentiethȱcentury.ȱI sawȱitȱinȱaȱDutchȱbookȱforȱyoungȱpeopleȱonȱSadhuȱSundarȱSinghȱfrom 1924.ȱCf.ȱJ.ȱSchouten,ȱDeȱjongeȱLeeuwȱvanȱhetȱVijfstroomenlandȱ(Arnhem:ȱH. tenȱBrink,ȱ1924). 34

JESUSȱASȱGURU

28

shaltȱlive.”ȱHeȱadds:ȱ“Hadȱanyȱotherȱdoctrineȱbeenȱrequisiteȱto teachȱ menȱ theȱ roadȱ toȱ peaceȱ andȱ happiness,ȱ Jesusȱ couldȱ not haveȱ pronouncedȱ toȱ theȱ Lawyer,ȱ ‘Thisȱ doȱ andȱ THOUȱ SHALT LIVE’.”35 TheȱquestionȱofȱtheȱextentȱtoȱwhichȱtheȱwordsȱofȱJesusȱare sufficientȱ continuedȱ toȱ influenceȱ theȱ debate.ȱ Theȱ Baptistsȱ arȬ guedȱ thatȱ theȱ historyȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ andȱ theȱ doctrinesȱ ofȱ theȱ church wereȱ neededȱ inȱ anyȱ caseȱ toȱ acquireȱ forgivenessȱ ofȱ sinsȱ andȱ to receiveȱtheȱstrengthȱtoȱobeyȱGod’sȱcommandments.ȱThisȱobjecȬ tionȱgaveȱRammohanȱRoyȱtheȱopportunityȱagainȱtoȱquoteȱextenȬ sivelyȱ theȱ sayingsȱ byȱ Jesusȱ heȱ hadȱ published.ȱ Heȱ findsȱ many textsȱinȱwhichȱitȱclearlyȱappearsȱthatȱonlyȱsincereȱrepentanceȱreȬ sultsȱinȱforgiveness.ȱTheȱparableȱofȱtheȱprodigalȱsonȱisȱtheȱmost tellingȱhere.ȱRammohanȱnowȱquotesȱforȱtheȱfirstȱtimeȱfromȱthe Oldȱ Testament,ȱ namelyȱ Ezekielȱ 18:30:ȱ “Repent,ȱ andȱ turnȱ yourȬ selvesȱfromȱallȱyourȱtransgressions;ȱsoȱiniquityȱshallȱnotȱbeȱyour ruin.”ȱ Veryȱ emphatically,ȱ Rammohanȱ thenȱ refersȱ toȱ theȱ apocaȬ lypticȱ imageȱ ofȱ theȱ judgementȱ byȱ theȱ Sonȱ ofȱ Manȱ inȱ Matthew 25.ȱ Theȱ reigningȱ Christȱ willȱ confrontȱ theȱ peopleȱ withȱ their deeds.ȱ Whatȱ theyȱ haveȱ orȱ haveȱ notȱ doneȱ forȱ theȱ leastȱ among people,ȱ theyȱ haveȱ orȱ haveȱ notȱ doneȱ forȱ Jesus:ȱ “Forȱ Iȱ wasȱ an hungred,ȱandȱyeȱgaveȱmeȱmeatȱ...”ȱ(vv.ȱ35ff.).ȱRammohanȱconȬ cludedȱ thatȱ thereȱ wereȱ noȱ otherȱ meansȱ toȱ acquireȱ eternalȱ life thanȱ theȱ fulfilmentȱ ofȱ ourȱ dutyȱ toȱ Godȱ byȱ obeyingȱ hisȱ comȬ mandments.ȱ Heȱ comparesȱ thoseȱ whoȱ argueȱ thatȱ dogmatic knowledgeȱ wasȱ necessaryȱ forȱ salvationȱ withȱ thoseȱ whoȱ say “Lord,ȱ Lord”ȱ insteadȱ ofȱ doingȱ theȱ willȱ ofȱ hisȱ Fatherȱ (cf.ȱ MatȬ thewȱ7:21).ȱRammohanȱRoyȱendsȱupȱagainȱatȱtheȱSermonȱonȱthe Mountȱ asȱ theȱ heartȱ ofȱ Jesus’ȱ instruction:ȱ “theȱ blessedȱ andȱ beȬ nignȱ moralȱ doctrinesȱ taughtȱ inȱ theȱ sermonȱ onȱ theȱ mount,”ȱ of whichȱ“theȱobedienceȱtoȱwhichȱisȱsoȱabsolutelyȱcommandedȱas indispensableȱ andȱ allȬsufficientȱ toȱ thoseȱ whoȱ desireȱ toȱ inherit eternalȱlife”ȱobtains.36 Anotherȱ pointȱ ofȱ disputeȱ wasȱ hisȱ rejectionȱ ofȱ theȱ miracle storiesȱ andȱ historicalȱ factsȱ fromȱ Jesus’ȱ life,ȱ whichȱ Rammohan Royȱ discussesȱ inȱ hisȱ introduction.ȱ Theȱ Baptistsȱ heldȱ itȱ against himȱ thatȱ heȱ consideredȱ theȱ miraclesȱ insignificantȱ andȱ notȱ very ȱRammohunȱRoy,ȱTheȱEnglishȱWorksȱofȱRammohunȱRoy,ȱp.ȱ551.

35

ȱRammohunȱRoy,ȱTheȱEnglishȱWorksȱofȱRammohunȱRoy,ȱp.ȱ555.

36

THEȱGUIDEȱTOȱPEACEȱANDȱHAPPINESS:ȱRAMMOHANȱROY

29

convincingȱ forȱ Indians.ȱ Theȱ supposedlyȱ comicȱ exampleȱ that RammohanȱcitedȱfromȱHinduȱmythologyȱtoȱshowȱthatȱnothing wasȱtooȱfantasticȱforȱtheȱsuperstitionȱofȱhisȱcompatriotsȱhadȱthe oppositeȱeffect.ȱMarshmanȱtrembledȱwithȱrighteousȱindignation whenȱheȱdescribesȱtoȱhisȱreadersȱhowȱtheȱmiraclesȱofȱChristȱare comparedȱ hereȱ withȱ theȱ storyȱ ofȱ Agastiȱ whoȱ swallowsȱ the oceanȱ andȱ thenȱ urinatesȱ itȱ outȱ again.ȱ Theȱ suggestionȱ thatȱ the biographicalȱ partsȱ ofȱ theȱ Gospelȱ wouldȱ onlyȱ invokeȱ resistance onȱ theȱ partȱ ofȱ opponentsȱ isȱ alsoȱ angrilyȱ rejected.37ȱ Thisȱ isȱ cerȬ tainlyȱ notȱ theȱ strongestȱ partȱ ofȱ Rammohanȱ Roy’sȱ approach.ȱ In hisȱ defensiveȱ writingsȱ heȱ referred,ȱ notȱ entirelyȱ incorrectly,ȱ to theȱ conflictsȱ thatȱ churchȱ historyȱ hadȱ producedȱ preciselyȱ when dealingȱ withȱ theȱ questionȱ ofȱ theȱ interpretationȱ ofȱ Jesus’ȱ life. Andȱheȱreferred,ȱalthoughȱsomewhatȱhighhandedly,ȱtoȱtheȱlittle successȱthatȱtheȱmissionariesȱhadȱhadȱwithȱtheirȱversionȱofȱthe messageȱofȱtheȱGospelȱuntilȱnow:ȱheȱcouldȱdoȱbetter!ȱThereȱwas somethingȱ inȱ that,ȱ butȱ itȱ cannotȱ beȱ deniedȱ thatȱ Rammohanȱ is veryȱ oneȬsidedȱ inȱ thisȱ respect.ȱ Theȱ rationalisticȱ critiqueȱ ofȱ the miracleȱ stories,ȱ whichȱ originatedȱ inȱ theȱ precedingȱ eighteenth century,ȱplayedȱhimȱquiteȱfalseȱhere.ȱAndȱleavingȱasideȱtheȱpasȬ sionȱ narrativesȱ andȱ allȱ referenceȱ toȱ theȱ resurrectionȱ seriously limitsȱhisȱimageȱofȱJesus. Theȱdebateȱcontinuedȱforȱaȱfewȱyears,ȱbutȱtheȱpositionsȱhad alreadyȱbeenȱassumedȱatȱtheȱbeginningȱandȱtheȱdebatersȱwould notȱdeviateȱfromȱthoseȱpositions.ȱTheȱpublicationsȱbecameȱlongȬ erȱ andȱ denser;ȱ ultimately,ȱ Rammohanȱ Royȱ andȱ Marshman wroteȱworksȱofȱmoreȱthanȱ200ȱpages,ȱinȱwhichȱtheyȱboxedȱeach other’sȱearsȱwithȱBibleȱtextsȱasȱinȱtheirȱpreviousȱwritingsȱwithȬ outȱ convincingȱ theȱ other.ȱ Theȱ doctrinesȱ ofȱ theȱ Trinityȱ andȱ reȬ conciliationȱ provedȱ toȱ beȱ ableȱ toȱ leadȱ toȱ almostȱ endlessȱ arguȬ ments.ȱ Rammohanȱ wonȱ regularlyȱ onȱ points:ȱ heȱ exploredȱ the Hebrewȱ andȱ Greekȱ conceptsȱ furtherȱ and,ȱ togetherȱ withȱ hisȱ alȬ readyȱearlierȱacquiredȱphenomenalȱknowledgeȱofȱdifferentȱreliȬ gions,ȱ heȱ couldȱ presentȱ hisȱ caseȱ broadlyȱ andȱ convincingly. Marshmanȱcontinuedȱtoȱrepeatȱorthodoxȱstatementsȱthatȱwould certainlyȱ beȱ recognizedȱ inȱ anȱ Europeanȱ contextȱ butȱ wouldȱ not findȱ muchȱ receptionȱ amongȱ Indians.ȱ Itȱ isȱ aȱ shameȱ thatȱ MarshȬ manȱ hadȱ enticedȱ Rammohanȱ Royȱ intoȱ aȱ discussionȱ thatȱ was ȱSeeȱDasgupta,ȱTheȱLifeȱandȱTimesȱofȱRajahȱRammohanȱRoy,ȱp.ȱ240.

37

JESUSȱASȱGURU

30

increasinglyȱfurtherȱremovedȱfromȱhisȱfirstȱsympatheticȱattempt toȱpresentȱtheȱpreceptsȱofȱJesusȱtoȱanȱIndianȱpublic.38 Althoughȱ neitherȱ ofȱ theȱ partiesȱ inȱ theȱ debateȱ managedȱ to convinceȱtheȱother,ȱitȱdidȱhaveȱanȱeffect.ȱThisȱwasȱsoȱfirstȱofȱall onȱ theȱ individualȱ level,ȱ whichȱ leadȱ toȱ aȱ greatȱ commotion.ȱ AlȬ readyȱinȱ1821,ȱWilliamȱAdam,ȱaȱBaptistȱmissionaryȱinȱKolkata, announcedȱthatȱheȱfoundȱRammohanȱRoy’sȱargumentȱaboutȱthe unbiblicalȱ natureȱ ofȱ theȱ doctrineȱ ofȱ theȱ Trinityȱ increasingly convincing.ȱ Heȱ abandonedȱ theȱ Baptistsȱ andȱ joinedȱ theȱ small Unitarianȱcommunityȱinȱ Kolkata,ȱ leavingȱ theȱ missionȱ centreȱin Seramporeȱbewildered.ȱWilliamȱWard,ȱwho,ȱtogetherȱwithȱWilȬ liamȱCareyȱandȱJoshuaȱ Marshman,ȱ formedȱ theȱ Seramporeȱ trio, wroteȱ sadly:ȱ “Theȱ heathenȱ Ramȱ Mohunroyȱ convertingȱ aȱ MisȬ sionary!ȱ Howȱ areȱ weȱ fallen!ȱ Oȱ Lord,ȱ help,ȱ orȱ weȱ perish!”39 SomewhatȱmoreȱelegantȱcriticsȱcalledȱAdamȱ“theȱsecondȱfallen Adam.”40 Aȱmoreȱgeneralȱeffectȱofȱtheȱdebateȱwasȱthatȱitȱbecameȱclear onceȱ andȱ forȱ allȱ inȱ Indianȱ societyȱ howȱ differentlyȱ theȱ meaning ofȱJesusȱcouldȱbeȱperceived.ȱTheȱproclamationȱbyȱtheȱorthodox pietisticȱ missionariesȱ didȱ notȱ appearȱ toȱ beȱ theȱ onlyȱ possible messageȱ ofȱ theȱ Gospel.ȱ Undoubtedly,ȱ Rammohanȱ Roy’sȱ book andȱ theȱ controversyȱ thatȱ followedȱ awokeȱ interestȱ inȱ manyȱ for whatȱJesusȱhadȱactuallyȱsaidȱ himself.ȱAndȱthatȱwasȱwhyȱ RamȬ mohanȱRoyȱhadȱpublishedȱtheȱbookȱinȱtheȱfirstȱplace. Oppositions VariousȱoppositionsȱemergedȱfromȱtheȱdebateȱaboutȱJesus.ȱFirst ofȱ all,ȱ thereȱ wasȱ theȱ oppositionȱ betweenȱ theȱ Hinduȱ whoȱ atȬ temptedȱ sincerelyȱ toȱ describeȱ theȱ messageȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ onȱ hisȱ own ȱIȱthereforeȱdisagreeȱentirelyȱwithȱSugirtharajah,ȱwhoȱdescribesȱthe debateȱinȱtermsȱofȱcolonialȱresistance.ȱAccordingȱtoȱhim,ȱtheȱȱcolonized (Roy)ȱengagedȱinȱbattleȱwithȱtheȱimperialistȱideologyȱandȱheȱsucceeded inȱdefeatingȱtheȱinvaderȱ(Marshman)ȱwithȱtheȱlatter’sȱownȱweapons.ȱThat isȱ theȱ reasonȱ forȱ theȱ titleȱ ofȱ hisȱ article,ȱ alludingȱ toȱ theȱ greatȱ mutiny againstȱtheȱcolonialȱarmyȱinȱ1857,ȱ“TheȱIndianȱTextualȱMutinyȱofȱ1820.” ThatȱRammohanȱwasȱvictoriousȱisȱnotȱincorrect,ȱbutȱheȱdidȱnotȱstartȱthe dispute—theȱothersȱdid. 38

ȱCitedȱinȱRobertson,ȱRajaȱRammohanȱRay,ȱp.ȱ40.

39

ȱKotnala,ȱRajaȱMohunȱRoyȱandȱIndianȱAwakening,ȱp.ȱ95.

40

THEȱGUIDEȱTOȱPEACEȱANDȱHAPPINESS:ȱRAMMOHANȱROY

31

andȱtheȱmissionariesȱwhoȱalsoȱsincerelyȱaddressedȱaȱmessageȱof reconciliationȱ throughȱ Jesusȱ toȱ theȱ Indianȱ people.ȱ Theseȱ were twoȱveryȱdifferentȱapproachesȱtoȱtheȱGospel,ȱandȱtheȱopposition betweenȱthemȱcanȱbeȱseenȱrepeatedlyȱfromȱtheȱnineteenthȱcenȬ turyȱonȱinȱaȱnumberȱofȱsituations.ȱItȱisȱaȱdifferenceȱinȱtheȱdirecȬ tionȱofȱone’sȱlook,ȱwhichȱleadsȱtoȱaȱentirelyȱdifferentȱformȱofȱbeȬ lief.ȱAndȱseldomȱdoȱpeopleȱcomeȱtoȱtermsȱonȱtheȱbasisȱofȱthese viewpoints.ȱTheȱdifferenceȱbetweenȱbothȱisȱdescribedȱinȱtheȱhisȬ toryȱ ofȱ theologyȱ asȱ theȱ “Religionȱ ofȱ Christ”ȱ versusȱ theȱ “ChrisȬ tianȱreligion.”41 Rammohanȱ Roy’sȱ interestȱ wasȱ “theȱ faithȱ ofȱ Jesus,”ȱ asȱ that wasȱexpressedȱprimarilyȱinȱJesus’ȱsayings.ȱTheȱBaptistȱmissionȬ ariesȱ madeȱ “faithȱ inȱ Jesus”ȱ central:ȱ theȱ convictionȱ thatȱ human beingsȱcouldȱbeȱreconciledȱwithȱGodȱthroughȱJesusȱasȱmediator. Itȱ isȱ regrettableȱ thatȱ theȱ asȱ suchȱ legitimateȱ positionȱ ofȱ MarshȬ manȱ andȱ hisȱ fellowsȱ didȱ notȱ allowȱ anyȱ roomȱ forȱ Rammohan Roy’sȱintentionȱandȱpresentationȱofȱtheȱmessageȱofȱtheȱGospel. TheȱfaithȱofȱJesus,ȱhisȱpreaching,ȱparablesȱandȱinterpretationȱof theȱ lawȱ did,ȱ afterȱ all,ȱ meanȱ aȱ greatȱ dealȱ toȱ Marshmanȱ asȱ well. Becauseȱheȱdidȱnotȱrecognizeȱthat,ȱhisȱmessageȱofȱfaithȱinȱJesus didȱ notȱ reachȱ theȱ other.ȱ Bothȱ positionsȱ areȱ rightȱ inȱ theirȱ own way.ȱ Rammohanȱ presentedȱ Jesusȱ correctlyȱ asȱ aȱ guru,ȱ and Marshmanȱ hadȱ justȱ asȱ muchȱ rightȱ toȱ wantȱ toȱ proclaimȱ more thanȱthatȱaboutȱJesus. Othersȱdealtȱmoreȱwiselyȱwithȱthisȱopposition.ȱAȱgoodȱexȬ ampleȱisȱtheȱAnglicanȱbishopȱofȱKolkata,ȱReginaldȱHeberȱ(1783Ȭ 1826).ȱ Heȱ arrivedȱ inȱ Indiaȱ inȱ 1823,ȱ whenȱ theȱ controversy betweenȱ Rammohanȱ Royȱ andȱ Joshuaȱ Marshmanȱ wasȱ atȱ its height.ȱHeȱdidȱnotȱinterveneȱinȱtheȱChristologicalȱdebate,ȱbutȱhe didȱ haveȱ aȱ sermonȱ atȱ Pentecostȱ inȱ 1825ȱ inȱ whichȱ heȱ referred veryȱclearlyȱtoȱtheȱissue.ȱAmongȱotherȱthings,ȱheȱsaid:ȱ WeȱrejoiceȱthatȱChristȱisȱpreached,ȱevenȱbyȱthoseȱwhoȱhold notȱhisȱfaithȱinȱourȱownȱunityȱofȱfellowshipȱ....ȱWeȱareȱconȬ tentȱthatȱtheȱmoralityȱofȱtheȱGospelȱshouldȱbeȱdisseminated,

41 ȱSee,ȱforȱexample,ȱH.M.ȱKuitert,ȱJezus:ȱNalatenschapȱvanȱhetȱchristenȬ dom.ȱSchetsȱvoorȱeenȱchristologieȱ(Baarn:ȱTenȱHave,ȱ1998),ȱpp.ȱ187Ȭ200.

JESUSȱASȱGURU

32

evenȱ byȱ thoseȱ whoȱ robȱ Christȱ ofȱ hisȱ godheadȱ andȱ mediaȬ torialȱattributes.42

Asideȱ fromȱ theȱ oppositionȱ betweenȱ theȱ faithȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ and faithȱinȱJesus,ȱthereȱisȱyetȱanotherȱoppositionȱinȱtheȱdiscussions onȱ Theȱ Preceptsȱ ofȱ Jesus.ȱ Whoȱ actuallyȱ hasȱ controlȱ ofȱ Jesus’ȱ legȬ acy?ȱForȱMarshman,ȱitȱwasȱunacceptableȱforȱaȱ“heathen”ȱtoȱexȬ ploreȱtheȱChristianȱheritageȱonȱhisȱown.ȱInȱcontrast,ȱRammohan Royȱcontestedȱtheȱmonopolyȱthatȱtheȱmissionariesȱthoughtȱthey hadȱonȱtheȱmessageȱofȱtheȱGospel.ȱHeȱdidȱthatȱinȱanȱunexpected wayȱ thatȱ wouldȱ haveȱ greatȱ influenceȱ inȱ Indiaȱ rightȱ upȱ toȱ the presentȱtime. Inȱ 1823ȱ Rammohanȱ wasȱ stillȱ wrappedȱ upȱ inȱ anotherȱ deȬ bate.ȱHeȱconductedȱaȱpublicȱexchangeȱofȱlettersȱonȱChristology withȱaȱcertainȱDr.ȱR.ȱTytler,ȱaȱdoctorȱinȱKolkata.43ȱThisȱbattleȱof pensȱisȱnotȱveryȱinteresting,ȱbecauseȱtheȱtoneȱisȱquiteȱtenseȱand theȱ argumentsȱ fromȱ bothȱ sidesȱ areȱ ratherȱ quick.ȱ Butȱ RammoȬ han,ȱ nowȱ underȱ theȱ pseudonymȱ ofȱ Ramȱ Doss,ȱ madeȱ aȱ remark thatȱbeganȱtoȱleadȱitsȱownȱlife.ȱUnderȱtheȱpseudonymȱ“AȱChrisȬ tian,”ȱTytlerȱmadeȱaȱpatheticȱappealȱtoȱhisȱfellowȱChristiansȱto honourȱtheirȱreligionȱandȱinȱthisȱcontextȱexclaimed:ȱ“...ȱareȱyou soȱ farȱ degradedȱ byȱ Asiaticȱ effeminacyȱ asȱ ....”44ȱ Rammohan quotedȱthisȱinsultingȱexpressionȱandȱconcluded:ȱ Beforeȱ“AȱChristian”ȱindulgedȱinȱaȱtiradeȱaboutȱpersonsȱbeȬ ingȱ“degradedȱbyȱAsiaticȱeffeminacy”ȱheȱshouldȱhaveȱrecolȬ lectedȱ thatȱ almostȱ allȱ theȱ ancientȱ prophetsȱ andȱ patriarchs veneratedȱ byȱ Christians,ȱ nayȱ evenȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ himself,ȱ a Divineȱ incarnationȱ andȱ theȱ founderȱ ofȱ theȱ Christianȱ Faith, ȱCitedȱbyȱDermotȱKillingleyȱinȱ“RammohunȱRoyȱandȱBishopȱHeȬ ber’sȱViewȱofȱtheȱTrinity,”ȱin:ȱGrahamȱHarveyȱetȱal.,ȱWordsȱRemembered, TextsȱRenewed:ȱEssaysȱinȱHonourȱofȱJohnȱF.A.ȱSawyerȱ(Sheffield:ȱSheffield AcademicȱPress,ȱ1995),ȱpp.ȱ480Ȭ96.ȱ 42

ȱLaterȱincludedȱinȱaȱcollectionȱbyȱRammohanȱRoyȱcalledȱAȱVinȬ dicationȱofȱtheȱIncarnationȱofȱtheȱDeity,ȱnowȱfoundȱinȱRammohunȱRoy,ȱThe EnglishȱWorksȱofȱRammohunȱRoy,ȱvol.ȱIV,ȱpp.ȱ887Ȭ908. 43

ȱRammohunȱRoy,ȱTheȱEnglishȱWorksȱofȱRammohunȱRoy,ȱvol.ȱIV,ȱp.

44

904.

THEȱGUIDEȱTOȱPEACEȱANDȱHAPPINESS:ȱRAMMOHANȱROY

33

wereȱASIATICS,ȱsoȱthatȱifȱaȱChristianȱthinksȱitȱdegradingȱto beȱbornȱorȱtoȱresideȱinȱAsia,ȱheȱdirectlyȱreflectsȱuponȱthem.45

Tytler’sȱresponseȱwasȱtoȱbeȱexpected. Butȱ itȱ isȱ importantȱ thatȱ Rammohanȱ Royȱ hereȱ explicitly claimsȱJesusȱasȱaȱfellowȱAsian—probablyȱforȱtheȱfirstȱtimeȱinȱthe historyȱofȱIndia.ȱAndȱcertainlyȱnotȱforȱtheȱlastȱtime:ȱitȱbecomesȱa fixedȱelementȱinȱtheȱdialogueȱonȱJesusȱinȱIndia.ȱItȱisȱgoodȱtoȱreȬ memberȱhereȱhowȱrevolutionaryȱthisȱstatementȱwasȱatȱtheȱtime. Sinceȱ theȱ secondȱ halfȱ ofȱ theȱ twentiethȱ century,ȱ itȱ hasȱ beenȱ arȬ guedȱ emphaticallyȱ thatȱ Jesusȱ wasȱ aȱ Jewȱ andȱ thereforeȱ notȱ the “possession”ȱ ofȱ Europeans,ȱ Christianȱ orȱ not.ȱ Butȱ theȱ situation wasȱ quiteȱ differentȱ atȱ theȱ beginningȱ ofȱ theȱ nineteenthȱ century. EspeciallyȱinȱEnglandȱitȱwasȱusualȱtoȱseeȱJesusȱasȱbelongingȱto thatȱ culture.ȱ Illustrativeȱ ofȱ thisȱ isȱ theȱ poemȱ publishedȱ byȱ WilȬ liamȱ Blakeȱ inȱ 1804,ȱ whichȱ becameȱ veryȱ popularȱ asȱ aȱ hymnȱ in Englishȱ churches,ȱ bothȱ inȱ Englandȱ itselfȱ andȱ inȱ theȱ colonies.ȱ It beginsȱwithȱtheȱwords: Andȱdidȱthoseȱfeetȱinȱancientȱtime WalkȱuponȱEngland’sȱmountainsȱgreen? AndȱwasȱtheȱHolyȱLambȱofȱGod OnȱEngland’sȱpleasantȱpasturesȱseen?46

Againstȱ thisȱ background,ȱ itȱ wasȱ allȱ theȱ moreȱ shockingȱ thatȱ a HinduȱpresentedȱJesusȱasȱsomeoneȱwhoȱwasȱcloserȱtoȱhimȱthan toȱtheȱChristianȱEuropeans.ȱOneȱcanȱobjectȱtoȱtheȱtooȱeasyȱidenȬ tificationȱthatȱRammohanȱRoyȱmakesȱ betweenȱ Israeliteȱ andȱ InȬ dian:ȱ thereȱ is,ȱ afterȱ all,ȱ quiteȱ aȱ bitȱ ofȱ differenceȱ betweenȱ the Gangesȱ andȱ Galilee.47ȱ Butȱ Rammohanȱ correctlyȱ questionsȱ the obviousnessȱ withȱ whichȱ Europeansȱ seeȱ Jesusȱ asȱ oneȱ ofȱ their own. Rammohanȱ has,ȱ inȱ anyȱ case,ȱ madeȱ oneȱ thingȱ clear.ȱ From thatȱpointȱ onȱ itȱ wouldȱ needȱ toȱbeȱ takenȱ intoȱ accountȱthat,ȱ outȬ ȱRammohunȱRoy,ȱTheȱEnglishȱWorksȱofȱRammohunȱRoy,ȱvol.ȱIV,ȱp.

45

906. ȱWilliamȱBlake’sȱopeningȱpoemȱinȱhisȱMiltonȱcycle.

46

ȱTheseȱtermsȱareȱborrowedȱfromȱanȱarticleȱbyȱStanleyȱJ.ȱSamartha, “GangaȱandȱGalilee:ȱTwoȱResponsesȱtoȱTruth,”ȱinȱS.J.ȱSamartha,ȱCourage forȱDialogueȱ(Geneva:ȱWCC,ȱ1981),ȱpp.ȱ142Ȭ57. 47

34

JESUSȱASȱGURU

sideȱEurope,ȱpeopleȱwouldȱgiveȱshapeȱtoȱfaithȱinȱJesusȱinȱtheir ownȱ way.ȱ Rammohanȱ Royȱ gaveȱ theȱ firstȱ stimulusȱ toȱ thisȱ with hisȱimageȱofȱJesusȱasȱaȱguruȱwhoȱcanȱbeȱtakenȱatȱhisȱword.

CHAPTERȱ3

FromȱFalseȱProphet ToȱDemonstrableȱDivinity NehemiahȱGoreh

Theȱ messageȱ ofȱ theȱ Gospelȱ cerȬ tainlyȱ didȱ notȱ remainȱ unnoticed inȱ Indiaȱ ofȱ theȱ nineteenthȱ cenȬ tury.ȱ Rammohanȱ Royȱ didȱ his partȱ withȱ respectȱ toȱ thisȱ inȱ KolȬ kata,ȱdemandingȱthatȱtheȱculturȬ alȱ eliteȱ inȱtheȱ countryȱ payȱattenȬ tionȱ toȱ Jesus’ȱ teachings.ȱ The modern,ȱ liberalȱ Hindus,ȱ suchȱ as thoseȱ whoȱ metȱ inȱ theȱ Brahmo Samaj,ȱwereȱonceȱandȱforȱallȱconȬ vincedȱofȱtheȱvalueȱofȱtheȱChrisȬ tianȱ faith,ȱ atȱ leastȱ insofarȱ asȱ it concernedȱ theȱ moralityȱ ofȱ theȱ Gospel.ȱ Butȱ theȱ Christianȱ faith wasȱ alsoȱ aȱ topicȱ ofȱ discussionȱ andȱ debateȱ amongȱ Hindusȱ in otherȱ circlesȱ asȱ well.ȱ Missionariesȱ fromȱ variousȱ denominations confrontedȱ Hindusȱ inȱ manyȱ partsȱ ofȱ theȱ countryȱ withȱ theȱ reȬ ligionȱ ofȱ theȱ Europeans,ȱ theȱ colonizers.ȱ Asȱ such,ȱ theȱ subjectȱ of theȱ proclamationȱ wasȱ atȱ leastȱ usuallyȱ understoodȱ byȱ theȱ local population.ȱ Theȱ preachingȱ ofȱ theȱ Gospelȱ alsoȱ oftenȱ incited strongȱ resistance,ȱ whichȱ aroseȱ particularlyȱ whenȱ theyȱ peneȬ tratedȱintoȱtheȱheartȱofȱHinduȱsociety,ȱasȱinȱtheȱcityȱofȱVaranasi. Characteristicȱ ofȱ theȱ resistanceȱ ofȱ theȱ orthodoxȱ Hindusȱ in Varanasiȱ wasȱ theȱ campaignȱ thatȱ theȱ youngȱ brahmanȱ NilakanȬ thaȱ Gorehȱ carriedȱ outȱ againstȱ theȱ streetȱ preachingȱ ofȱ theȱ misȬ sionariesȱinȱhisȱcity.ȱHeȱenteredȱintoȱdebateȱwithȱtheȱpreachers orallyȱandȱinȱwriting,ȱandȱshowedȱhimselfȱtoȱbeȱaȱsharpȱandȱinȬ telligentȱ apologistȱ forȱ Hinduism.ȱ Nevertheless,ȱ theȱ courseȱ his lifeȱtookȱafterwardsȱisȱexceptional.ȱGorehȱstudiedȱtheȱChristian faithȱ inȱ orderȱ toȱ beȱ ableȱ toȱ combatȱ itȱ butȱ wasȱ increasinglyȱ imȬ pressedȱbyȱtheȱBibleȱandȱtheȱteachingsȱofȱtheȱchurchȱandȱafterȱa 35

JESUSȱASȱGURU

36

fewȱyearsȱabandonedȱHinduismȱandȱwasȱbaptized.ȱNilakantha becameȱ Nehemiahȱ andȱ ultimatelyȱ oneȱ ofȱ theȱ mostȱ celebrated apologistsȱforȱChristianityȱinȱIndia. Nikalanthaȱ Gorehȱ hadȱ aȱ classicalȱ Hinduȱ background.ȱ He cameȱfromȱaȱprominentȱbrahmanicȱfamilyȱinȱwesternȱIndiaȱand hisȱfamilyȱhadȱbeenȱassociatedȱforȱgenerationsȱwithȱtheȱcourtȱof oneȱ ofȱ theȱ localȱ princesȱ inȱ Bundelkhand,ȱ theȱ nawabȱ ofȱ Banda. Nilakantha’sȱ grandfatherȱ alsoȱ heldȱ aȱ publicȱ officeȱ thereȱ asȱ the prince’sȱvizier.ȱAfterȱaȱlongȱcareerȱatȱtheȱcourt,ȱhowever,ȱheȱsetȬ tledȱ withȱ twoȱ ofȱ hisȱ sonsȱ inȱ Varanasi,ȱ whereȱ theyȱ ranȱ aȱ guestȬ houseȱ forȱ pilgrims.ȱ Nilakanthaȱ wasȱ bornȱ inȱ theȱ ruralȱ areaȱ of westernȱIndia,ȱforȱhisȱmotherȱhad,ȱaccordingȱtoȱanȱoldȱcustom, retiredȱ toȱ herȱ parents’ȱ homeȱ beforeȱ givingȱ birth.ȱ Heȱ wasȱ born there,ȱinȱtheȱvillageȱofȱKashipuraȱ(HamirpurȱDt.),ȱonȱ8ȱFebruary 1825.ȱHeȱgrewȱupȱinȱtheȱhomeȱofȱhisȱfather’sȱfamilyȱinȱVaranasi andȱ wasȱ thusȱ alsoȱ stampedȱ byȱ lifeȱ inȱ theȱ bigȱ city,ȱ inȱ aȱ multiȬ culturalȱ society.ȱ Goreh’sȱ educationȱ wasȱ gearedȱ toȱ hisȱ family’s traditionalȱ wayȱ ofȱ life.ȱ Theȱ conservativeȱ brahmansȱ wereȱ opȬ posedȱ toȱ theȱ schoolsȱ theȱ Europeansȱ hadȱ founded.ȱ Evenȱ the prestigiousȱ Benaresȱ Sanskritȱ Collegeȱ wouldȱ notȱ do,ȱ because thereȱtooȱtheȱEuropeanȱinfluenceȱcouldȱmakeȱtheȱstudentsȱȱcritȬ icalȱ ofȱ theirȱ ownȱ religiousȱ teaching.ȱ Nilakanthaȱ wasȱ thusȱ eduȬ catedȱatȱoneȱofȱtheȱSanskritȱschoolsȱinȱtheȱHinduȱmonasteries,ȱof whichȱthereȱwereȱmanyȱinȱVaranasi,ȱandȱwasȱalsoȱgivenȱprivate tutoringȱbyȱbrahmanicȱgurus.ȱHeȱbecameȱproficientȱinȱSanskrit grammar,ȱinȱtheȱsacredȱtextsȱandȱtheȱvariousȱphilosophicalȱsysȬ temsȱofȱHinduism,ȱandȱsoonȱbecameȱknownȱasȱaȱpandit,ȱtheȱtitle forȱaȱbrahmanȱwhoȱknowsȱSanskritȱwell.ȱȱHeȱlaterȱacquiredȱthe titleȱ ofȱ shastri,ȱ anȱ expertȱ inȱ theȱ wisdomȱ andȱ lawȱ booksȱ ofȱ HinȬ duism.1 TheȱGorehȱfamilyȱwereȱofȱoldȱdevoteesȱofȱShiva.ȱTheȱhouse whereȱtheȱwholeȱfamilyȱlivedȱtogetherȱinȱVaranasiȱalsoȱhadȱits ownȱ templeȱ forȱ Mahadeva,ȱ orȱ Shiva.ȱ Butȱ Nilakantha’sȱ father wasȱaȱdevoteeȱofȱVishnu,ȱandȱNilakanthaȱalsoȱlaterȱchoseȱVishȬ

ȱC.E.ȱGardner,ȱGoreh’sȱbiographer,ȱexplainsȱtheȱtitlesȱforȱhisȱBritish readersȱinȱhisȱLifeȱofȱFatherȱGorehȱ(London:ȱLongmans,ȱGreen,ȱandȱCo., 1900),ȱp.ȱ24,ȱnotȱinappropriatelyȱasȱfollows:ȱ“Aȱshastriȱwouldȱcorrespond toȱourȱDoctorȱofȱDivinity,ȱwhileȱaȱpanditȱwouldȱrepresentȱourȱMasterȱof Arts.” 1

FROMȱFALSEȱPROPHETȱTOȱDEMONSTRABLEȱDIVINITY

37

nuȱasȱhisȱpersonalȱdivinityȱ(ishtadeva),ȱevenȱthoughȱheȱhad,ȱfolȬ lowingȱinȱhisȱgrandfather’sȱsteps,ȱfirstȱbeenȱaȱdevoteeȱofȱShiva. SuchȱmovesȱfromȱShaivismȱtoȱVaishnavismȱwereȱratherȱrareȱbut couldȱ beȱ defendedȱ becauseȱ bothȱ divinitiesȱ wereȱ viewedȱ asȱ leȬ gitimatelyȱ Hindu.ȱ Theȱ reasonsȱ forȱ Nilakantha’sȱ moveȱ areȱ also remarkable.ȱHeȱhadȱdoneȱsomeȱcarefulȱresearchȱintoȱtheȱhistory ofȱhisȱreligion,ȱasȱisȱapparentȱfromȱhowȱheȱwritesȱaboutȱitȱlater himself.2ȱ Heȱ wasȱ struckȱ byȱ theȱ factȱ thatȱ inȱ theȱ mostȱ authoritaȬ tiveȱandȱoldestȱsacredȱtextsȱVishnu,ȱratherȱthanȱShiva,ȱisȱcentral. Andȱ heȱ discoveredȱ thatȱ theȱ greatȱ Shankaraȱ andȱ hisȱ immediate disciplesȱ wereȱ devoteesȱ ofȱ Vishnuȱ andȱ scarcelyȱ grantedȱ Shiva anyȱ spaceȱ inȱ theirȱ writings.ȱ Toȱ theȱ youngȱ Nilakantha,ȱ theȱ auȬ thorityȱ ofȱ scriptureȱ andȱ traditionȱ appearedȱ toȱ weighȱ heavily. ThisȱwouldȱturnȱoutȱtoȱbeȱaȱfixedȱpatternȱinȱhisȱfurtherȱdevelopȬ ment,ȱhoweverȱmuchȱhisȱviewsȱwouldȱchange. Inȱ1844ȱNilakanthaȱGorehȱengagedȱinȱpublicȱdebateȱforȱthe firstȱtime.ȱTheȱoccasionȱwasȱtheȱworkȱofȱChristianȱmissionaries, whoȱwereȱpreachingȱtheȱChristianȱfaithȱonȱtheȱstreet.ȱLikeȱmany otherȱorthodoxȱHindus,ȱNilakanthaȱconsideredȱsuchȱconfrontaȬ tionalȱmissionizingȱtoȱbeȱinsulting,ȱcertainlyȱ whenȱ itȱ wasȱdone inȱtheȱholyȱcityȱofȱtheȱHindus.ȱThisȱ“bazaarȱpreaching”ȱwasȱnot withoutȱ itsȱ detractorsȱ amongȱ Christiansȱ either.ȱ Liberalȱ church membersȱviewedȱthisȱapproachȱasȱtooȱaggressive,ȱandȱcivilȱserȬ vantsȱfearedȱthatȱitȱwouldȱproduceȱinstabilityȱinȱtheȱnativeȱsociȬ ety.ȱInȱcontrast,ȱmissionariesȱofȱtheȱevangelicalȱpersuasion,ȱboth withinȱtheȱAnglicanȱChurchȱandȱamongȱtheȱdissenters,ȱfoundȱit toȱ beȱ aȱ legitimateȱ wayȱ ofȱ proclaimingȱ theȱ Gospel,ȱ whichȱ was, moreover,ȱtheȱmostȱeffective,ȱpreciselyȱbecauseȱofȱitsȱconfrontaȬ tionalȱ character.ȱ Nilakanthaȱ witnessedȱ Williamȱ Smithȱ atȱ work, anȱ Anglicanȱ missionaryȱ whoȱ hadȱ beenȱ sentȱ toȱ Indiaȱ byȱ the Churchȱ Missionaryȱ Societyȱ (CMS),ȱ anȱ organizationȱ associated withȱtheȱevangelicalȱwingȱofȱtheȱAnglicanȱChurch,ȱtheȱsoȬcalled “Lowȱ Church.”ȱ Smith’sȱ preachingȱ was,ȱ inȱ goodȱ Calvinistȱ faȬ shion,ȱfixatedȱentirelyȱonȱtheȱcontrastȱbetweenȱeternalȱsalvation andȱeternalȱrejection.ȱTheȱallȬdeterminativeȱinfluenceȱofȱCalvin isȱ recognizableȱ rightȱ upȱ toȱ theȱ terminologyȱ heȱ usedȱ when

2 ȱ Inȱ aȱ letterȱ toȱ Sirȱ Monierȱ MonierȬWilliams,ȱ citedȱ extensivelyȱ by Gardner,ȱLifeȱofȱFatherȱGoreh,ȱpp.ȱ35Ȭ36.

JESUSȱASȱGURU

38

speakingȱofȱdoubleȱpredestination.3ȱSmithȱmadeȱhumanȱmisery centralȱ andȱ interpretedȱ itȱ asȱ aȱ testȱ toȱ whichȱ Godȱ subjectedȱ the humanȱbeingȱinȱhisȱonceȬonlyȱearthlyȱexistence.ȱFaithȱinȱChrist offeredȱaȱwayȱoutȱofȱaȱcompletelyȱdepravedȱexistence.ȱWhoever acceptsȱtheȱGospel’sȱofferȱofȱsalvationȱgainsȱaccessȱtoȱheavenly bliss,ȱbutȱinevitableȱpunishmentȱinȱhellȱawaitsȱthoseȱwhoȱdoȱnot turnȱtoȱChrist.ȱOtherȱreligionsȱareȱsimplyȱrejected:ȱHinduismȱis aȱmeansȱSatanȱusesȱtoȱtrapȱpeople.4 Theȱ nineteenȬyearȬoldȱ Nilakanthaȱ Gorehȱ tookȱ upȱ theȱ disȬ puteȱ withȱ Williamȱ Smithȱ andȱ hisȱ fellowȱ missionariesȱ onȱ three levels.ȱFirst,ȱheȱvisitedȱSmithȱinȱorderȱtoȱconvinceȱhimȱofȱwhat wasȱ absurdȱ inȱ hisȱ religion.ȱ Toȱ Nilakantha,ȱ itȱ seemedȱ meritoriȬ ousȱ toȱ attemptȱ toȱ silenceȱ theȱ missionaries.5ȱ Heȱ madeȱ hisȱ obȬ jectionsȱ andȱ immediatelyȱ afterȱ hisȱ visitȱ wroteȱ aȱ letterȱ about themȱinȱwhichȱheȱarticulatedȱhisȱcritiqueȱonceȱmore.ȱSmithȱanȬ sweredȱhimȱelaborately,ȱstatingȱinȱsharplyȱantitheticalȱway:ȱ“In yourȱ religionȱ thereȱ isȱ nothingȱ butȱ darknessȱ before,ȱ andȱ darkȬ nessȱ behind,ȱ andȱ doubtȱ andȱ fearȱ inȱ theȱ middle;ȱ hereȱ lightȱ is rained,ȱandȱpeaceȱandȱhappinessȱforeverȱandȱever.”6ȱSuchȱanȱapȬ proachȱ didȱ notȱ convinceȱ theȱ youngȱ brahman,ȱ ofȱ course.ȱ Smith didȱ notȱ wantȱ toȱ replyȱ toȱ Nilakantha’sȱ argumentsȱ duringȱ their conversationsȱ butȱ urgedȱ himȱ toȱ readȱ theȱ Newȱ Testament,ȱ of whichȱ heȱ hadȱ givenȱ himȱ aȱ copyȱ atȱ theirȱ firstȱ meeting.ȱ NilaȬ kanthaȱhadȱacceptedȱitȱoutȱofȱpolitenessȱbutȱrefusedȱtoȱreadȱit. Smithȱ finallyȱ gaveȱ hisȱ brahmanȱ visitorȱ anotherȱ book,ȱ one thatȱ wasȱ impossibleȱ forȱ himȱ toȱ leaveȱ unread.ȱ Itȱ wasȱ aȱ workȱ in veryȱpolishedȱSanskrit,ȱcontainingȱanȱapologyȱofȱChristianityȱin Indianȱ style.ȱ Itȱ wasȱ calledȱ Matapariksha,ȱ i.e.ȱ “Anȱ Investigation intoȱ theȱ Religions.”ȱ Theȱ authorȱ wasȱ Johnȱ Muir,ȱ aȱ Britishȱ civil 3 ȱThusȱWilliamȱSmith,ȱDwij:ȱTheȱConversionȱofȱaȱBrahmanȱtoȱtheȱFaith ofȱChristȱ(London:ȱJamesȱNisbetȱandȱCo.,ȱ1850),ȱp.ȱ72,ȱȱwritesȱthatȱnotȱall peopleȱamongȱtheȱEuropeanȱpeoplesȱwillȱbeȱsaved:ȱ“perhapsȱnotȱoneȱin aȱhundred,”ȱaȱclearȱreflectionȱofȱCalvin’sȱfamousȱcentesimusȱquisque.ȱ

ȱSmith,ȱDwij,ȱp.ȱ45.

4

ȱ Smith,ȱ Dwij,ȱ p.ȱ 37.ȱ Seeȱ alsoȱ Gardner,ȱ Lifeȱ ofȱ Fatherȱ Goreh,ȱ p.ȱ 38. “Meritorious”(punya)ȱshouldȱbeȱunderstoodȱhereȱinȱtheȱreligiousȱsense: combattingȱtheȱreligionȱofȱtheȱbarbariansȱ(mleccha)ȱwouldȱproduceȱaȱgood karma. 5

ȱSmith,ȱDwij,ȱpp.ȱ42Ȭ43.

6

FROMȱFALSEȱPROPHETȱTOȱDEMONSTRABLEȱDIVINITY

39

servantȱ withȱ anȱ exceptionalȱ knowledgeȱ ofȱ Sanskrit,ȱ whoȱ was veryȱ sympatheticȱ toȱ theȱ evangelicalȱ missionaryȱ movement.7 Muir’sȱ longȱ discourseȱ inȱ poeticȱ formȱ gaveȱ aȱ numberȱ ofȱ arguȬ mentsȱforȱtheȱtruthȱofȱtheȱChristianȱfaithȱthatȱwereȱworkedȱout broadly.ȱHeȱpresentedȱinȱparticularȱthreeȱcriteriaȱforȱdeterminȬ ingȱwhetherȱaȱreligionȱwasȱtrue.ȱFirstȱofȱall,ȱaȱreligionȱcouldȱbe trueȱonlyȱifȱtheȱfounderȱhadȱtheȱpowerȱtoȱperformȱmiracles.ȱSecȬ ond,ȱ theȱ textsȱ ofȱ aȱ trueȱ religionȱ areȱ characterizedȱ byȱ holiness andȱexaltednessȱ(shreshthata).ȱThird,ȱonlyȱaȱtrueȱreligionȱwould beȱ intendedȱ forȱ allȱ peoplesȱ andȱ thereforeȱ beȱ characterizedȱ by universalityȱ (samanyata).ȱ Muirȱ thenȱ introducesȱ severalȱ arguȬ mentsȱtoȱproveȱthatȱonlyȱtheȱChristianȱfaithȱmeetsȱallȱthreeȱcriȬ teriaȱofȱtruth,ȱwhereasȱHinduismȱdoesȱnotȱhaveȱone. Muir’sȱ bookȱ wasȱ veryȱ significantȱ forȱ Nilakanthaȱ Goreh’s development.ȱ Later,ȱ whenȱ heȱ wroteȱ aboutȱ hisȱ conversionȱ to Christianity,ȱ Nilakanthaȱ saidȱ thatȱ theȱ Mataparikshaȱ constituted hisȱ firstȱ acquaintanceȱ withȱ theȱ Christianȱ faith.8ȱ Atȱ firstȱ heȱ reȬ jectedȱMuir’sȱargumentȱwithȱallȱhisȱmightȱandȱtookȱtheȱtrouble toȱcomposeȱaȱreply,ȱalsoȱinȱtheȱformȱofȱaȱlongȱpoemȱinȱSanskrit. Thisȱ impressiveȱ workȱ byȱ Nilakanthaȱ isȱ calledȱ ShastratattvavinȬ irnaya,ȱwhichȱmeans:ȱ“TheȱProofȱofȱtheȱTruthȱofȱtheȱScripture.” Inȱ thisȱ wayȱ heȱ engagesȱ inȱ theȱ disputeȱ withȱ theȱ Christianȱ misȬ sionariesȱonȱtheȱsecondȱlevel.ȱTwoȱbrahmansȱhadȱalreadyȱpreviȬ ouslyȱwrittenȱaȱrefutationȱofȱMuir’sȱMatapariksha,9ȱbutȱNilakanȬ tha’sȱ workȱ offeredȱ theȱ sharpestȱ condemnationȱ ofȱ Muir’sȱ arguȬ mentȱandȱtheȱmostȱradicalȱrejectionȱofȱtheȱChristianȱfaith.

ȱ Johnȱ Muirȱ (1810Ȭ1882)ȱ wouldȱ laterȱ becomeȱ famousȱ forȱ hisȱ exȬ tensiveȱcollectionȱofȱclassicalȱSanskritȱwritings,ȱOriginalȱSanskritȱTextsȱon theȱOriginȱandȱHistoryȱofȱtheȱPeopleȱofȱIndia,ȱwhichȱwasȱpublishedȱinȱȱfive partsȱbetweenȱ1860ȱandȱ1872.ȱMataparikshaȱwasȱpublishedȱforȱtheȱfirst timeȱinȱ1839. 7

8 ȱN.ȱGoreh,ȱAȱLetterȱtoȱtheȱBrahmosȱFromȱaȱConvertedȱBrahmanȱofȱBeȬ naresȱ[1867],ȱ2ndȱed.ȱ(Allahabad:ȱNorthȱIndiaȱTractȱSociety,ȱ1868),ȱp.ȱ31.

ȱTheȱcontroversyȱbetweenȱMuirȱandȱtheȱbrahmansȱisȱdescribedȱexȬ tensivelyȱinȱRichardȱFoxȱYoung,ȱResistantȱHinduism:ȱSanskritȱSourcesȱon AntiȬChristianȱApologeticsȱinȱEarlyȱNineteenthȬCenturyȱIndia,ȱPublications ofȱtheȱDeȱNobiliȱResearchȱLibraryȱVIIIȱ(Vienna:ȱUniversityȱofȱVienna, 1981) 9

JESUSȱASȱGURU

40

Nilakanthaȱ objectsȱ firstȱ ofȱ allȱ toȱ Muir’sȱ rationalisticȱ apȬ proach,ȱ whichȱ apparentlyȱ couldȱ judgeȱ religiousȱ systemsȱ on truthȱ fromȱ theȱ outside.ȱ Inȱ oppositionȱ toȱ this,ȱ theȱ youngȱ brahȬ manȱpostulatesȱalmostȱaȱBarthianȱapproachȱtoȱfaith.ȱTheȱhuman beingȱfirstȱhasȱtoȱsubjectȱhimselfȱbyȱfaithȱ(shraddha)ȱtoȱreligious truthȱ andȱ onlyȱ thenȱ canȱ reasonȱ (tarka)ȱ provideȱ deeperȱ insight intoȱ theȱ doctrinalȱ system.ȱ Nor,ȱ forȱ thatȱ matter,ȱ isȱ Nilakantha convincedȱ byȱ Muir’sȱ assessmentȱ asȱ regardsȱ content.ȱ Heȱ rejects allȱthreeȱofȱtheȱcriteriaȱforȱtruthȱthatȱMuirȱintroducesȱforȱChrisȬ tianity.ȱ Nilakanthaȱ statesȱ thatȱ heȱ doesȱ notȱ believeȱ inȱ theȱ mirȬ aclesȱ thatȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ isȱ saidȱ toȱ haveȱ done.ȱ Ifȱ itȱ wasȱ trueȱ that thisȱincarnatedȱdivinityȱcouldȱhealȱtheȱblind,ȱwhyȱdidȱtheȱblind peopleȱ whoȱ believedȱ inȱ himȱ todayȱ remainȱ blind?ȱ Thatȱ would meanȱ thatȱ somethingȱ hasȱ changedȱ withȱ respectȱ toȱ God’sȱ comȬ passion—whichȱ isȱ impossibleȱ toȱ imagine.ȱ Obviously,ȱ heȱ also wantsȱnothingȱ toȱdoȱ withȱtheȱ allegedȱexaltednessȱ ofȱtheȱ ChrisȬ tianȱ revelation.ȱ Toȱ theȱ contrary,ȱ heȱ boldlyȱ assertsȱ thatȱ thereȱ is noȱ passageȱ inȱ theȱ Bibleȱ withoutȱ discrepanciesȱ andȱ otherȱ shortȬ comings.ȱIncidentally,ȱheȱalsoȱstatesȱhisȱdislikeȱofȱChristiansȱbeȬ causeȱ theyȱ killȱ animals,ȱ evenȱ cows.ȱ Anyȱ religionȱ thatȱ doesȱ not includeȱmercyȱforȱanimalsȱcannotȱbeȱanȱexaltedȱreligion.ȱFinally, inȱNilakantha’sȱapproachȱnothingȱremainedȱofȱtheȱuniversality ofȱtheȱChristianȱfaith.ȱHereȱheȱreachesȱaȱclimaxȱinȱhisȱfierceȱfight againstȱChristianity.ȱInȱhisȱview,ȱJohnȱMuirȱandȱallȱotherȱChrisȬ tianȱapologistsȱhaveȱevaluatedȱtheirȱownȱreligionȱinȱanȱentirely wrongȱway.ȱTheyȱcouldȱdoȱnothingȱelse,ȱforȱtheirȱreligionȱisȱto beȱcharacterizedȱasȱaȱdelusionȱ(mohadharma).ȱInȱHinduȱthinking, thisȱtermȱrefersȱtoȱaȱbeliefȱthatȱisȱheldȱoutȱtoȱpeopleȱinȱorderȱto deceiveȱ them.ȱ Hereȱ itȱ isȱ aȱ responseȱ byȱ theȱ divinityȱ toȱ theȱ misȬ deedsȱ doneȱ byȱ humans:ȱ apparently,ȱ Christiansȱ wereȱ soȱ badȱ in theirȱ previousȱ livesȱ thatȱ theyȱ mustȱ nowȱ liveȱ withȱ suchȱ aȱ deluȬ sion.ȱItȱisȱtheirȱownȱfaultȱthatȱtheyȱhaveȱnoȱreliableȱreligionȱand cannotȱseeȱthatȱthemselves!ȱTheȱBibleȱisȱnoȱmoreȱthanȱaȱdeceitȬ fulȱ workȱ (mohashastra).ȱ And,ȱ inȱ Nilakantha’sȱ view,ȱ Christȱ isȱ a falseȱ prophet,ȱ theȱ personificationȱ ofȱ deception.ȱ Nothing,ȱ thereȬ fore,ȱneedsȱtoȱbeȱsaidȱaboutȱhim.10

ȱYoung,ȱResistantȱHinduism,ȱp.ȱ137,ȱwasȱastonishedȱthatȱChristȱdoes notȱconstituteȱaȱtopicȱinȱthisȱwork:ȱ“Perhapsȱtheȱmostȱremarkableȱfeature ofȱHinduȱapologeticsȱwithinȱtheȱMataparikshaȱcontextȱisȱnotȱsoȱmuch 10

FROMȱFALSEȱPROPHETȱTOȱDEMONSTRABLEȱDIVINITY

41

ThisȱworkȱbyȱNilakanthaȱGorehȱinȱSanskritȱconstitutesȱhis disputeȱwithȱtheȱmissionariesȱonȱanȱacademicȱlevel.ȱItsȱeffectȱreȬ mainedȱlimited,ȱhowever.ȱItȱisȱnotȱknownȱifȱJohnȱMuirȱeverȱreȬ spondedȱtoȱtheȱattack,ȱbutȱitȱisȱunlikely.ȱInȱVaranasi,ȱonlyȱaȱfew scholarlyȱHindusȱstudiedȱtheȱwork.ȱItȱwasȱnotȱpublishedȱduring hisȱlifetime—notȱuntilȱ1951.11ȱNilakanthaȱconductedȱhisȱdispute withȱ theȱ missionariesȱ onȱ yetȱ aȱ thirdȱ level.ȱ Inȱ additionȱ toȱ the scholarlyȱSanskritȱpoem,ȱheȱalsoȱwroteȱaȱproseȱtreatmentȱinȱthe languageȱ usedȱ byȱ peopleȱ everyday,ȱ Hindi.12ȱ Theȱ manuscript wasȱ moreȱ modestlyȱ calledȱ “Doubtsȱ aboutȱ Christianity,”ȱ andȱ it wasȱ distributedȱ byȱ theȱ authorȱ inȱ Varanasiȱ toȱ armȱ Hindus againstȱ ȱ Christianȱ preaching.ȱ Inȱ theȱ firstȱ pointȱ ofȱ doubtȱ weȱ alȬ readyȱ findȱ aȱ reflectionȱ onȱ theȱ preachingȱ ofȱ Williamȱ Smithȱ and hisȱ fellowȱ missionaries.ȱ Ifȱ peopleȱ canȱ beȱ savedȱ onlyȱ through Christ,ȱ thenȱ itȱ isȱ incomprehensibleȱ thatȱ Godȱ hasȱ broughtȱ it aboutȱ thatȱ soȱ manyȱ peopleȱ haveȱ noȱ knowledgeȱ ofȱ him.ȱ Inȱ that case,ȱ Godȱ hasȱ createdȱ thoseȱ countlessȱ peopleȱ exclusivelyȱ for hell.ȱ Theȱ secondȱ pointȱ ofȱ doubtȱ isȱ alsoȱ directedȱ atȱ theȱ heartȱ of missionaries’ȱproclamation:ȱifȱChristȱaloneȱisȱtheȱmediator,ȱthen God’sȱloveȱandȱgraceȱisȱcertainlyȱlimited.ȱMoreover,ȱitȱdoesȱnot accordȱwithȱGod’sȱjusticeȱthatȱanȱinnocentȱpersonȱshouldȱsuffer forȱtheȱguilty.ȱTheȱthirdȱpointȱalsoȱconcernsȱJesusȱbutȱisȱdirected moreȱatȱMuir’sȱarguments.ȱNilakanthaȱdoesȱnotȱbelieveȱinȱmirȬ acleȱ storiesȱ asȱ aȱ rule,ȱ thusȱ neitherȱ inȱ thoseȱ allegedlyȱ doneȱ by Jesus.ȱ Moreover,ȱ theȱ argumentȱ isȱ notȱ correct:ȱ ifȱ Christiansȱ do notȱ wishȱ toȱ acceptȱ theȱ miraclesȱ doneȱ byȱ Hindus,ȱ whyȱ should theȱHindusȱacceptȱtheȱmiraclesȱdoneȱbyȱChrist?ȱNilakanthaȱthen defendsȱHinduismȱonȱaȱfewȱpointsȱwhereȱChristiansȱhaveȱmisȬ understoodȱ it.ȱ Afterȱ all,ȱ theyȱ denyȱ theȱ lawȱ ofȱ karmaȱ andȱ the transmigrationȱofȱsouls.ȱTheyȱalsoȱrejectȱtheȱworshipȱofȱimages, butȱ thisȱ isȱ toȱ beȱ comparedȱ withȱ theȱ wayȱ inȱ whichȱ theyȱ themȬ whatȱitȱcontainedȱbutȱwhatȱitȱlacked.ȱAȱmostȱcuriousȱabsenceȱisȱJesus Christ,ȱtheȱfigureȱatȱtheȱveryȱcenterȱofȱChristianity.”ȱInȱNilakantha’sȱcase, thisȱdoesȱnotȱhaveȱtoȱcauseȱanyȱastonishment:ȱhisȱapproachȱexcludesȱany substantialȱinterestȱinȱtheȱfigureȱofȱJesusȱChrist. ȱShastratattvavinirnayaȱofȱNilakantha,ȱed.ȱS.L.ȱKatreȱ(Ujjain:ȱScindia OrientalȱInstituteȱinȱUjjain,ȱ1951). 11

12 ȱAȱsummaryȱofȱthisȱneverȱpublishedȱworkȱcanȱbeȱfoundȱinȱSmith, Dwij,ȱpp.ȱ58Ȭ70;ȱseeȱalsoȱYoung,ȱResistantȱHinduism,ȱpp.ȱ104Ȭ05.

42

JESUSȱASȱGURU

selvesȱgiveȱtheȱBibleȱaȱseparateȱstatusȱsoȱthatȱtheyȱcanȱfocusȱon theȱomnipresentȱGod.ȱFinally,ȱNilakanthaȱtakesȱupȱtheȱfigureȱof Krishna,ȱwhoȱisȱoftenȱmisunderstoodȱbyȱChristians.ȱTheȱstories ofȱ hisȱ amorousȱ adventuresȱ withȱ theȱ shepherdȱ girlsȱ areȱ not intendedȱtoȱarouseȱlustȱbutȱtoȱtranscendȱhumanȱpassion.ȱItȱisȱa sinȱtoȱthinkȱthatȱoneȱisȱallowedȱtoȱactȱjustȱlikeȱKrishna. ThereȱisȱaȱclearȱdifferenceȱbetweenȱtheȱtwoȱworksȱbyȱNilaȬ kanthaȱ Gorehȱ againstȱ theȱ missionaries.ȱ Theȱ argumentȱ inȱ the Sanskritȱ poemȱ isȱ moreȱ aȱ matterȱ ofȱ principleȱ andȱ isȱ stricter.ȱ He attemptsȱ primarilyȱ toȱ argueȱ againstȱ hisȱ opponents’ȱ starting pointsȱ and,ȱ inȱ doingȱ so,ȱ dismissesȱ theirȱ religionȱ asȱ aȱ delusion whoseȱ contentȱ needsȱ noȱ furtherȱ attention.ȱ Heȱ thusȱ hardlyȱ disȬ cussesȱ theȱ figureȱ ofȱ Christ,ȱ whereasȱ theȱ Hindiȱ workȱ doesȱ disȬ cussȱ Jesusȱ Christ.ȱ Theȱ primaryȱ questionȱ nowȱ isȱ ifȱ Jesus’ȱ work, particularlyȱ hisȱ reconcilingȱ sufferingȱ andȱ death,ȱ canȱ haveȱ the meaningȱ thatȱ Christiansȱ ascribeȱ toȱ it.ȱ Nilakantha’sȱ responseȱ to thatȱ questionȱ isȱ negative,ȱ butȱ heȱ expressesȱ himselfȱ muchȱ less negatively.ȱTheȱdifferenceȱbetweenȱbothȱwritingsȱhadȱtoȱdo,ȱof course,ȱ withȱ theȱ differencesȱ betweenȱ theȱ targetȱ audiences.ȱ The SanskritȱwritingȱisȱintendedȱforȱpanditsȱandȱtheȱauthorȱisȱthereȬ foreȱinclinedȱtoȱuseȱargumentsȱonȱaȱtheoreticalȱlevel.ȱTheȱHindi workȱ isȱ intendedȱ forȱ aȱ moreȱ generalȱ public;ȱ heȱ alsoȱ offered WilliamȱSmithȱaȱcopy.ȱInȱthisȱworkȱGorehȱshowsȱaȱmoreȱmodȬ erateȱside.ȱNevertheless,ȱthereȱisȱprobablyȱsomethingȱelseȱgoing on.ȱ Nilakanthaȱ Gorehȱ hasȱ graduallyȱ begunȱ toȱ thinkȱ differently aboutȱtheȱfaithȱofȱhisȱopponents.ȱAfterȱreadingȱMuir’sȱpoem,ȱhe alsoȱbeganȱtoȱstudyȱtheȱBible,ȱprobablyȱtoȱgainȱammunitionȱfor theȱ battleȱ butȱ alsoȱ withȱ growingȱ interest.ȱ Heȱ saidȱ laterȱ thatȱ it wasȱ primarilyȱ theȱ Sermonȱ onȱ theȱ Mountȱ thatȱ hadȱ appealedȱ to him.13ȱJesus’ȱteachingȱandȱexampleȱprovedȱtoȱbeȱpersuasiveȱand wouldȱ notȱ letȱ himȱ be.ȱ Despiteȱ hisȱ initiallyȱ veryȱ fundamental objectionsȱtoȱChristianity,ȱheȱbeganȱincreasinglyȱtoȱwonderȱifȱit wasȱnotȱaȱmatterȱofȱdivineȱinspiration. Afterȱ havingȱ appliedȱ himselfȱ forȱ almostȱ aȱ yearȱ toȱ fighting theȱ Christianȱ faithȱ inȱ writing,ȱ heȱ resumedȱ hisȱ conversations withȱ Williamȱ Smithȱ inȱ theȱ springȱ ofȱ 1845.ȱ Heȱ slowlyȱ became moreȱ andȱ moreȱ acquaintedȱ withȱ theȱ Christianȱ faithȱ andȱ after 13 ȱFromȱaȱconversationalȱnoteȱbyȱSirȱMonierȱMonierȬWilliams,ȱquotȬ edȱbyȱGardner,ȱLifeȱofȱFatherȱGoreh,ȱp.ȱ43.

FROMȱFALSEȱPROPHETȱTOȱDEMONSTRABLEȱDIVINITY

43

threeȱyearsȱwasȱbaptized.ȱTheȱcommotionȱthatȱhisȱconversionȱto Christianityȱ causedȱ amongȱ Hindusȱ isȱ almostȱ unimaginable. Hindusȱalwaysȱfoundȱitȱdifficultȱtoȱdealȱwithȱtheȱphenomenon ofȱ abandoningȱ one’sȱ faith,ȱ butȱ hereȱ itȱ wasȱ aȱ brahmanȱ andȱ a wellȬknownȱscholarȱonȱtopȱofȱthat.ȱTheȱfactȱthatȱheȱhadȱshown himselfȱinȱpreviousȱyearsȱtoȱbeȱanȱapologistȱforȱHinduismȱmade hisȱ conversionȱ evenȱ moreȱ difficult.ȱ Nilakanthaȱ wasȱ expelled fromȱhisȱcasteȱandȱwasȱviewedȱfromȱthenȱonȱbyȱhisȱrelativesȱas dead.14ȱCharacteristicȱofȱthisȱindignationȱisȱtheȱwayȱinȱwhichȱhis conversionȱwouldȱbeȱstillȱviewedȱbyȱorthodoxȱHindusȱaȱcentury later.ȱ S.L.ȱ Katreȱ wroteȱ inȱ theȱ introductionȱ toȱ hisȱ publicationȱ of theȱ Shastratattvavinirnayaȱ thatȱ Smithȱ usedȱ practicalȱ psychology toȱ easeȱ Nilakanthaȱ awayȱ fromȱ theȱ environmentȱ inȱ whichȱ he grewȱ up:ȱ heȱ hypnotizedȱ himȱ withȱ hisȱ friendlyȱ attitudeȱ and pleasantȱ surroundings.ȱ Accordingȱ toȱ Katre,ȱ theȱ deathȱ ofȱ NilaȬ kantha’sȱwife,ȱLakshmibai,ȱisȱalsoȱtoȱbeȱblamedȱonȱChristianity. Sheȱ hadȱ beenȱ sickȱ forȱ aȱ longȱ timeȱ andȱ wasȱ baptizedȱ twoȱ days beforeȱ sheȱ died.ȱ Katre,ȱ withoutȱ mentioningȱ herȱ illness,ȱ stated thatȱherȱhusbandȱhadȱherȱbaptizedȱagainstȱherȱwill:ȱ“ThisȱforciȬ bleȱbaptizationȱ...ȱsoȱmuchȱshockedȱherȱthatȱsheȱdidȱnotȱsurvive itȱ evenȱ byȱ threeȱ days.”15ȱ Lakshmibai’sȱ earlyȱ deathȱ was,ȱ of course,ȱgivenȱaȱveryȱdifferentȱinterpretationȱbyȱtheȱmissionaries: “Itȱwasȱaȱblessedȱthingȱthusȱtoȱdieȱinȱtheȱfreshnessȱofȱbaptismal grace.”16 ForȱNilakanthaȱhimself,ȱhisȱbaptismȱinȱ1848ȱwasȱtheȱbeginȬ ningȱofȱanȱentirelyȱdifferentȱlife,ȱinȱaȱnewȱenvironmentȱandȱwith newȱdutiesȱandȱchallenges.ȱAȱmajorȱsymbolȱofȱthisȱwasȱhisȱnew name:ȱ fromȱ thenȱ onȱ heȱ calledȱ himselfȱ byȱ hisȱ baptismalȱ name, Nehemiah,ȱ evenȱ thoughȱ heȱ sometimesȱ addedȱ hisȱ oldȱ Hindu ȱ Thisȱ wasȱ doneȱ throughȱ ghatasphota,ȱ i.e.ȱ “theȱ breakingȱ ofȱ the pitcher”.ȱTheȱsocioȬreligiousȱdeathȱofȱtheȱguiltyȱpartyȱwasȱillustratedȱby knockingȱoverȱaȱpitcherȱofȱwater.ȱSeeȱManusmritiȱXI:ȱ183Ȭ86:ȱ“Aȱfemale slaveȱshouldȱoverturnȱaȱpotȱfullȱofȱwaterȱwithȱherȱfoot,ȱasȱifȱitȱwereȱforȱa deadȱperson”;ȱThisȱtranslationȱisȱtakenȱfromȱWendyȱDonigerȱ(transl.), TheȱLawsȱofȱManuȱ(London:ȱPenguinȱBooks,ȱ1991),ȱp.ȱ269. 14

ȱS.L.ȱKatreȱinȱhisȱintroductionȱtoȱShastratattvavinirnaya,ȱp.ȱXXV. KatreȱpublishedȱNilakantha’sȱHinduȱapologyȱtoȱcounterbalanceȱtheȱuse ofȱGoreh’sȱlaterȱworkȱbyȱChristianȱmissionaries. 15

ȱGardner,ȱLifeȱofȱFatherȱGoreh,ȱp.ȱ87.

16

JESUSȱASȱGURU

44

nameȱforȱtheȱsakeȱofȱclarity.17ȱȱHeȱalsoȱcontinuedȱtoȱuseȱtheȱtitle shastriȱ wheneverȱ itȱ wasȱ usefulȱ toȱ emphasizeȱ hisȱ statusȱ asȱ a scholar.18ȱItȱisȱremarkableȱthatȱheȱwasȱcalledȱPanditȱNehemiahȱin theȱ initialȱ periodȱ afterȱ hisȱ conversion.19ȱ Asȱ aȱ convertȱ whoȱ had anȱextensiveȱknowledgeȱofȱtheȱHinduȱreligionȱandȱphilosophy, heȱwasȱparticularlyȱwelcomeȱamongȱtheȱChristianȱmissionaries. Inȱ additionȱ toȱ theȱ manyȱ illiterate,ȱ lowerȱ casteȱ peopleȱ whoȱ had becomeȱ Christiansȱ thereȱ wasȱ nowȱ aȱ manȱ ofȱ academicȱ status, whoseȱ qualitiesȱ theȱ missionariesȱ usedȱ gratefullyȱ onȱ manyȱ difȬ ferentȱ fronts.ȱ Fromȱ theȱ beginningȱ Nehemiahȱ Gorehȱ wasȱ asked toȱlookȱafterȱpublicationsȱthatȱcouldȱbeȱofȱserviceȱtoȱtheȱspreadȬ ingȱ ofȱ theȱ Christianȱ message.ȱ Hisȱ firstȱ projectȱ wasȱ aȱ continuȬ ationȱofȱproducingȱtheȱUrduȱBookȱofȱCommonȱPrayerȱinȱHindi,ȱa taskȱ onȱ whichȱ Smithȱ hadȱ alreadyȱ begun.ȱ Butȱ hisȱ mostȱ influȬ entialȱbookȱwasȱShadȬdarshanaȬdarpana,ȱaȱwellȱthoughtȬoutȱstudy inȱ Hindiȱ onȱ theȱ sixȱ classicalȱ Hinduȱ philosophicalȱ systems.ȱ It wasȱ translatedȱ quicklyȱ intoȱ English,ȱ wherebyȱ theȱ neutral,ȱ typȬ icalȱIndianȱtitleȱMirrorȱofȱtheȱSixȱSchoolsȱwasȱreplacedȱbyȱaȱproȬ grammaticȱ Aȱ Rationalȱ Refutationȱ ofȱ theȱ Hinduȱ Philosophicalȱ SysȬ tems.20ȱ Althoughȱ theȱ bookȱ wasȱ intendedȱ expresslyȱ toȱ showȱ the superiorityȱofȱtheȱChristianȱfaith,ȱforȱdecadesȱitȱwasȱtheȱbestȱinȬ troductionȱ toȱ theȱ classicalȱ philosophyȱ ofȱ India.ȱ Panditȱ NeheȬ ȱNilakanthaȱmeansȱ“heȱwhoseȱthroatȱisȱblue”;ȱitȱisȱanȱepithetȱfor Shiva—theȱGorehȱfamilyȱhadȱtraditionallyȱbelongedȱtoȱtheȱShaivas.ȱ 17

ȱ Forȱ example,ȱ onȱ theȱ titleȱ pageȱ ofȱ hisȱ mostȱ scholarlyȱ work:ȱ A RationalȱRefutationȱofȱtheȱHinduȱPhilosophicalȱSystemsȱ(Calcutta:ȱCalcutta ChristianȱTractȱandȱBookȱSocietyȱ1862). 18

19 ȱApparently,ȱpanditȱwasȱviewedȱatȱtheȱtimeȱasȱanȱacademicȱtitle andȱnotȱasȱaȱreligiousȱone.ȱThatȱisȱdifferentȱnow.ȱInȱ2002ȱwhenȱtheȱHindu priestȱHansȱR.ȱBhagwandienȱinȱRotterdamȱwasȱbaptized,ȱheȱexplicitly distancedȱhimselfȱfromȱtheȱtitleȱpandit.ȱHeȱsignedȱaȱletterȱtoȱmeȱinȱwhich heȱannouncedȱhisȱconversionȱasȱ“ptȱH.R.ȱBhagwandien”ȱandȱtheȱ“pt” wasȱdeliberatelyȱcrossedȱout.

ȱTheȱthirdȱeditionȱofȱtheȱEnglishȱtranslation,ȱwhichȱappearedȱafter hisȱdeath,ȱwasȱonceȱagainȱgivenȱtheȱneutralȱtitleȱofȱtheȱHindiȱoriginal:ȱA MirrorȱofȱtheȱHinduȱPhilosophicalȱSystems,ȱtransl.ȱFitzȬEdwardȱHall,ȱ3rdȱed. (London:ȱTheȱChristianȱLiteratureȱSocietyȱforȱIndia,ȱ1911).ȱTheȱmostȱreȬ centȱedition,ȱfromȱ2003,ȱonceȱagainȱhasȱaȱmoreȱapologeticȱtitle:ȱAȱChrisȬ tianȱResponseȱtoȱtheȱHinduȱPhilosophicalȱSystems,ȱed.ȱK.P.ȱAleazȱ(Kolkata (Calcutta):ȱPunthiȱPustak,ȱ2003). 20

FROMȱFALSEȱPROPHETȱTOȱDEMONSTRABLEȱDIVINITY

45

miahȱ continuedȱ toȱ workȱ asȱ aȱ catechistȱ andȱ laterȱ asȱ aȱ pastorȱ in missions,ȱ beingȱ recruitedȱ forȱ veryȱ differentȱ tasksȱ atȱ different times.ȱItȱwasȱobviousȱthatȱhe,ȱtheȱbrahmanȱscholar,ȱwouldȱbeȱinȬ vitedȱtoȱaccompanyȱaȱyoungȱmaharajahȱwhoȱhadȱshortlyȱbefore becomeȱ aȱ Christianȱ onȱ aȱ tripȱ toȱ England.ȱ Hisȱ backgroundȱ also madeȱhimȱtheȱrightȱpersonȱtoȱspreadȱtheȱGospelȱamongȱtheȱelite inȱ Kolkata,ȱ theȱ capitalȱ atȱ thatȱ time.ȱ Later,ȱ asȱ aȱ preacher,ȱ he wouldȱalsoȱworkȱinȱaȱsettlementȱofȱmahars,ȱwhoȱwereȱviewedȱas “untouchable”ȱ inȱ theȱ casteȱ system.ȱ Thatȱ he,ȱ aȱ brahman,ȱ was willingȱtoȱlookȱafterȱthisȱpartȱofȱtheȱpopulation,ȱgainedȱhimȱexȬ ceptionalȱgoodwill. Inȱtheȱmeantime,ȱaȱchangeȱdidȱoccurȱinȱNehemiahȱGoreh’s careerȱ inȱ theȱ church.ȱ Heȱ wasȱ initiallyȱ completelyȱ unawareȱ of differentȱtraditionsȱwithinȱChristianity.ȱTheȱLowȱChurchȱtradiȬ tionȱinȱtheȱAnglicanȱChurchȱandȱtheȱassociatedȱmissionsȱorganȬ izationȱCMSȱhadȱofferedȱhimȱhisȱfirstȱacquaintanceȱwithȱchurch life.ȱButȱaboutȱtenȱyearsȱafterȱhisȱbaptismȱheȱbeganȱtoȱstudyȱinȬ creasinglyȱtheȱviewsȱofȱtheȱHighȱChurchȱtradition.ȱAsȱaȱHindu asȱwell,ȱGorehȱhadȱbeenȱexceptionallyȱsensitiveȱtoȱtheȱauthority ofȱtheȱageȬoldȱtradition:ȱitȱwasȱtheȱmostȱimportantȱfactorȱinȱhis moveȱ fromȱ Shaivismȱ toȱ Vaishnavism.ȱ Somethingȱ similarȱ hapȬ penedȱ here.ȱ Withȱ Smithȱ andȱ hisȱ circleȱ Gorehȱ missedȱ theȱ strictȬ nessȱ ofȱ aȱ churchȱ orderȱ andȱ theȱ authorityȱ ofȱ theȱ tradition.ȱ EnȬ countersȱ withȱ AngloȬCatholicsȱ andȱ readingȱ theȱ booksȱ byȱ their leaderȱEdwardȱPuseyȱopenedȱupȱaȱnewȱperspectiveȱforȱhim.ȱHe experiencedȱtheȱLowȱChurchȱpeopleȱincreasinglyȱasȱpeopleȱwho madeȱdecisionsȱinȱreligiousȱandȱecclesiasticalȱareasȱaccordingȱto theirȱ ownȱ insights.ȱ Theȱ Highȱ Churchȱ peopleȱ wereȱ muchȱ more firmlyȱ embeddedȱ inȱ theȱ churchȱ ofȱ allȱ agesȱ andȱ regularlyȱ apȬ pealedȱ toȱ theȱ authorityȱ ofȱ theȱ oldȱ churchȱ fathers.ȱ Ultimately, Nehemiahȱ Gorehȱ sawȱ theȱ churchȱ asȱ aȱ mysticalȱ body,ȱ withȱ its ownȱvalueȱandȱauthority,ȱthatȱexistedȱindependentȱofȱtheȱindiȬ vidualȱ members.ȱ Inȱ 1867ȱ heȱ leftȱ theȱ CMSȱ andȱ soughtȱ toȱ join Highȱ Churchȱ circlesȱ inȱ Kolkata.ȱ Theȱ bishopȱ sawȱ toȱ itȱ thatȱ he couldȱ continueȱ hisȱ careerȱ inȱ aȱ wayȱ thatȱ suitedȱ thisȱ change.ȱ He wasȱquicklyȱordainedȱasȱaȱdeaconȱandȱlaterȱasȱaȱpriest.ȱHeȱthen becameȱ involvedȱ inȱ theȱ missionȱ workȱ ofȱ theȱ Highȱ Churchȱ AnȬ glicans,ȱorganizedȱinȱtheȱSocietyȱforȱtheȱPropagationȱofȱtheȱGosȬ pelȱ(SPG).ȱButȱGorehȱwantedȱtoȱgoȱaȱstepȱfurther.ȱGivenȱthatȱhe hadȱbeenȱaȱwidowerȱforȱsomeȱtimeȱnow,ȱheȱlookedȱintoȱtheȱposȬ sibilityȱ ofȱ becomingȱ aȱ monk.ȱ Aȱ congregationȱ forȱ maleȱ monks

46

JESUSȱASȱGURU

hadȱ beenȱ foundedȱ inȱ 1866ȱ forȱ theȱ firstȱ timeȱ inȱ theȱ Churchȱ of England.ȱ Itȱ wasȱ theȱ Societyȱ ofȱ St.ȱ Johnȱ theȱ Evangelist,ȱ usually calledȱtheȱCowleyȱFathers.ȱTogetherȱwithȱNehemiahȱGoreh’sȱinȬ stigationȱ aȱ fewȱ monksȱ cameȱ toȱ Indiaȱ toȱ setȱ upȱ aȱ community there.ȱGoreh,ȱofȱcourse,ȱjoinedȱthemȱasȱaȱnovice.ȱIndeed,ȱheȱnevȬ erȱdidȱtakeȱvowsȱbecauseȱtheȱculturalȱdifferencesȱfromȱtheȱEuroȬ peanȱmonksȱwereȱtooȱgreat.ȱButȱheȱdidȱremainȱaȱmemberȱofȱthis monasticȱ communityȱ and,ȱ likeȱ theȱ membersȱ whoȱ hadȱ taken vows,ȱ heȱ wasȱ generallyȱ calledȱ “Father.”ȱ Fatherȱ Gorehȱ diedȱ on 29ȱOctoberȱ1895. Inȱ hisȱ theologicalȱ thinking,ȱ Nehemiahȱ Gorehȱ attempted continuallyȱtoȱrationalizeȱtheȱchoicesȱheȱmade.ȱInȱtheȱfirstȱperiȬ odȱ afterȱ hisȱ baptism,ȱ heȱ wasȱ stronglyȱ influencedȱ byȱ theȱ evanȬ gelicalȱpreachingȱofȱSmithȱandȱhisȱfellowȱmissionariesȱfromȱthe CMS.ȱHeȱwrestled,ȱforȱexample,ȱwithȱtheȱdoctrineȱofȱtheȱeternal punishmentȱofȱtheȱsinnerȱandȱevenȱwroteȱaȱtreatiseȱonȱthisȱissue ofȱ noȱ lessȱ thanȱ 160ȱ pages.ȱ Butȱ muchȱ moreȱ importantȱ wasȱ the wayȱ inȱ whichȱ heȱ presentedȱ theȱ Christianȱ faithȱ inȱ theȱ religious contextȱinȱIndia.ȱUnlikeȱtheȱCMSȱmissionaries,ȱheȱstudiedȱseriȬ ouslyȱtheȱphilosophyȱandȱreligiousȱbeliefsȱofȱhisȱsurroundings. Butȱ justȱlikeȱtheȱ missionaries,ȱ heȱ sawȱ theȱ Christianȱ faithȱasȱthe onlyȱ wayȱ toȱ salvation.ȱ Thereȱ isȱ noȱ traceȱ ofȱ doubtȱ inȱ hisȱ works thatȱeveryoneȱwhoȱwasȱnotȱaȱChristianȱshouldȱconvertȱuncondiȬ tionallyȱ toȱ theȱ trueȱ faith.ȱ Whenȱ heȱ foundȱ hisȱ placeȱ inȱ High Churchȱ circles,ȱ heȱ propoundedȱ theȱ truthȱ ofȱ Christianityȱ as forcefullyȱ asȱ possibleȱ andȱ inȱ anyȱ caseȱ moreȱ widely.ȱ Theȱ whole historyȱofȱdoctrineȱwasȱpresentȱinȱtheȱarguments:ȱScriptureȱand traditionȱtogetherȱformedȱtheȱirrefutableȱproofȱofȱtheȱdivineȱoriȬ ginȱ ofȱ Christianity.ȱ Itȱ isȱ aȱ veryȱ narrowȱ conceptȱ ofȱ truthȱ that broughtȱ himȱ toȱ seeȱ oneȱ straightȱ uninterruptedȱ lineȱ fromȱ his ownȱecclesiasticalȱpositionȱviaȱtheȱchurchȱfathersȱtoȱtheȱapostles andȱ thusȱ toȱ activityȱ ofȱ theȱ Holyȱ Spirit.ȱ Heȱ citesȱ withȱ approval theȱoldȱchurchȱfathersȱonȱtheȱoneȱtruth: HearȱwhatȱS.ȱIrenaeus,ȱwhoȱwasȱtheȱdiscipleȱofȱS.ȱPolycarp, whoȱwasȱtheȱdiscipleȱofȱS.ȱJohn,ȱsaysȱofȱthisȱtradition.ȱ“This preachingȱandȱthisȱfaith,ȱtheȱChurchȱ...ȱdispersedȱasȱsheȱisȱin

FROMȱFALSEȱPROPHETȱTOȱDEMONSTRABLEȱDIVINITY

47

theȱwholeȱworld,ȱkeepsȱdiligently,ȱasȱthoughȱsheȱdweltȱbut inȱoneȱhouse.”21

Itȱ isȱ remarkableȱ howȱ Nehemiahȱ Gorehȱ presentedȱ this ChristianȱtruthȱtoȱtheȱHinduȱworld:ȱmakingȱanȱallȬoutȱeffort,ȱhe soughtȱ publicȱ debate,ȱ justȱ asȱ heȱ hadȱ doneȱ previouslyȱ against Christianity.ȱ Hisȱ mainȱ work,ȱ inȱ whichȱ heȱ refutesȱ theȱ Hindu philosophicalȱ systemsȱ inȱ aȱ rationalȱ way,ȱ i.e.ȱ ShadȬdarshanaȬdarȬ panaȱorȱAȱRationalȱRefutationȱofȱtheȱHinduȱPhilosophicalȱSchools,ȱis anȱimpressiveȱcontributionȱtoȱtheȱdialogueȱwithȱorthodoxȱHinȬ dus.ȱMoreover,ȱheȱalsoȱengagedȱinȱdebateȱwithȱmodernȱHindus whoȱ hadȱ leftȱ aȱ greatȱ dealȱ ofȱ theȱ traditionalȱ ideas,ȱ ritualsȱ and wayȱ ofȱ lifeȱ behind.ȱ Heȱ metȱ themȱ inȱ theȱ easternȱ partȱ ofȱ India, particularlyȱinȱKolkata,ȱinȱtheȱBrahmoȱSamaj,ȱtheȱSocietyȱofȱthe WorshippersȱofȱGod,ȱtheȱmonotheisticȱreligiousȱsocietyȱfounded byȱRammohanȱRoy.22ȱThereȱwasȱaȱsimilarȱorganizationȱinȱwestȬ ernȱ India,ȱ particularlyȱ inȱ Mumbaiȱ (Bombay)ȱ andȱ Pune,ȱ called Prarthanaȱ Samaj,ȱ theȱ Societyȱ ofȱ Prayer.ȱ Thoughȱ smallȱ inȱ terms ofȱ membership,ȱ bothȱ organizationsȱ playedȱ aȱ prominentȱ roleȱ in urbanȱ intellectualȱ elite.ȱ Gorehȱ addressedȱ theȱ adherentsȱ ofȱ the BrahmoȱSamajȱinȱwritingȱforȱtheȱfirstȱtimeȱinȱ1867,ȱwithȱaȱwork calledȱAȱLetterȱtoȱtheȱBrahmosȱformȱaȱConvertedȱBrahmanȱofȱBenares. Fourȱ lecturesȱ wereȱ publishedȱ inȱ 1875,ȱ whichȱ heȱ hadȱ heldȱ in theseȱ circlesȱ inȱ Mumbaiȱ andȱ Pune.ȱ Butȱ theȱ mostȱ interesting workȱinȱthisȱgenreȱisȱaȱlongȱexpositionȱonȱtheȱdivinityȱofȱChrist, whichȱ Gorehȱ wroteȱ inȱ theȱ formȱ ofȱ aȱ letter.ȱ Thisȱ letterȱ wasȱ orȬ iginallyȱ intendedȱ forȱ Panditaȱ Ramabai,ȱ whoȱ hadȱ becomeȱ a Christianȱshortlyȱbeforeȱbut,ȱinȱGoreh’sȱview,ȱwasȱtooȱmuchȱinȬ clinedȱtoȱletȱtheȱgenerallyȱreligiousȱprevailȱoverȱorthodoxy.ȱThe bookȱisȱcalledȱProofsȱofȱtheȱDivinityȱofȱourȱLord.23ȱHeȱalsoȱaddsȱin aȱ longȱ subtitleȱ thatȱ heȱ willȱ alsoȱ showȱ thatȱ theȱ Brahmoȱ Samaj andȱtheȱPrarthanaȱSamajȱareȱnotȱalternativesȱforȱChristianity. ȱN.ȱGoreh,ȱProofsȱofȱtheȱDivinityȱofȱourȱLordȱStatedȱinȱAȱLetterȱtoȱa Friend:ȱInȱWhichȱitȱalsoȱShownȱthatȱneitherȱBrahmoismȱnorȱPrarthanasamajism canȱbeȱAcceptedȱasȱaȱSubstituteȱforȱChristianityȱ(Bombay:ȱAngloȬVernacular Press,ȱ1887),ȱp.ȱ41. 21

ȱSeeȱchapterȱ2ȱofȱthisȱbook.

22

ȱSeeȱnoteȱ21.ȱIȱamȱindebtedȱtoȱRickȱHivnerȱinȱChennaiȱwhoȱproȬ videdȱmeȱwithȱaȱphotocopyȱofȱoneȱofȱtheȱfewȱremainingȱcopiesȱofȱthis rareȱwork. 23

JESUSȱASȱGURU

48

AȱcertainȱimageȱofȱJesusȱsurfacesȱinȱGoreh’sȱwritingsȱafter hisȱ conversionȱ toȱ Christianity.ȱ Thisȱ isȱ notȱ theȱ teacherȱ ofȱ wisȬ dom,ȱwhichȱmadeȱsuchȱanȱimpressionȱonȱRammohanȱRoy!ȱGorȬ ehȱ distancesȱ himselfȱ veryȱ explicitlyȱ fromȱ anyȱ venerationȱ for Jesus’ȱteachingsȱasȱwasȱcultivatedȱ inȱtheȱBrahmoȱSamaj.ȱGoreh wasȱ alsoȱ veryȱ muchȱ taken,ȱ inȱ hisȱ firstȱ acquaintanceȱ withȱ the Gospel,ȱbyȱJesus’ȱsayings,ȱprimarilyȱasȱtheyȱcanȱbeȱfoundȱinȱthe Sermonȱ onȱ theȱ Mount.ȱ But,ȱ asȱ heȱ writesȱ toȱ theȱ Brahmos,ȱ that wasȱnotȱanyȱreasonȱasȱsuchȱforȱhimȱtoȱbecomeȱaȱChristian.ȱMore wasȱneededȱtoȱmakeȱhimȱtakeȱtheȱstepȱthatȱwouldȱbreakȱallȱties toȱ hisȱ familyȱ andȱ costȱ himȱ hisȱ respectedȱ positionȱ amongȱ the Hindus.ȱItȱwasȱtheȱdoctrineȱofȱeternalȱpunishmentȱthatȱaffected himȱsoȱdeeplyȱthatȱheȱhadȱtoȱmakeȱtheȱchoiceȱandȱtheȱnecessary sacrifices.ȱThereȱwasȱnoȱplaceȱforȱthisȱdoctrineȱwithȱtheȱBrahmo Samaj,ȱbutȱ“Thisȱveryȱdoctrine,ȱIȱsay,ȱwhichȱyouȱobjectȱto,ȱand wouldȱ banishȱ awayȱ fromȱ religion,ȱ hasȱ provedȱ forȱ meȱ theȱ only sourceȱofȱlife.”24ȱHeȱopposedȱtheȱadherentsȱofȱtheȱBrahmoȱSamaj veryȱ forcefullyȱ whenȱ theyȱ claimedȱ thatȱ theyȱ hadȱ incorporated theȱessenceȱofȱChristianityȱinȱacceptingȱtheȱmoralityȱofȱtheȱGosȬ pel.ȱAndȱthenȱhisȱdialogueȱpartnersȱhadȱtheȱtemerityȱtoȱremind himȱthatȱheȱhimselfȱhadȱbeenȱveryȱmuchȱimpressedȱatȱtheȱstart byȱJesus’ȱmoralȱteaching.ȱButȱforȱGoreh,ȱthatȱwasȱnotȱatȱallȱcenȬ tralȱtoȱhisȱfaithȱandȱhisȱworkȱasȱaȱmissionary.ȱHisȱconcernȱwas “toȱsetȱforthȱtheȱevidencesȱofȱChristianity,ȱtoȱproveȱtherebyȱthat Christianityȱisȱaȱdivineȱrevelation.”25 Theȱ terminologyȱ thatȱ Nehemiahȱ Gorehȱ usesȱ hereȱ isȱ cerȬ tainlyȱ revealing.ȱ Heȱ appearsȱ toȱ haveȱ adoptedȱ theȱ sameȱ wayȱ of arguingȱthatȱheȱearlierȱopposedȱasȱaȱHindu.ȱWhenȱheȱhadȱseen theȱproofsȱlistedȱinȱJohnȱMuir’sȱwritingȱforȱtheȱdivineȱoriginȱof theȱChristianȱfaith,ȱheȱhadȱstronglyȱrejectedȱthisȱwayȱofȱarguing. Rationalȱargumentsȱ(tarka)ȱcouldȱbeȱvaluableȱforȱȱpenetratingȱa religiousȱ systemȱ butȱ oneȱ mustȱ firstȱ entrustȱ oneselfȱ inȱ faith (shradda)ȱ toȱ theȱ truth.ȱ Nowȱ heȱ doesȱ preciselyȱ theȱ opposite:ȱ the Brahmosȱ and,ȱ withȱ them,ȱ theȱ wholeȱ orthodoxȱ Hinduȱ populaȬ tion,ȱ wereȱ toȱ bowȱ beforeȱ theȱ argumentsȱ thatȱ theȱ churchȱ could produceȱforȱtheȱtruthȱofȱChristianȱdoctrine.ȱEvenȱwithȱrespectȱto contentȱ hisȱ writingsȱ toȱ theȱ Brahmosȱ wereȱ theȱ mirrorȱ imageȱ of ȱGoreh,ȱAȱLetterȱtoȱtheȱBrahmos,ȱpp.ȱ52Ȭ53.

24

ȱGoreh,ȱAȱLetterȱtoȱtheȱBrahmos,ȱp.ȱ35.

25

FROMȱFALSEȱPROPHETȱTOȱDEMONSTRABLEȱDIVINITY

49

hisȱ earlierȱ refutationȱ ofȱ Muir’sȱ Matapariksha.ȱ Thenȱ heȱ wanted nothingȱtoȱdoȱwithȱJesus’ȱmiracles;ȱnowȱheȱadvancesȱasȱanȱarguȬ mentȱforȱtheȱtruthȱofȱChristianityȱthatȱtheȱmiracleȱstoriesȱinȱthe Gospelȱ canȱ beȱ supportedȱ historically.ȱ Earlierȱ heȱ rejectedȱ the ideaȱofȱtheȱexaltednessȱofȱtheȱbiblicalȱrevelation;ȱnowȱheȱstates that,ȱ ofȱ allȱ sacredȱ texts,ȱ onlyȱ theȱ Bibleȱ doesȱ notȱ containȱ any shortcomingsȱ orȱ exaggerations.ȱ Nothingȱ remainsȱ ofȱ theȱ Hindu writingsȱandȱdoctrinesȱinȱhisȱjudgement—thereȱisȱnoȱconceptȱof theȱholinessȱofȱGodȱtoȱbeȱfoundȱinȱthem.ȱȱHeȱcitesȱtheȱstoriesȱof Krishnaȱandȱtheȱshepherdȱgirlsȱasȱanȱexampleȱofȱ“filthiestȱblasȬ phemy.”26ȱ Earlier,ȱ heȱ hadȱ claimedȱ emphaticallyȱ thatȱ humans shouldȱnotȱpresumeȱtoȱjudgeȱKrishna.ȱTheȱBibleȱisȱcertainlyȱnot aȱ delusionȱ anyȱ longerȱ andȱ Christȱ notȱ aȱ deceptiveȱ incarnation. Toȱtheȱcontrary,ȱtheȱChristianȱfaithȱisȱdemonstrablyȱtheȱonlyȱreȬ velationȱfromȱGod. Hereȱ itȱ concernsȱ nothingȱ lessȱ thanȱ aȱ logicalȱ necessity.27 Withȱ greatȱ shrewdness,ȱ heȱ attemptsȱ toȱ convinceȱ theȱ Brahmos thatȱitȱisȱpreciselyȱtheyȱasȱmodernȱHindusȱwhoȱshouldȱbeȱmore openȱtoȱthis.ȱHeȱgivesȱhisȱargumentȱinȱaȱniceȱsyllogism:ȱ1.ȱAȱhuȬ manȱ beingȱ cannotȱ createȱ aȱ pure,ȱ perfectȱ religionȱ throughȱ his naturalȱreason;ȱ2.ȱBrahmoismȱisȱaȱpure,ȱperfectȱreligion;ȱ3.ȱBrahȬ moismȱhasȱoriginatedȱinȱChristianity;ȱthereforeȱChristianityȱisȱa divineȱrevelation.ȱItȱisȱapparentȱhereȱandȱelsewhereȱthatȱGoreh seesȱ theȱ teachingȱ ofȱ theȱ Brahmoȱ Samajȱ asȱ theȱ naturalȱ religion withȱwhichȱthereȱisȱnothingȱwrongȱasȱsuch.ȱChristianityȱalsoȱinȬ cludesȱ thisȱ naturalȱ religionȱ asȱ aȱ component.ȱ Butȱ itȱ isȱ obvious thatȱ thisȱ naturalȱ religionȱ mustȱ beȱ supplementedȱ byȱ theȱ special revelationȱ ofȱ Christianity.ȱ Andȱ thatȱ takesȱ usȱ toȱ Jesusȱ Christ— notȱ asȱ theȱ teacherȱ ofȱ wisdomȱ butȱ asȱ theȱ secondȱ personȱ ofȱ the Trinityȱwhoȱguaranteesȱtheȱtruth. NehemiahȱGorehȱwasȱstronglyȱinfluencedȱinȱhisȱarguments byȱ“evidentialȱtheology”asȱthatȱhadȱbeenȱdevelopedȱatȱtheȱend ofȱtheȱeighteenthȱcenturyȱbyȱWilliamȱPaley.ȱHisȱmajorȱwork,ȱA Viewȱ ofȱ theȱ Evidencesȱ ofȱ Christianity,ȱ whichȱ wasȱ veryȱ popularȱ at theȱtimeȱinȱAnglicanȱcircles,ȱwasȱaȱsourceȱofȱinsightȱforȱGoreh. Theȱideaȱthatȱtheȱtruthȱcouldȱbeȱprovedȱfascinatedȱhim,ȱandȱhe wentȱtoȱallȱlengthsȱtoȱconvinceȱhisȱcompatriotsȱofȱthat.ȱTheȱhigh ȱGoreh,ȱAȱLetterȱtoȱtheȱBrahmos,ȱp.ȱ5.

26

ȱGoreh,ȱAȱLetterȱtoȱtheȱBrahmos,ȱp.ȱ45.

27

JESUSȱASȱGURU

50

pointȱofȱhisȱlaterȱapologeticȱworkȱisȱtheȱbookȱwithȱtheȱcharacterȬ isticȱ titleȱ Proofsȱ ofȱ theȱ Divinityȱ ofȱ Ourȱ Lord.ȱ Hereȱ Gorehȱ reveals himselfȱasȱaȱtraditional,ȱorthodoxȱtheologian,ȱwhoȱwasȱalsoȱconȬ sciousȱofȱhisȱplaceȱinȱIndianȱsociety.ȱTheȱmanyȱreferencesȱfrom Scriptureȱandȱtraditionȱthatȱheȱmentionsȱareȱnotȱthatȱsurprising. HeȱascribesȱgreatȱauthorityȱespeciallyȱtoȱtheȱAthanasianȱCreed, butȱTheȱBookȱofȱCommonȱPrayerȱandȱotherȱAnglicanȱwritingsȱapȬ pearȱtoȱhaveȱcanonicalȱstatusȱforȱhimȱasȱwell.ȱHereȱtooȱweȱfind againȱhisȱviewȱthatȱtheȱadherentsȱofȱtheȱBrahmoȱSamajȱ(andȱthe PrarthanaȱSamaj)ȱinȱfactȱofferedȱnothingȱmoreȱthanȱnaturalȱreliȬ gion,ȱtracesȱofȱwhichȱcanȱbeȱfoundȱinȱallȱreligions.ȱThatȱaȱcertain pureȱ“theism”ȱhasȱcentralȱplaceȱinȱtheirȱsocietiesȱisȱdueȱtoȱChrisȬ tianity.ȱTheȱpresenceȱofȱtheȱchurchȱhas,ȱafterȱall,ȱdrivenȱthemȱto thinkȱofȱsomethingȱbetterȱthanȱtheȱindefensibleȱreligionȱofȱtheir ancestors.ȱButȱnowȱtheyȱhadȱtoȱtakeȱtheȱstepȱofȱacceptingȱChrist asȱ theȱ GodȬmanȱ onȱ earth.ȱ Gorehȱ hereȱ usedȱ aȱ niceȱ Indianȱ proȬ verbȱ toȱ makeȱ clearȱ toȱ theȱ Brahmosȱ thatȱ rejectionȱ ofȱ Hinduism doesȱnotȱnecessarilyȱmeanȱrejectionȱofȱChristianity:ȱ“Theȱfoolish manȱwhoseȱtongueȱhasȱbeenȱburntȱbyȱhotȱmilk,ȱblowsȱuponȱthe buttermilkȱ (inȱ orderȱ toȱ coolȱ it)ȱ beforeȱ heȱ drinksȱ it.”28ȱ Itȱ isȱ preȬ ciselyȱtheȱChristianȱfaithȱthatȱnowȱbecomesȱmeaningfulȱinȱIndia whereȱ societyȱ isȱ threateningȱ toȱ disintegrateȱ becauseȱ ofȱ theȱ loss ofȱ Hinduism.ȱ Aȱ halfȬreligionȱ likeȱ thatȱ ofȱ theȱ Brahmosȱ hasȱ noȬ thingȱtoȱoffer,ȱandȱthereforeȱChristianityȱmustȱbeȱaccepted.ȱThat inȱitselfȱisȱaȱmatterȱofȱaȱhealthyȱunderstanding.ȱ Canȱ Christianityȱ findȱ acceptanceȱ inȱ India?ȱ Theȱ conclusion toȱ Goreh’sȱ bookȱ includesȱ theȱ answerȱ toȱ thatȱ question.ȱ Heȱ asȬ sumesȱthatȱChristȱcanȱbeȱunderstoodȱandȱacceptedȱpreciselyȱin Indiaȱ becauseȱ “aȱ genuineȱ Hinduȱ isȱ prepared,ȱ toȱ someȱ extent,ȱ to acceptȱ theȱ doctrinesȱ ofȱ theȱ Holyȱ Trinityȱ andȱ ofȱ theȱ incarnaȬ tion.”29ȱ Theȱ italicizedȱ word,ȱ “prepared,”ȱ isȱ telling:ȱ Gorehȱ does indeedȱhaveȱinȱmindȱaȱpraeparatioȱevangelicaȱthatȱisȱtoȱbeȱfound inȱHinduism.ȱAndȱhereȱheȱisȱthinkingȱofȱclassicalȱHinduismȱand notȱ theȱ modernȱ viewsȱ ofȱ theȱ Brahmoȱ Samajȱ andȱ theȱ Prarthana Samaj,ȱwhichȱdisplayȱmoreȱofȱWesternȱrationalismȱthanȱofȱEastȬ ernȱreligiosity.ȱTheȱtraditionalȱHindusȱpossessȱaȱreceptivityȱfor theȱtrulyȱdivine,ȱthatȱenablesȱthem,ȱmoreȱthanȱotherȱpeoples,ȱto ȱGoreh,ȱProofsȱofȱtheȱDivinityȱofȱOurȱLord,ȱp.ȱ58.

28

ȱGoreh,ȱProofsȱofȱtheȱDivinityȱofȱOurȱLord,ȱp.ȱ72.

29

FROMȱFALSEȱPROPHETȱTOȱDEMONSTRABLEȱDIVINITY

51

acceptȱfaithȱinȱChrist.ȱGorehȱcertainlyȱgoesȱfarȱwhenȱheȱwrites: “Providenceȱ hasȱ certainlyȱ preparedȱ us,ȱ theȱ Hindus,ȱ toȱ receive Christianityȱ inȱ aȱ wayȱ inȱ which,ȱ itȱ seemsȱ toȱ me,ȱ noȱ other nation—exceptingȱ theȱ Jews,ȱ ofȱ course,—hasȱ beenȱ prepared.”30 HereȱheȱmentionsȱaȱnumberȱofȱaspectsȱofȱHinduismȱthatȱareȱimȬ portantȱinȱthisȱconnection.ȱFirstȱofȱallȱisȱtheȱcallȱtoȱcompleteȱdeȬ votionȱ toȱ Godȱ (ananyabhakti)ȱ foundȱ inȱ Hinduȱ sacredȱ textsȱ like theȱ BhagavadȬGitaȱ andȱ Bhagavataȱ Purana.ȱ Andȱ thisȱ isȱ notȱ the onlyȱthing,ȱforȱtheȱscripturesȱalsoȱcallȱpeopleȱtoȱrenunciationȱof theȱ worldȱ (vairagya),ȱ toȱ humilityȱ (namrata)ȱ andȱ perseverance (kshama).ȱJesus’ȱteachingȱconnectsȱwithȱtheseȱvalues. Asȱaȱteacher,ȱJesusȱisȱthereforeȱgrantedȱaȱplaceȱamongȱthe Hindus.ȱ Butȱ doesȱ heȱ findȱ aȱ placeȱ asȱ wellȱ asȱ aȱ divineȱ form? GorehȱemphasizesȱthatȱtheȱHindusȱareȱfamiliarȱwithȱtheȱideaȱof theȱincarnationȱofȱGodȱonȱearth,ȱreferringȱtoȱRamaȱandȱKrishna whoȱareȱconsideredȱtoȱbeȱdescentsȱofȱtheȱdivineȱ(avatara).ȱThere are,ȱ ofȱ course,ȱ differencesȱ betweenȱ theȱ incarnationȱ ofȱ Godȱ in Christ,ȱ completeȱ withȱ theȱ doctrineȱ ofȱ theȱ twoȱ natures,ȱ andȱ the variousȱdescentsȱofȱVishnu,ȱbutȱessentiallyȱtheȱideaȱisȱtheȱsame inȱbothȱreligions.ȱHinduismȱalsoȱbelievesȱthatȱinȱhisȱgraceȱGod descendedȱ toȱ theȱ earthȱ andȱ sufferedȱ variousȱ humiliationsȱ to saveȱ humanȱ beings.ȱ Itȱ isȱ characteristicȱ thatȱ inȱ thisȱ contextȱ he citesȱ aȱ classicȱ Sanskritȱ textȱ thatȱ extolsȱ theȱ variousȱ descentsȱ of Vishnu:ȱ“Ifȱheȱhadȱtoȱdistanceȱhimselfȱfromȱhisȱmanhood,ȱifȱhe hadȱ toȱ descendȱ toȱ theȱ lowest,ȱ ifȱ heȱ evenȱ hadȱ toȱ beȱ become contemptibleȱ byȱ begging—everythingȱ toȱ saveȱ theȱ world,ȱ then thisȱhasȱbeenȱshownȱbyȱhim,ȱtheȱMostȱHigh,ȱbyȱhisȱownȱexamȬ ple.”31ȱAȱpreparationȱforȱtheȱChristianȱfaithȱcanȱalsoȱbeȱfoundȱin theȱ Hinduȱ depictionȱ ofȱ theȱ Trimurti,ȱ aȱ depictionȱ inȱ whichȱ the godsȱ Brahma,ȱ Vishnuȱ andȱ Shivaȱ areȱ mergedȱ intoȱ oneȱ divine form.ȱThus,ȱHindusȱdoȱnotȱfindȱitȱstrangeȱwhenȱtheyȱseeȱJesus ChristȱbroughtȱtogetherȱwithȱtheȱSpiritȱandȱtheȱFatherȱintoȱone divinity.ȱ Finally,ȱ Gorehȱ mentionsȱ theȱ Hinduȱ feelingȱ forȱ ritual andȱworship.ȱTheȱworshipȱserviceȱofȱtheȱchurchȱremindsȱoneȱof Hinduȱ ritualȱ andȱ thereforeȱ appealsȱ asȱ aȱ matterȱ ofȱ courseȱ to ȱGoreh,ȱProofsȱofȱtheȱDivinityȱofȱOurȱLord,ȱp.ȱ72.

30

ȱVallabhadeva,ȱTheȱSubhashitavaliȱofȱVallabhadeva,ȱed.ȱP.ȱPetersen, ptȱDurgaprasad,ȱBombayȱSanskritȱSeries,ȱXXI,ȱ2ndȱed.ȱ(Pune:ȱBhandarkar OrientalȱResearchȱInstitute,ȱ1961),ȱv.ȱ987. 31

JESUSȱASȱGURU

52

Hindus.ȱ Readingȱ betweenȱ theȱ lines,ȱ oneȱ canȱ findȱ hereȱ anȱ arȬ gumentȱforȱHighȱChurchȱAnglicanȱliturgy.ȱItȱisȱpreciselyȱinȱthe exaltednessȱ ofȱ theȱ trueȱ worshipȱ serviceȱ thatȱ theȱ Hinduȱ recogȬ nizesȱwhatȱtheȱchurchȱinȱChristȱisȱallȱabout. Goreh’sȱ attitudeȱ isȱ clearlyȱ dated.ȱ Theȱ demonstrabilityȱ of theȱ Christianȱ truthȱ isȱ aȱ roadȱ thatȱ hasȱ beenȱ increasinglyȱ abanȬ donedȱbyȱtheologiansȱinȱandȱoutsideȱofȱIndia.ȱInȱparticular,ȱthe stronglyȱ rational,ȱ dogmaticȱ approachȱ withȱ whichȱ Gorehȱ adȬ vancesȱtheȱdivinityȱofȱChristȱwillȱnotȱappealȱtoȱmanyȱanyȱmore. Inȱ addition,ȱ theȱ personȱ ofȱ Nehemiahȱ Gorehȱ isȱ notȱ veryȱ recogȬ nizableȱanyȱmore.ȱTheȱbrahmanȱscholarȱwhoȱcouldȱmoveȱfrom extremeȱ rejectionȱ toȱ uncriticalȱ acceptanceȱ ofȱ Christianȱ orthoȬ doxyȱ belongsȱ toȱ aȱ foregoneȱ time.ȱ Thereȱ isȱ alsoȱ aȱ strongȱ tragic sideȱ toȱ theȱ courseȱ Goreh’sȱ lifeȱ took:ȱ heȱ sacrificedȱ everything thatȱwasȱdearȱandȱpreciousȱtoȱhimȱforȱtheȱGospel,ȱbutȱinȱtheȱend heȱ didȱ notȱ fitȱ intoȱ theȱ stiffȱ Britishȱ churchȱ cultureȱ either.ȱ The Englishȱ ladyȱ whoȱ tookȱ careȱ ofȱ himȱ inȱ theȱ lastȱ phaseȱ ofȱ hisȱ life describedȱhimȱasȱ“veryȱsaintly,ȱbutȱutterlyȱjoyless.”32ȱSheȱisȱalso theȱ sourceȱ ofȱ theȱ sadȱ remarkȱ thatȱ Fatherȱ Gorehȱ hadȱ prayedȱ to Godȱ forȱ 43ȱ yearsȱ forȱ joyȱ inȱ hisȱ faith,ȱ butȱ thatȱ prayerȱ hadȱ gone unheard. Inȱ hisȱ writingsȱ theȱ strictȱ asceticȱ Gorehȱ oftenȱ offersȱ acute butȱ ratherȱ dryȱ theology.ȱ Butȱ weȱ shouldȱ notȱ forgetȱ thatȱ heȱ was oneȱofȱtheȱfirstȱIndianȱtheologicalȱthinkers.ȱHeȱhadȱnoȱotherȱexȬ amplesȱthanȱEuropeanȱtheologians,ȱandȱinȱtheȱareaȱthatȱwould laterȱbeȱknownȱasȱinterreligiousȱdialogueȱthereȱwasȱnothingȱhe couldȱfallȱbackȱon.ȱInȱhisȱwork,ȱhowever,ȱweȱfindȱaȱnumberȱof initiativesȱthatȱwouldȱbeȱworkedȱoutȱlaterȱbyȱIndianȱtheologians andȱ couldȱ alsoȱ beȱ madeȱ extraordinarilyȱ fruitful.ȱ Nehemiah Gorehȱ wasȱ aȱ shastriȱ andȱ remainedȱ that.ȱ Heȱ hadȱ radicallyȱ reȬ jectedȱ theȱ Hinduȱ faithȱ butȱ didȱ notȱ doȱ soȱ superficially.ȱ Heȱ alȬ waysȱ discussedȱ theȱ questionsȱ ofȱ Hinduȱ philosophyȱ andȱ reliȬ giousȱtraditionȱwithȱdepth.ȱInȱtheȱchurchȱheȱshowedȱthatȱitȱwas actuallyȱ worthwhileȱ toȱ studyȱ Hinduismȱ seriously.ȱ Withȱ RamȬ mohanȱRoy,ȱheȱdaredȱmaintain,ȱoverȱagainstȱtheȱveryȱEuropean churchȱ environment,ȱ thatȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ wasȱ anȱ Asianȱ andȱ thus ȱMrs.ȱHenryȱPopeȱfromȱMazagon,ȱcitedȱextensivelyȱbyȱGardner, LifeȱofȱFatherȱGoreh,ȱpp.ȱ380Ȭ81. 32

FROMȱFALSEȱPROPHETȱTOȱDEMONSTRABLEȱDIVINITY

53

couldȱ neverȱ beȱ foreignȱ toȱ Asians.33ȱ Inȱ particular,ȱ inȱ theȱ book thatȱheȱwroteȱforȱhisȱfellowȱcasteȱmemberȱȱPanditaȱRamabai,ȱhe soughtȱpointsȱofȱcontactȱforȱtheȱproclamationȱofȱChristianityȱin India.ȱ Weȱ findȱ hereȱ allȱ theȱ themesȱ thatȱ wouldȱ beȱ workedȱ out laterȱbyȱtheologiansȱlikeȱChakkaraiȱandȱAppasamy:ȱtheȱbhaktiȱas aȱtypicalȱIndianȱfaithȱattitude,ȱtheȱavatarasȱofȱVishnuȱasȱcomparȬ ableȱwithȱtheȱincarnationȱinȱChrist,ȱasȱwellȱasȱtheȱfeelingȱofȱthe Hindusȱ forȱ ritualȱ andȱ worship.34ȱ Fatherȱ Gorehȱ alsoȱ frequently arguedȱthatȱuseȱshouldȱbeȱmadeȱofȱmonksȱinȱmissionsȱinȱIndia. Hisȱ thesisȱ wasȱ thatȱ onlyȱ thoseȱ whoȱ livedȱ asȱ religiousȱ would haveȱaccessȱtoȱtheȱHindus.ȱHisȱownȱwayȱofȱlifeȱwasȱadaptedȱto thatȱ ideal.ȱ Theȱ greatȱ Indologistȱ Maxȱ Müllerȱ lamentedȱ theȱ fact thatȱGorehȱbecameȱ“aȱChristianȱsannyasin.”35ȱOnlyȱinȱtheȱtwenȬ tiethȬcenturyȱ ashramȱ movementȱ wouldȱ itȱ becomeȱ clearȱ how fruitfullyȱ theȱ Hinduȱ monasticȱ idealȱ couldȱ beȱ appliedȱ inȱ the Christianȱ church.36ȱ Inȱ theȱ contextȱ ofȱ Hinduȱ society,ȱ theȱ most amazingȱ thingȱ finallyȱ isȱ thatȱ aȱ brahmanȱ likeȱ Gorehȱ wasȱ able, throughȱ hisȱ Christianȱ conviction,ȱ toȱ distanceȱ himselfȱ soȱ much fromȱ hisȱ casteȱ backgroundȱ thatȱ heȱ couldȱ evenȱ liveȱ inȱ aȱ comȬ munityȱ ofȱ “untouchable”ȱ mahars.ȱ Itȱ isȱ fromȱ himȱ thatȱ weȱ have theȱsaying:ȱ“ChristianityȱwithȱcasteȱwouldȱbeȱnoȱChristianityȱat all.”37ȱ Onlyȱ inȱ theȱ lastȱ quarterȱ ofȱ theȱ twentiethȱ centuryȱ would thatȱ becomeȱ aȱ themeȱ inȱ dalitȱ theology.38ȱ Thatȱ Nehemiahȱ Goreh wasȱȱinȱmanyȱwaysȱfarȱaheadȱofȱhisȱtimeȱalsoȱȱcontributedȱtoȱthe tragedyȱofȱhisȱlife. ȱSeeȱR.H.S.ȱBoyd,ȱAnȱIntroductionȱtoȱIndianȱChristianȱTheology,ȱ2nd rev.ȱed.ȱ(Madras:ȱTheȱChristianȱLiteratureȱSociety,ȱ1975),ȱp.ȱ55.ȱCf.ȱchapȬ terȱ2.ȱȱ 33

ȱSeeȱchapterȱ6.

34

ȱSeeȱYoung,ȱResistantȱHinduism,ȱp.ȱ171.

35

ȱSeeȱchapterȱ8.

36

ȱInȱGardner,ȱLifeȱofȱFatherȱGoreh,ȱp.ȱ7.

37

ȱSeeȱchapterȱ10.

38

CHAPTERȱ4

TheȱSaviourȱofȱAll PanditaȱRamabai Onȱmyȱdeskȱareȱfourȱbooksȱfromȱtheȱbeginningȱofȱtheȱtwentieth century,ȱ allȱ ofȱ whichȱ haveȱ aȱ Christianȱ Indianȱ womanȱ asȱ their subject:ȱ Panditaȱ Ramabaiȱ (1858Ȭ1922).ȱ Theseȱ booksȱ areȱ inȱ four differentȱ languages,ȱ French,ȱ German,ȱ Dutchȱ andȱ English,ȱ and eachȱ articulatesȱ aȱ specialȱ appreciationȱ forȱ thisȱ woman.ȱ Thatȱ is primarilyȱvisibleȱinȱtheȱsubtitleȱ(theȱtitleȱofȱallȱfourȱbooksȱisȱsimȬ ply:ȱPanditaȱRamabai).ȱThus,ȱtheȱFrenchȱsubtitleȱis:ȱ“TheȱMother ofȱtheȱLittleȱWidows,”ȱwhileȱtheȱGermanȱis:ȱ“TheȱMotherȱofȱthe Outcasts.”ȱ Theȱ Dutchȱ hasȱ noȱ lessȱ than:ȱ “Theȱ Trailblazerȱ for Liftingȱ Upȱ Hinduȱ Women.”1ȱ Theȱ Englishȱ bookȱ seemsȱ more neutral—itsȱsubtitleȱisȱsimplyȱ“TheȱStoryȱofȱHerȱLife”—butȱitȱis preciselyȱthisȱbookȱthatȱsingsȱherȱpraisesȱmostȱintensely.ȱTheȱinȬ troductionȱ announcesȱ theȱ storyȱ ofȱ herȱ lifeȱ asȱ “aȱ Recordȱ ofȱ AnȬ sweredȱPrayersȱandȱFulfilledȱPromises,”ȱcompleteȱwithȱallȱthese capitals.2 Theȱfourȱbooksȱhaveȱmuchȱmoreȱinȱcommonȱthanȱjustȱtheir subject.ȱ Allȱ wereȱ publishedȱ byȱ missionȱ organizationsȱ orȱ pubȬ lishersȱassociatedȱwithȱsuchȱorganizations.3ȱRamabaiȱwasȱthusȱa wellȬknownȱ andȱ celebratedȱ figureȱ inȱ missionsȱ circles.ȱ Itȱ isȱ also ȱRespectively,ȱPaulȱBuchenel,ȱPanditaȱRamabai:ȱLaȱmèreȱdesȱpetites veuvesȱ(Lausanne:ȱSecrétariatȱdeȱlaȱMissionȱSuisseȱauxȱIndes,ȱs.a.ȱ);ȱNicol MacNicol,ȱPanditaȱRamabai:ȱDieȱMutterȱderȱAusgestoßenen,ȱtransl.ȱP.ȱBaltzer (Stuttgart/Basel:ȱ Evang.ȱ Missionsverlag,ȱ 1930);ȱ N.J.ȱ Schelling,ȱ Pandita Ramabai:ȱBaanbreeksterȱvoorȱdeȱopheffingȱderȱHindoeȬVrouwen,ȱLichtstralen opȱdenȱakkerȱderȱwereldȱ30/1ȱ(Hoenderloo:ȱZendingsstudieȬRaad,ȱ1924). 1

ȱ Helenȱ S.ȱ Dyer,ȱ Panditaȱ Ramabai:ȱ Theȱ Storyȱ ofȱ Herȱ Lifeȱ (London: MorganȱandȱScott,ȱs.a.ȱ[1900]),ȱp.ȱ5. 2

ȱTheȱFrench,ȱGermanȱandȱDutchȱvolumesȱwereȱallȱpublishedȱby missionsȱorganizations.ȱMorganȱandȱScott,ȱwhichȱpublishedȱtheȱEnglish biography,ȱhostedȱtheȱofficeȱforȱTheȱChristian:ȱAȱWeeklyȱRecordȱofȱChristian LifeȱandȱTestimony,ȱEvangelisticȱEffort,ȱMissionaryȱEnterprise,ȱandȱReligious andȱPhilanthropicȱWorkȱthroughoutȱtheȱWorld. 3

55

JESUSȱASȱGURU

56

veryȱclearȱwhyȱthatȱisȱso:ȱaȱconvertedȱHinduȱherself,ȱsheȱsetȱup anȱimpressiveȱsocialȱreliefȱprogrammeȱforȱHinduȱgirlsȱandȱwoȬ men.ȱ Sheȱ tookȱ inȱ thousandsȱ inȱ herȱ dayȱ schoolsȱ andȱ boarding schools,ȱ andȱ offeredȱ themȱ anȱ education.ȱ Mostȱ ofȱ theseȱ were girlsȱ whoȱ hadȱ noȱ opportunityȱ whatsoeverȱ toȱ beȱ educated,ȱ but sheȱsometimesȱalsoȱtookȱinȱchildrenȱwhoȱhadȱveryȱlittleȱchance ofȱ survival.ȱ Manyȱ ofȱ herȱ studentsȱ alsoȱ choseȱ toȱ becomeȱ ChrisȬ tiansȱbecauseȱofȱtheirȱstayȱinȱtheseȱinstitutions.ȱAndȱinȱanyȱcase everyoneȱwhoȱstayedȱinȱRamabai’sȱhouseȱsawȱidealisticȱenergy andȱpracticalȱpietyȱinspiredȱbyȱChristianȱfaith. PanditaȱRamabaiȱhasȱhadȱgreatȱsignificanceȱforȱtheȱspread ofȱ theȱ Christianȱ faithȱ asȱ wellȱ asȱ forȱ theȱ imageȱ ofȱ theȱ churchȱ in India.ȱIfȱNehemiahȱGorehȱwasȱoneȱofȱtheȱfirstȱnativeȱIndianȱtheȬ ologians,ȱsheȱwasȱoneȱofȱtheȱfirstȱIndiansȱtoȱshowȱtheȱsocialȱface ofȱtheȱchurch.ȱFromȱtheȱstart,ȱmissionsȱhadȱgoneȱhandȱinȱhand withȱ emergencyȱ aid,ȱ medicalȱ careȱ andȱ schooling.ȱ Butȱ thatȱ was alwaysȱaȱWesternȱinitiative,ȱwhereasȱRamabai’sȱsocialȱandȱeduȬ cationalȱworkȱwasȱcompletelyȱIndian.ȱTheȱdifferentȱinstitutions, basedȱonȱ Indianȱmodels,ȱwereȱherȱownȱideaȱandȱherȱinitiative. Andȱ itȱ wasȱ becauseȱ ofȱ herȱ greatȱ charismaȱ thatȱ bothȱ Western donorsȱandȱIndianȱcolleaguesȱcouldȱbeȱmobilized. Panditaȱ Ramabai’sȱ influenceȱ extendedȱ muchȱ furtherȱ than herȱsocialȱworkȱinspiredȱbyȱChristianity.ȱSheȱworkedȱatȱimprovȬ ingȱtheȱlotȱofȱwomenȱinȱIndiaȱinȱmanyȱways.ȱSheȱattemptedȱin numerousȱ speechesȱ toȱ giveȱ herȱ compatriotsȱ betterȱ insightȱ into theirȱ ownȱ Hinduȱ traditionȱ andȱ theȱ consequencesȱ thatȱ couldȱ be drawnȱ fromȱ thatȱ forȱ theȱ circumstancesȱ inȱ whichȱ womenȱ lived. Mostȱofȱherȱpublicationsȱasȱwell,ȱinȱMarathiȱandȱEnglish,ȱarticȬ ulatedȱ aȱ pleaȱ forȱ womenȱ inȱ difficultȱ circumstances.ȱ Inȱ particuȬ lar,ȱ sheȱ workedȱ onȱ behalfȱ ofȱ theȱ highȱ casteȱ womenȱ whoȱ were confrontedȱwithȱaȱgreatȱdealȱofȱinjusticeȱandȱoppression.ȱThus, itȱisȱnotȱonlyȱChristiansȱinȱIndiaȱwhoȱappreciateȱPanditaȱRamaȬ bai.ȱ Contemporaryȱ feministsȱ alsoȱ referȱ toȱ Ramabai’sȱ work, whichȱalreadyȱinȱtheȱdarkȱnineteenthȱcenturyȱstoodȱupȱsoȱmiliȬ tantlyȱ forȱ women’sȱ interests.4ȱ Andȱ officialȱ institutionsȱ honour ȱ Forȱ example,ȱ Umaȱ Chakravarti,ȱ Rewritingȱ History:ȱ Theȱ Lifeȱ and TimesȱofȱPanditaȱRamabaiȱ(NewȱDelhi:ȱKaliȱforȱWomen,ȱ1998).ȱRamȱBapat stronglyȱopposesȱtheȱincorporationȱofȱRamabaiȱintoȱtheȱfeministȱstruggle, givenȱthatȱsheȱwasȱconcernedȱonlyȱwithȱhighȬcasteȱbrahmanȱwomen.ȱHe 4

THEȱSAVIOURȱOFȱALL:ȱPANDITAȱRAMABAI

57

herȱ stillȱ today.ȱ Thus,ȱ aȱ reprintȱ ofȱ her mostȱ wellȬknownȱ book,ȱ Theȱ HighȬCaste HinduȱWoman,ȱwrittenȱinȱ1887,ȱwasȱpubȬ lishedȱ inȱ 1981ȱ byȱ orderȱ ofȱ theȱ governȬ mentȱofȱtheȱstateȱofȱMaharashtra.ȱPandita Ramabai’sȱ portraitȱ isȱ regularlyȱ seenȱ in contemporaryȱ India—on,ȱ amongȱ other things,ȱaȱ1989ȱpostageȱstamp. Ramabaiȱwasȱnotȱaȱsystematicȱtheologianȱandȱdidȱnotȱwant toȱ beȱ thatȱ atȱ all.ȱ Sheȱ viewedȱ theȱ differencesȱ ofȱ opinionȱ inȱ the Christianȱ churchȱ andȱ theȱ debatesȱ inȱ theologyȱ withȱ someȱ susȬ picion.ȱSheȱhadȱnotȱembracedȱfaithȱinȱChristȱinȱorderȱtoȱbecome entangledȱinȱaȱdeeplyȱdividedȱChristianityȱthatȱsheȱencountered inȱ bothȱ Indiaȱ andȱ England.ȱ Onȱ theȱ otherȱ hand,ȱ herȱ writings witnessȱtoȱaȱveryȱclearȱviewȱofȱtheȱmeaningȱofȱJesusȱChrist.ȱThat viewȱ hasȱ everythingȱ toȱ doȱ withȱ theȱ humanitarianȱ workȱ to whichȱ sheȱ hadȱ dedicatedȱ herselfȱ forȱ soȱ manyȱ decades.ȱ When sheȱwasȱalmostȱfiftyȱ yearsȱold,ȱ sheȱdrewȱupȱ theȱ balanceȱ sheets ofȱherȱlifeȱinȱtheȱbookȱAȱTestimonyȱofȱOurȱInexhaustibleȱTreasure. Thatȱ isȱ theȱ mostȱ importantȱ sourceȱ forȱ theȱ knowledgeȱ ofȱ the courseȱofȱherȱlifeȱandȱtheȱdevelopmentȱofȱherȱfaithȱandȱthought. WeȱshouldȱrememberȱthatȱthisȱworkȱwasȱcharacterizedȱbyȱaȱcerȬ tainȱ oneȬsidedness.ȱ Sheȱ viewedȱ herȱ lifeȱ fromȱ theȱ faithȱ position sheȱhadȱreachedȱafterȱaȱlongȱroadȱacrossȱdifferentȱborders:ȱthere wasȱlittleȱroomȱleftȱforȱearlierȱmotivesȱandȱideals.ȱForȱthatȱmatȬ ter,ȱitȱisȱthatȱmajorȱdevelopmentȱthatȱmakesȱherȱbiographyȱvery enthralling.ȱHerȱpopularityȱcanȱalsoȱbeȱexplainedȱonȱtheȱbasisȱof thisȱfascinatingȱlifeȱstory.

seesȱRamabaiȱprimarilyȱasȱaȱrevolutionaryȱwithȱrespectȱtoȱreligion.ȱThat isȱcorrect,ȱbutȱtheȱgreatȱinfluenceȱthatȱRamabaiȱexercisedȱonȱtheȱposition ofȱwomenȱ(especiallyȱamongȱtheȱhighȱcasteȱwomen)ȱshouldȱnotȱbeȱdeȬ nied.ȱCf.ȱRamȱBapat,ȱ“PanditaȱRamabai:ȱFaithȱandȱReasonȱinȱtheȱShadow ofȱ Eastȱ andȱ West,”ȱ inȱ Vasudhaȱ Dalmiaȱ andȱ Heinrichȱ vonȱ Stietencron (eds),ȱRepresentingȱHinduism:ȱTheȱConstructionȱofȱReligiousȱTraditionsȱand NationalȱIdentityȱ(NewȱDelhi/London:ȱSageȱPublications,ȱ1995),ȱpp.ȱ224Ȭ 52.ȱ Forȱ Ramabaiȱ andȱ feminismȱ inȱ Indiaȱ seeȱ alsoȱ theȱ introductionȱ by MeeraȱKosambiȱinȱtheȱmostȱrecentȱeditionȱofȱherȱworkȱPanditaȱRamabai throughȱHerȱOwnȱWords:ȱSelectedȱWorks,ȱed.ȱMeeraȱKosambiȱ(NewȱDelhi: OxfordȱUniversityȱPress,ȱ2000).

58

JESUSȱASȱGURU

AȱQuestȱforȱRedemption Inȱ herȱ youthȱ Ramabaiȱ wasȱ alwaysȱ onȱ theȱ road.ȱ Sheȱ wasȱ the youngestȱ childȱ ofȱ aȱ brahmanȱ coupleȱ whoȱ hadȱ livedȱ forȱ many yearsȱ inȱ aȱ houseȱ theyȱ hadȱ builtȱ themselvesȱ inȱ theȱ jungle,ȱ far fromȱsociety.ȱInȱthisȱisolatedȱspotȱinȱtheȱhighlandsȱofȱtheȱWestȬ ernȱGhatsȱ(Karnataka)ȱRamabaiȱDongreȱwasȱbornȱinȱ1858.5ȱHer homeȱwasȱanȱashramȱwhereȱstudyȱandȱmeditationȱwereȱcentral and,ȱ howeverȱ remoteȱ itȱ was,ȱ manyȱ pilgrimsȱ managedȱ toȱ find theirȱwayȱthere.ȱAccordingȱtoȱtheȱHinduȱlawsȱofȱhospitality,ȱall ofȱtheȱpilgrimsȱwereȱwelcomed,ȱgivenȱlodgingȱandȱfed.ȱTheȱinȬ comeȱofȱtheȱfamily,ȱwhichȱcameȱfromȱleasingȱriceȱfieldsȱandȱcoȬ conutȱplantationsȱwasȱultimatelyȱnotȱsufficientȱtoȱmeetȱtheȱcosts engenderedȱbyȱthisȱconstantȱstreamȱofȱvisitors.ȱWhenȱRamabai wasȱ sixȱ monthsȱ old,ȱ herȱ parentsȱ thusȱ decidedȱ toȱ giveȱ upȱ the ashramȱ andȱ toȱ leadȱ anȱ itinerantȱ life.ȱ Theyȱ setȱ offȱ withȱ their children,ȱanȱolderȱgirl,ȱaȱboyȱandȱtheȱbabyȱcarriedȱbyȱaȱservant inȱaȱbasketȱonȱherȱhead,ȱtravellingȱbyȱfootȱfromȱpilgrimageȱsite toȱ pilgrimageȱ site.ȱ Atȱ templesȱ andȱ atȱ otherȱ holyȱ placesȱ herȱ faȬ therȱrecitedȱsectionsȱfromȱtheȱsacredȱtextsȱinȱSanskrit,ȱforȱwhich hisȱ audienceȱ showedȱ theirȱ appreciationȱ withȱ giftsȱ ofȱ moneyȱ or inȱkind.ȱForȱsixteenȱyearsȱtheȱfamilyȱtravelledȱthroughȱIndiaȱin thisȱ way,ȱ andȱ Ramabaiȱ thusȱ experiencedȱ theȱ mostȱ traditional sideȱofȱHinduȱsociety.ȱTheȱlackȱofȱwomen’sȱrightsȱespeciallyȱafȬ fectedȱherȱdeeply.ȱHerȱexperiencesȱinȱherȱyouthȱwouldȱproveȱto beȱ determinativeȱ forȱ herȱ laterȱ activities,ȱ andȱ sheȱ wouldȱ often referȱtoȱthemȱinȱherȱwritings. Thusȱsheȱtellsȱherȱolderȱsister’sȱstoryȱwithȱbitterness.ȱInȱline withȱ tradition,ȱ theȱ girlȱ wasȱ marriedȱ offȱ asȱ aȱ child.ȱ Itȱ wasȱ cusȬ tomaryȱinȱbrahmanicȱfamiliesȱthatȱaȱgirlȱbeȱmarriedȱbetweenȱthe agesȱofȱfiveȱandȱelevenȱandȱthenȱgoȱtoȱliveȱwithȱherȱinȬlaws.ȱIn thisȱ case,ȱ however,ȱ aȱ differentȱ arrangementȱ wasȱ made.ȱ RamaȬ bai’sȱ fatherȱ hadȱ insistedȱ thatȱ theȱ youngȱ bridegroomȱ ȱ stayȱ with himȱ soȱ thatȱ heȱ andȱ theȱ girlȱ wouldȱ receiveȱ aȱ soundȱ education. Theȱparentsȱofȱtheȱboyȱhadȱagreed,ȱbutȱwhenȱtheȱmarriageȱcereȬ monyȱ wasȱ over,ȱ theyȱ tookȱ theirȱ sonȱ withȱ themȱ toȱ theirȱ own homeȱ again.ȱ Thirteenȱ yearsȱ laterȱ theȱ bridegroomȱ calledȱ onȱ the familyȱtoȱclaimȱhisȱbride.ȱTheȱtwoȱ“spouses”ȱwereȱtotallyȱalienȬ 5 ȱInȱtheȱGangamulaȱForest,ȱonȱtheȱborderȱofȱwhatȱisȱnowȱChikmaȬ galurȱDistrictȱandȱDakshinaȱKannadaȱDistrict.ȱ

THEȱSAVIOURȱOFȱALL:ȱPANDITAȱRAMABAI

59

atedȱfromȱeachȱother.ȱTheȱgirlȱhadȱdevelopedȱintoȱanȱintelligent, cultivatedȱ youngȱ woman,ȱ whileȱ theȱ boyȱ hadȱ endedȱ upȱ onȱ the marginsȱofȱsociety.ȱOfȱcourse,ȱtheȱwomanȱwasȱnotȱatȱallȱinclined toȱshareȱherȱlifeȱwithȱaȱbeggarȱandȱherȱparentsȱsupportedȱherȱin that.ȱ Butȱ toȱ aȱ numberȱ ofȱ orthodoxȱ membersȱ ofȱ theȱ brahmanic community,ȱitȱwasȱregardedȱasȱscandalousȱthatȱaȱwomanȱwould beȱunwillingȱtoȱgoȱwithȱherȱhusband.ȱTheyȱcollectedȱmoneyȱto sueȱinȱaȱBritishȱcourt.ȱTheȱcourtȱfoundȱforȱtheȱhusbandȱ,ȱbecause theȱ colonialȱ governmentȱ heldȱ thatȱ theȱ traditionalȱ Hinduȱ rules forȱconductȱhadȱtoȱbeȱrespected.ȱ“Fortunately,”ȱRamabaiȱwrote ofȱherȱsister,ȱ“sheȱwasȱsoonȱreleasedȱfromȱthisȱsorrowfulȱworld byȱcholera.”ȱAndȱsheȱadds,ȱfullȱofȱcynicism:ȱ“Whateverȱmayȱbe saidȱofȱtheȱepidemicsȱthatȱyearlyȱassailȱourȱcountry,ȱtheyȱareȱnot unwelcomeȱamongȱtheȱunfortunateȱwomenȱwhoȱareȱthusȱperseȬ cutedȱbyȱsocial,ȱreligious,ȱandȱStateȱlaws.”6 Andȱthenȱthereȱisȱtheȱastonishingȱstoryȱofȱaȱmanȱwhoȱgave hisȱdaughterȱinȱmarriageȱtoȱanotherȱpilgrimȱwhileȱonȱaȱpilgrimȬ age.ȱTheyȱmetȱduringȱtheȱmorningȱbathȱinȱtheȱriver.ȱTheȱfather ofȱ theȱ girlȱ askedȱ theȱ otherȱ whoȱ heȱ wasȱ andȱ whereȱ heȱ came from.ȱAfterȱheȱlearnedȱthatȱhisȱconversationȱpartnerȱwasȱaȱbrahȬ manȱlikeȱhimselfȱandȱthatȱheȱwasȱaȱwidower,ȱheȱofferedȱhimȱhis nineȬyearȬoldȱdaughterȱinȱmarriage.ȱTheyȱneededȱnoȱmoreȱthan anȱ hourȱ toȱ comeȱ toȱ anȱ agreementȱ andȱ theȱ marriageȱ wasȱ conȬ cludedȱtheȱfollowingȱday.ȱAȱdayȱlaterȱtheȱfatherȱleftȱinȱaȱcheerȬ fulȱ moodȱ withȱ theȱ restȱ ofȱ hisȱ family,ȱ whileȱ hisȱ daughterȱ was takenȱbyȱaȱthirtyȬfiveȬyearȱoldȱhusband,ȱwhomȱsheȱdidȱnotȱatȱall know,ȱtoȱaȱvillageȱfifteenȱhundredȱkilometresȱaway.7ȱHereȱRamȬ

ȱPanditaȱRamabai,ȱTheȱHighȬCasteȱWomanȱ[1887]ȱ(London:ȱGeorge BellȱandȱSons,ȱ1888),ȱp.ȱ35;ȱRamabai,ȱPanditaȱRamabaiȱthroughȱHerȱOwn Words,ȱp.ȱ156.ȱSheȱwritesȱaboutȱ“aȱnearȱrelativeȱofȱmine.”ȱDr.ȱRachelȱL. Bodley,ȱwhoȱknewȱRamabaiȱwellȱpersonally,ȱconfirmsȱinȱherȱforeword toȱ Theȱ HighȬCasteȱ Womanȱ thatȱ thisȱ concernedȱ Ramabai’sȱ sister;ȱ seeȱ p. XVII.ȱCf.ȱPadminiȱSengupta,ȱPanditaȱRamabaiȱSaraswati:ȱHerȱLifeȱandȱWork. PanditaȱRamabaiȱBirthȱCentenaryȱMemorialȱVolumeȱ(London:ȱAsiaȱPublishȬ ingȱHouse,ȱ1970),ȱpp.ȱ58Ȭ60. 6

7 ȱRamabai,ȱTheȱHighȬCasteȱWoman,ȱpp.ȱ20Ȭ21;ȱRamabai,ȱPanditaȱRamȬ abaiȱthroughȱHerȱOwnȱWords,ȱp.ȱ145.

JESUSȱASȱGURU

60

abaiȱwasȱdescribingȱnothingȱotherȱthanȱtheȱmarriageȱofȱherȱown parents!8 InȱthisȱcaseȱthingsȱdidȱnotȱturnȱoutȱbadlyȱforȱtheȱnineȬyearȬ oldȱbride,ȱviewedȱwithinȱtheȱframeworkȱofȱtheȱculture.ȱRamabai describesȱ herȱ fatherȱ asȱ anȱ orthodoxȱ reformer.9ȱ Inȱ principle,ȱ he adheredȱstrictlyȱtoȱtheȱrulesȱofȱhisȱcaste,ȱbutȱheȱdidȱhaveȱanȱunȬ conventionalȱideal.ȱHeȱhadȱseenȱhisȱteacherȱprovideȱinstruction inȱSanskritȱtoȱtheȱprincessesȱatȱtheȱcourtȱofȱtheȱprincesȱinȱPune. Thatȱ wasȱ aȱ veryȱ exceptionalȱ situationȱ andȱ wasȱ almostȱ inconȬ ceivableȱoutsideȱtheȱcourtȱsinceȱwomenȱwereȱnotȱconsideredȱcaȬ pableȱ ofȱ learningȱ theȱ priestlyȱ languageȱ and,ȱ moreover,ȱ itȱ was consideredȱ inappropriateȱ forȱ womenȱ toȱ concernȱ themselves withȱtheȱsacredȱtexts.ȱButȱRamabai’sȱfatherȱhadȱresolvedȱtoȱfolȬ lowȱhisȱteacher’sȱgoodȱexampleȱandȱtoȱteachȱhisȱownȱwifeȱSanȬ skrit.ȱ Heȱ wasȱ notȱ successfulȱ inȱ achievingȱ thisȱ idealȱ inȱ hisȱ first marriage,ȱ butȱ heȱ triedȱ againȱ withȱ hisȱ newȱ youngȱ bride.ȱ And, indeed,ȱthisȱintelligentȱgirlȱprovedȱtoȱbeȱaȱgoodȱstudent,ȱmasterȬ ingȱtheȱdifficultȱsacredȱlanguageȱinȱaȱfewȱyearsȱandȱlearningȱan importantȱ partȱ ofȱ theȱ mythologicalȱ writings,ȱ theȱ Puranas,ȱ by heart. TheȱactionsȱofȱRamabai’sȱfatherȱhereȱwereȱsoȱcontroversial thatȱ heȱ hadȱ toȱ accountȱ forȱ themȱ toȱ theȱ leadersȱ ofȱ theȱ religious groupȱtoȱwhichȱheȱbelonged.ȱByȱbirth,ȱheȱbelongedȱtoȱtheȱmonȬ isticȱ traditionȱ ofȱ theȱ Advaitaȱ Vedantaȱ butȱ hadȱ laterȱ joinedȱ the dualisticȱ schoolȱ ofȱ theȱ devoteesȱ ofȱ Vishnu,ȱ whichȱ hadȱ been foundedȱ inȱ theȱ twelfthȱ centuryȱ byȱ Madhva.ȱ Heȱ wasȱ therefore summonedȱtoȱgiveȱaȱfullȱexplanationȱtoȱtheȱguruȱandȱpanditsȱgaȬ theredȱinȱUdupi.ȱHeȱsucceededȱinȱdefendingȱhisȱpositionȱviaȱarȬ gumentsȱderivedȱfromȱtheȱsacredȱtexts:ȱtheȱunconventionalȱeduȬ cationȱcouldȱcontinue.ȱTheȱchildrenȱthatȱwereȱbornȱofȱtheȱmarȬ riageȱwereȱalsoȱinitiatedȱintoȱtheȱmysteriesȱofȱtheȱSanskritȱliteraȬ ture.ȱInȱRamabai’sȱcase,ȱitȱwasȱprimarilyȱherȱmotherȱwhoȱtaught herȱ theȱ languageȱ andȱ theȱ literature;ȱ herȱ fatherȱ wasȱ occupied withȱ manyȱ pursuitsȱ andȱ wasȱ limitedȱ inȱ whatȱ heȱ couldȱ doȱ beȬ causeȱofȱhisȱadvancedȱage. ȱThisȱisȱstatedȱexplicitlyȱbyȱBodley;ȱseeȱRamabai,ȱTheȱHighȬCaste Woman,ȱp.ȱXV. 8

9 ȱPanditaȱRamabai,ȱAȱTestimonyȱofȱOurȱInexhaustibleȱTreasureȱ[1907], 11thȱed.ȱ(Kedgaon:ȱPanditaȱRamabaiȱMuktiȱMission,ȱ1992),ȱpp.ȱ10Ȭ11.

THEȱSAVIOURȱOFȱALL:ȱPANDITAȱRAMABAI

61

Whatȱ wasȱ itȱ thatȱ theȱ parentsȱ wantedȱ toȱ teachȱ theirȱ chilȬ dren?ȱ Asideȱ fromȱ Sanskritȱ grammarȱ andȱ vocabulary,ȱ bothȱ in verse,ȱtheyȱalsoȱwantedȱtoȱacquaintȱthemȱwithȱsomeȱofȱtheȱclasȬ sicȱ Hinduȱ writings.ȱ Theseȱ certainlyȱ didȱ notȱ includeȱ theȱ holy proverbsȱ fromȱ theȱ fourȱ Vedas,ȱ whichȱ wereȱ usedȱ inȱ theȱ cultus. Despiteȱ hisȱ enlightenedȱ ideals,ȱ Ramabai’sȱ fatherȱ didȱ notȱ conȬ siderȱitȱproperȱtoȱpassȱonȱtheseȱancientȱdivineȱtexts,ȱkeptȱscrupȬ ulouslyȱsecretȱbyȱtheȱpriests,ȱtoȱwomen.ȱButȱwomenȱcouldȱhave accessȱ toȱ moreȱ recentȱ partsȱ ofȱ theȱ sacredȱ texts,ȱ likeȱ theȱ BhagȬ avadȬGitaȱandȱtheȱBhagavataȱPurana.ȱTheȱlatterȱespeciallyȱwas consideredȱ toȱ beȱ extremelyȱ important:ȱ Madhvaȱ himselfȱ had calledȱ itȱ “theȱ fifthȱ Veda.”ȱ Ramabaiȱ wroteȱ laterȱ aboutȱ it:ȱ “the Bhagavataȱ Puranȱ wasȱ supposedȱ toȱ containȱ allȱ thatȱ wasȱ necesȬ saryȱ forȱ aȱ childȱ toȱ learn.”10ȱ Otherȱ materialȱ wasȱ thusȱ ignored. Secularȱ knowledgeȱ wasȱ suspectȱ inȱ thisȱ orthodoxȱ milieu,ȱ and contactȱ withȱ theȱ Westernȱ worldȱ throughȱ learningȱ English,ȱ for example,ȱwasȱabsolutelyȱforbidden.ȱTheȱreligiousȱSanskritȱtradiȬ tionȱ wasȱ everything.ȱ Theȱ goalȱ wasȱ toȱ learnȱ theȱ sacredȱ textsȱ by heart,ȱ andȱ thatȱ wasȱ noȱ smallȱ task:ȱ theȱ Bhagavataȱ Puranaȱ conȬ tainedȱ noȱ lessȱ thanȱ eighteenȱ thousandȱ verses!ȱ Ramabaiȱ always highlyȱesteemedȱherȱmother’sȱHinduȱinstruction,ȱevenȱafterȱher conversionȱ toȱ Christianity.ȱ Herȱ firstȱ bookȱ inȱ theȱ Englishȱ langȬ uage,ȱpublishedȱinȱtheȱUnitedȱStatesȱinȱ1887,ȱisȱdedicatedȱtoȱthe memoryȱ ofȱ herȱ motherȱ “whoseȱ sweetȱ influenceȱ andȱ ableȱ inȬ structionȱhaveȱbeenȱtheȱlightȱandȱguideȱofȱmyȱlife.”11 Theȱ knowledgeȱ Ramabaiȱ thusȱ acquiredȱ wouldȱ beȱ ofȱ great importanceȱforȱher,ȱbutȱasȱyetȱsheȱwasȱconfrontedȱwithȱtheȱdisȬ advantagesȱ ofȱ theȱ exclusivelyȱ religiouslyȱ orientedȱ existenceȱ of theȱbrahmans.ȱTheȱmostȱdifficultȱperiodȱofȱherȱlifeȱbeganȱwhen sheȱ wasȱ sixteenȱ yearsȱ old.ȱ Thereȱ wasȱ aȱ famineȱ andȱ theȱ family wasȱ underȱ greatȱ duressȱ becauseȱ ofȱ theirȱ hardships.ȱ Manual labourȱ layȱ completelyȱ outsideȱ theȱ scopeȱ ofȱ theirȱ culture,ȱ and theyȱ couldȱ notȱ earnȱ theirȱ livingȱ throughȱ recitingȱ sacredȱ texts. Onȱtheirȱterribleȱwanderings,ȱinȱwhichȱtheȱfamilyȱsoughtȱtoȱturn theirȱfateȱaroundȱwithȱsevereȱasceticism,ȱoneȱafterȱtheȱotherȱsucȬ ȱCitedȱinȱNicolȱMacNicol,ȱPanditaȱRamabai,ȱBuildersȱofȱModernȱInȬ diaȱ(Calcutta:ȱAssociationȱPress,ȱ1926),ȱp.ȱ12 10

11 ȱRamabai,ȱTheȱHighȬCasteȱWoman,ȱp.ȱV;ȱRamabai,ȱPanditaȱRamabai throughȱHerȱOwnȱWords,ȱp.ȱ129.

JESUSȱASȱGURU

62

cumbed.ȱ Withinȱ aȱ fewȱ monthsȱ Ramabaiȱ hadȱ lostȱ bothȱ parents andȱ herȱ sister.ȱ Togetherȱ withȱ herȱ brotherȱ sheȱ continuedȱ toȱ traȬ velȱ theȱ country,ȱ withȱ theȱ onlyȱ skillȱ sheȱ possessedȱ forȱ staying aliveȱtheirȱmeansȱofȱsustenance:ȱrecitingȱtheȱsacredȱtexts. Afterȱtwoȱyearsȱofȱwandering,ȱtheȱtwoȱarrivedȱinȱKolkata, thenȱ theȱ capitalȱ ofȱ theȱ BritishȬIndianȱ empire,ȱ whereȱ theirȱ star quicklyȱascended.ȱTheȱbrahmansȱasȱwellȱasȱtheȱBritishȱscholars wereȱimpressedȱbyȱthisȱeruditeȱduo,ȱandȱespeciallyȱbyȱRamabai. SheȱreceivedȱoneȱinvitationȱafterȱanotherȱtoȱdisplayȱherȱremarkȬ ableȱ knowledgeȱ ofȱ theȱ Sanskritȱ tradition,ȱ whichȱ resultedȱ in greatȱaccoladesȱforȱher.ȱAfterȱanȱexaminationȱbyȱthreeȱeminent scholars,ȱtwoȱEnglishȱandȱoneȱIndian,ȱsheȱwasȱgivenȱtheȱhonorȬ aryȱtitleȱSarasvatiȱ(theȱnameȱofȱtheȱgoddessȱofȱwisdom).ȱAȱshort timeȱlaterȱsheȱwasȱgivenȱtheȱrightȱtoȱbeȱtheȱfirstȱwomanȱtoȱplace theȱ titleȱ pandita,ȱ theȱ traditionalȱ designationȱ forȱ aȱ brahmanic scholar,ȱ beforeȱ herȱ name.ȱ Herȱ maleȱ fellowȱ panditsȱ sawȱ herȱ as havingȱaȱspecialȱtask:ȱsheȱwasȱrequestedȱtoȱgiveȱlecturesȱtoȱwoȬ menȱinȱtraditionalȱcirclesȱwhoȱlivedȱinȱpardaȱ(isolation).ȱHigher casteȱ womenȱ inȱ orthodoxȱ circlesȱ neverȱ leftȱ theȱ women’sȱ apartȬ mentsȱofȱtheirȱhomesȱandȱthereforeȱledȱanȱexceptionallyȱisolatȬ edȱ existence.ȱ Ramabaiȱ wasȱ toȱ instructȱ themȱ onȱ theȱ rightsȱ and dutiesȱ ofȱ women.ȱ Andȱ nowȱ forȱ theȱ firstȱ timeȱ sheȱ studiedȱ the shastras,ȱ theȱ writingsȱ thatȱ containedȱ theȱ traditionalȱ lawsȱ and rulesȱforȱ conduct.ȱThisȱstudyȱ madeȱ herȱ stillȱmoreȱ awareȱ ofȱ the predicamentȱ ofȱ women,ȱ preciselyȱ inȱ theȱ higherȱ castes.ȱ Nextȱ to theȱ practicalȱ applicationȱ ofȱ theȱ religiousȱ Sanskritȱ tradition,ȱ the languageȱ asȱ suchȱ andȱ theȱ literaryȱ heritageȱ continuedȱ toȱ fascinȬ ateȱher.ȱIllustrativeȱofȱthisȱisȱtheȱSanskritȱOde,ȱanȱodeȱonȱandȱin Sanskritȱ thatȱ sheȱ wroteȱ forȱ anȱ Indologists’ȱ congressȱ inȱ Berlin.12 HerȱpoemȱmadeȱaȱdeepȱimpressionȱonȱthisȱcompanyȱofȱspecialȬ istsȱandȱreinforcedȱherȱreputationȱasȱtheȱonlyȱfemaleȱpandit. Inȱadditionȱtoȱfameȱandȱprosperity,ȱsheȱwasȱalsoȱconfrontȬ edȱinȱthisȱperiodȱwithȱsevereȱhardship.ȱHerȱbrotherȱdiedȱafterȱa shortȱillnessȱandȱRamabaiȱhadȱnowȱlostȱallȱtheȱmembersȱofȱher immediateȱ family.ȱ Notȱ longȱ afterȱ herȱ brother’sȱ deathȱ sheȱ marȬ riedȱaȱwellȬtoȬdoȱlawyer,ȱBabuȱBipinȱBeharidasȱMedhavi.ȱThey ȱPanditaȱRamabai,ȱSanskritȱOde:ȱToȱtheȱCongressȱatȱBerlin,ȱSeptemȬ berȱ1881ȱbyȱtheȱLadyȱPanditȱRamabaiȱofȱSilcar,ȱAssam,ȱwithȱaȱtranslation byȱSirȱMonierȬWilliamsȱ[1881],ȱin:ȱSengupta,ȱPanditaȱRamabaiȱSaraswati, pp.ȱ340Ȭ47. 12

THEȱSAVIOURȱOFȱALL:ȱPANDITAȱRAMABAI

63

settledȱinȱtheȱextremeȱeasternȱpartȱofȱIndia,ȱinȱSilcharȱ(Assam). Itȱ wasȱ notȱ inȱ anyȱ wayȱ anȱ obviousȱ marriage,ȱ forȱ Ramabai belongedȱ toȱ theȱ highestȱ caste,ȱ theȱ brahmans,ȱ whereasȱ herȱ husȬ band’sȱ casteȱ couldȱ beȱ tracedȱ backȱ toȱ theȱ shudras.ȱ Marriageȱ beȬ tweenȱ peopleȱ ofȱ theseȱ twoȱ castesȱ (especiallyȱ oneȱ betweenȱ a brahmanicȱwomanȱ andȱ aȱshudraȱ man)ȱwasȱexplicitlyȱ forbidden inȱ theȱ Hinduȱ writings.ȱ Butȱ Ramabaiȱ hadȱ distancedȱ herself somewhatȱ inȱ theȱ meantimeȱ fromȱ herȱ religiousȱ background.ȱ In KolkataȱsheȱhadȱcomeȱintoȱcontactȱwithȱtheȱBrahmoȱSamaj,ȱthe Societyȱ ofȱ Worshippersȱ ofȱ God,ȱ whichȱ hadȱ beenȱ foundedȱ by Rajaȱ Rammohanȱ Royȱ atȱ theȱ beginningȱ ofȱ theȱ century,13ȱ andȱ to whichȱherȱhusbandȱalsoȱbelonged.ȱAsȱwasȱusualȱinȱtheseȱcircles, theyȱ wereȱ notȱ marriedȱ accordingȱ toȱ Hinduȱ ritesȱ butȱ inȱ civil court.ȱInȱfact,ȱtheȱpanditaȱwasȱnoȱlongerȱatȱhomeȱinȱtheȱworldȱof theȱ pandits.ȱ Becauseȱ ofȱ theȱ liberalȱ urbanȱ environmentȱ thatȱ she hadȱenteredȱinȱKolkata,ȱsheȱdevelopedȱaȱnewȱattitudeȱtoȱlifeȱin whichȱtraditionalȱfaithȱvaluesȱdecreasedȱinȱimportance.ȱWithȱreȬ spectȱtoȱreligion,ȱsheȱnowȱsubscribedȱtoȱtheȱmonotheismȱofȱthe Brahmoȱ Samaj.ȱ Forȱ theȱ firstȱtimeȱ sheȱ studiedȱ theȱ philosophical Sanskritȱliterature,ȱsuchȱasȱtheȱUpanishads—theȱIndianȱheritage appearedȱtoȱcontainȱmoreȱthanȱtheȱdevotionalȱpuranas. Itȱ wasȱ alsoȱ inȱ Kolkataȱ thatȱ Ramabaiȱ firstȱ encountered Christians.ȱ Butȱ thisȱ wasȱ goingȱ tooȱ far.ȱ Sheȱ describes,ȱ notȱ withȬ outȱ someȱ humour,ȱ howȱ sheȱ experiencedȱ aȱ prayerȱ meetingȱ atȱ a Christian’sȱ home.ȱ Forȱ her,ȱ itȱ wasȱ aȱ completelyȱ strangeȱ world, dueȱfirstȱofȱallȱtoȱtheȱEuropeanȱculturalȱpatternȱwithȱwhichȱthe Christianȱfaithȱwasȱinseparablyȱboundȱatȱthatȱtime.ȱForȱtheȱpanȬ ditaȱ fromȱ theȱ jungle,ȱ compatriotsȱ whoȱ actedȱ likeȱ Europeans wereȱaȱspecialȱpointȱofȱinterest.ȱButȱsheȱwasȱalsoȱshockedȱwhen peopleȱofferedȱher,ȱaȱbrahmanicȱwoman,ȱteaȱandȱcakes,ȱforȱshe hadȱnotȱrenouncedȱtheȱrulesȱforȱherȱcasteȱconcerningȱeveryday purity.ȱ Theȱ Christians’ȱ prayerȱ wasȱ aȱ completeȱ sourceȱ ofȱ aliȬ enation.ȱ Thoseȱ presentȱ kneeledȱ inȱ frontȱ ofȱ theirȱ chairsȱ and spokeȱwithȱtheirȱeyesȱclosed.ȱThereȱwasȱnoȱimageȱandȱitȱseemed toȱRamabaiȱthatȱtheyȱworshippedȱtheȱchairsȱbeforeȱwhichȱthey

ȱSeeȱchapterȱ2.

13

JESUSȱASȱGURU

64

wereȱkneeling.14ȱEvenȱtheȱBibleȱinȱSanskrit,ȱwhichȱwasȱgivenȱto herȱasȱaȱgift,ȱcouldȱnotȱconvertȱher:ȱitȱwasȱallȱtooȱforeign. Thisȱ changedȱ duringȱ herȱ marriage.ȱ Aȱ Baptistȱ missionary livedȱinȱSilcharȱandȱvisitedȱherȱseveralȱtimes.ȱWhenȱheȱhadȱexȬ plainedȱ theȱ firstȱ chapterȱ ofȱ Genesisȱ toȱ her,ȱ sheȱ wasȱ deeply movedȱbyȱit.ȱRamabaiȱwasȱdefinitelyȱsearching:ȱ“IȱwasȱdesperȬ atelyȱinȱneedȱofȱsomeȱreligion.ȱTheȱHinduȱreligionȱheldȱoutȱno hopeȱ forȱ me;ȱ theȱ Brahmoȱ religionȱ wasȱ notȱ aȱ veryȱ definiteȱ one. Forȱitȱisȱnothingȱbutȱwhatȱaȱmanȱmakesȱforȱhimself.”15ȱTheȱneed forȱaȱtrustworthyȱreligionȱcertainlyȱdidȱnotȱdecreaseȱwhenȱRamȬ abaiȱ foundȱ herselfȱ aloneȱ again.ȱ Afterȱ oneȱ andȱ aȱ halfȱ yearsȱ of marriage,ȱ herȱ husbandȱ diedȱ ofȱ cholera.ȱ Aȱ daughterȱ hadȱ been bornȱ inȱ theȱ meantimeȱ andȱ Ramabaiȱ hadȱ toȱ buildȱ aȱ newȱ future withȱtheȱlittleȱManorama. WithȱherȱchildȱRamabaiȱleftȱtheȱeasternȱpartȱofȱtheȱcountry andȱwentȱagainȱtoȱwesternȱIndiaȱwhereȱherȱrootsȱlay.ȱHerȱrepuȬ tationȱ hadȱ precededȱ herȱ andȱ inȱ Pune,ȱ whereȱ sheȱ settled,ȱ she wasȱ givenȱ aȱ warmȱ receptionȱ byȱ reformȬmindedȱ Hindus.ȱ She wasȱimmediatelyȱgivenȱtheȱopportunityȱtoȱresumeȱherȱoldȱoccuȬ pation:ȱrecitingȱtheȱpuranas.ȱInȱaddition,ȱsheȱgaveȱlecturesȱonȱthe positionȱ ofȱ women,ȱ andȱ foundedȱ aȱ societyȱ forȱ womenȱ thatȱ orȬ ganizedȱweeklyȱlecturesȱandȱdiscussions,ȱtheȱAryaȱMahilaȱSamȬ aj.ȱ Sheȱ madeȱ continuallyȱ strongerȱ argumentsȱ forȱ reforms,ȱ for educationȱ forȱ womenȱ andȱ betterȱ healthȱ care,ȱ asȱ wellȱ asȱ forȱ aid toȱtheȱmostȱvulnerableȱpeopleȱofȱsociety,ȱtheȱwidows.ȱRamabai wasȱ herselfȱ aȱ widowȱ andȱ sheȱ knewȱ fromȱ herȱ ownȱ experience howȱ widowsȱ wereȱ viewedȱ withȱ contempt.ȱ Popularȱ beliefȱ held thatȱ itȱ wasȱ asȱ aȱ consequenceȱ ofȱ badȱ deedsȱ inȱ theȱ presentȱ orȱ a previousȱ lifeȱ thatȱ aȱ woman’sȱ husbandȱ died:ȱ itȱ wasȱ herȱ karma. Ramabaiȱalsoȱheardȱtheȱusualȱreproachȱthatȱitȱwasȱherȱfaultȱthat herȱ husbandȱ hadȱ died.ȱ Sometimesȱ theȱ guiltȱ wasȱ madeȱ even moreȱ precise:ȱ thisȱ isȱ whatȱ happensȱ whenȱ oneȱ marriesȱ outside one’sȱcaste. Now,ȱdespiteȱeverything,ȱRamabaiȱfoundȱherselfȱinȱaȱpriviȬ legedȱ positionȱ becauseȱ ofȱ herȱ eruditionȱ andȱ reputation.ȱ Other ȱRamabai,ȱAȱTestimonyȱofȱOurȱInexhaustibleȱTreasure,ȱp.ȱ17;ȱRamabai, PanditaȱRamabaiȱthroughȱHerȱOwnȱWords,ȱp.ȱ301. 14

15 ȱRamabai,ȱAȱTestimonyȱofȱOurȱInexhaustibleȱTreasure,ȱp.ȱ23;ȱRamabai, PanditaȱRamabaiȱthroughȱHerȱOwnȱWords,ȱpp.ȱ305Ȭ06.

THEȱSAVIOURȱOFȱALL:ȱPANDITAȱRAMABAI

65

brahmanicȱ womenȱ wereȱ certainlyȱ notȱ thatȱ independent.ȱ In SouthȱIndiaȱaȱhigherȱcasteȱgirlȱwouldȱbeȱhandedȱoverȱtoȱherȱinȬ lawsȱimmediatelyȱafterȱtheȱwedding,ȱwhichȱwasȱsometimesȱperȬ formedȱwhenȱtheȱbridesȱwereȱnoȱolderȱthanȱpreschoolȱchildren. Ifȱtheȱhusbandȱdied,ȱthenȱtheȱgirlȱwasȱaȱwidowȱandȱhadȱtoȱsufȬ ferȱ allȱ theȱ attendantȱ consequences.ȱ Thisȱ wasȱ soȱ alsoȱ ifȱ theȱ girl hadȱnotȱyetȱreachedȱpubertyȱandȱhadȱnotȱexperiencedȱconjugal relations.ȱTheȱ“virginȱwidows”ȱhadȱnoȱfutureȱanyȱmore,ȱusually remainingȱ inȱ serviceȱ toȱ theirȱ inȬlawsȱ forȱ theȱ restȱ ofȱ theirȱ lives andȱoccupyingȱtheȱlowestȱpositionȱ inȱtheȱhouseholdȱhierarchy. TheyȱwereȱshavedȱbaldȱandȱworeȱcoarseȱclothingȱwithoutȱjewelȬ ry,ȱsoȱthatȱeveryoneȱwouldȱclearlyȱseeȱtheirȱstatus.ȱTheȱtimeȱȱof sati,ȱtheȱburningȱofȱwidows,ȱwasȱpast,ȱbutȱtheȱpositionȱofȱwidȬ ows,ȱ particularlyȱ theȱ youngestȱ group,ȱ wasȱ wretchedȱ atȱ this time. Inȱ Puneȱ Ramabaiȱ tookȱ pityȱ onȱ aȱ twelveȬyearȬoldȱ widow. Thisȱ childȱ hadȱ beenȱ marriedȱ whenȱ sheȱ wasȱ five,ȱ butȱ herȱ husȬ bandȱhadȱdiedȱaȱfewȱdaysȱafterȱtheȱweddingȱfeast.ȱTheȱgroom’s motherȱ accusedȱ theȱ girlȱ ofȱ “eatingȱ up”ȱ herȱ son:ȱ sheȱ wasȱ aȱ deȬ mon.ȱ Theȱ girlȱ wanderedȱ forȱ yearsȱ throughȱ theȱ streetsȱ ofȱ Pune untilȱ sheȱ cameȱ intoȱ contactȱ withȱ Ramabaiȱ andȱ askedȱ forȱ help. Ramabaiȱtookȱherȱinȱandȱfromȱthatȱsituationȱcameȱtheȱplanȱthat wouldȱbecomeȱRamabai’sȱlife’sȱwork.ȱSheȱlaterȱwrote: Asȱ Iȱ lookedȱ onȱ thatȱ littleȱ figureȱ myȱ vagueȱ thoughtsȱ about doingȱsomethingȱforȱmyȱsistersȱinȱsimilarȱconditionsȱbegan toȱtakeȱshapeȱ....ȱIȱbeganȱtoȱplaceȱaȱplanȱforȱstartingȱaȱHome forȱ Hinduȱ widowsȱ beforeȱ myȱ countrymenȱ andȱ toȱ askȱ for theirȱ helpȱ ....ȱ Theȱ unknownȱ God,ȱ whoȱ wasȱ directingȱ my stepsȱtowardȱtheȱwayȱofȱlife,ȱmadeȱitȱpossibleȱforȱmeȱtoȱcarȬ ryȱoutȱtheȱpurposeȱwhichȱHeȱhadȱputȱintoȱmyȱheart.16

ItȱisȱapparentȱfromȱthisȱquoteȱthatȱRamabaiȱlaterȱconnected theȱ startȱ ofȱ herȱ socialȱ workȱ withȱ aȱ newȱ religiousȱ orientation. Herȱ formulationȱ ofȱ thisȱ isȱ veryȱ muchȱ stampedȱ byȱ herȱ sure Christianȱ faith,ȱ withȱ aȱ strongȱ charismaticȱ slant,ȱ toȱ whichȱ she laterȱadhered.ȱButȱitȱisȱaȱfactȱthatȱinȱthisȱyearȱinȱPuneȱsheȱtook consciousȱinitiativesȱtoȱbecomeȱacquaintedȱwithȱ“theȱunknown ȱ Fromȱ anȱ articleȱ publishedȱ inȱ 1907,ȱ citedȱ byȱ MacNicol,ȱ Pandita Ramabaiȱ(Englishȱversion),ȱp.ȱ59;ȱcf.ȱDyer,ȱPanditaȱRamabai,ȱp.ȱ20.ȱTheȱterm “theȱunknownȱGod”ȱisȱborrowed,ȱofȱcourse,ȱfromȱActsȱ17:23. 16

JESUSȱASȱGURU

66

God.”ȱ Sheȱ studiedȱ theȱ Bible,ȱ soughtȱ contactȱ withȱ Englishȱ misȬ sionariesȱandȱIndianȱChristians,ȱwhileȱlearningȱEnglishȱinȱorder toȱ understandȱ theȱ Europeanȱ worldȱ better.ȱ Sheȱ wasȱ helpedȱ a greatȱ dealȱ inȱ thisȱ byȱ theȱ centreȱ ofȱ anȱ Anglicanȱ religiousȱ comȬ munityȱ inȱ Pune,ȱ theȱ soȬcalledȱ Wantageȱ Sisters.17ȱ Theȱ contact withȱ Nehemiahȱ Goreh,ȱ whoȱ wasȱ workingȱ inȱ Puneȱ atȱ theȱ time, wasȱ alsoȱ ofȱ greatȱ importance.18ȱ Afterȱ all,ȱ heȱ hadȱ theȱ same backgroundȱ inȱ Sanskritȱ scholarshipȱ asȱ sheȱ didȱ and,ȱ moreover, cameȱfromȱtheȱsameȱcaste:ȱtheyȱwereȱbothȱchitpavanȱbrahmans. Aȱmemberȱofȱtheȱsameȱcaste,ȱanȱeminentȱSanskritȱscholar,ȱwho hadȱ madeȱ theȱ stepȱ toȱ theȱ Christianȱ churchȱ moreȱ thanȱ thirty yearsȱ earlier—itȱ wasȱ selfȬevidentȱ thatȱ heȱ wouldȱ exerciseȱ an enormousȱpowerȱofȱattractionȱonȱtheȱsearchingȱRamabai. RamabaiȱhadȱlivedȱinȱPuneȱscarcelyȱaȱyearȱwhenȱsheȱdared toȱ takeȱ theȱ bigȱ stepȱ ofȱ travellingȱ toȱ England.ȱ Forȱ anȱ orthodox Hindu,ȱitȱwasȱaȱsinȱtoȱcrossȱtheȱocean.ȱRamabaiȱwasȱnoȱlonger boundȱ byȱ thisȱ timeȱ byȱ traditionalȱ Hinduȱ teachings,ȱ butȱ inȱ her behaviourȱsheȱwasȱstillȱlargelyȱfaithfulȱtoȱtheȱbrahmanicȱculture. Butȱ sheȱ wasȱ convincedȱ thatȱ onlyȱ inȱ Europeȱ couldȱ sheȱ acquire theȱknowledgeȱandȱskillsȱthatȱwereȱnecessaryȱforȱwhatȱsheȱsaw asȱherȱlife’sȱtask:ȱreliefȱforȱHinduȱwidows.ȱSheȱconsideredȱmedȬ icalȱ schoolȱ first,ȱ butȱ thatȱ didȱ notȱ appearȱ toȱ beȱ realizable.ȱ But languageȱstudyȱandȱsomeȱnaturalȱscienceȱcouldȱalsoȱproveȱimȬ portant.ȱ Moreover,ȱ sheȱ nowȱ hadȱ theȱ opportunityȱ toȱ findȱ anȬ swersȱ toȱ herȱ religiousȱ questionsȱ atȱ theȱ centreȱ ofȱ theȱ Christian world.ȱSheȱwasȱhospitablyȱreceivedȱinȱtheȱconventȱinȱWantage. AfterȱaȱstayȱofȱhalfȱaȱyearȱsheȱdecidedȱtoȱconvertȱtoȱChristianity. Sheȱ wasȱ baptized,ȱ alongȱ withȱ herȱ daughterȱ Manoramaȱ inȱ the AnglicanȱchurchȱinȱSeptemberȱ1883. WhatȱhadȱconvincedȱRamabaiȱofȱtheȱtruthȱofȱtheȱChristian faith?ȱThereȱwereȱdifferentȱfactors.ȱAcquaintanceȱwithȱlifeȱinȱthe religiousȱ communityȱ inȱ Wantageȱ andȱ herȱ conversationsȱ with theȱ sistersȱ meantȱ aȱ greatȱ dealȱ toȱ her.ȱ Sheȱ alsoȱ becameȱ acȬ quaintedȱ withȱ theȱ socialȱ sideȱ ofȱ churchȱ work.ȱ Sheȱ wasȱ very muchȱ impressedȱ byȱ anȱ excursionȱ toȱ aȱ Londonȱ branchȱ ofȱ the sisters,ȱ whereȱ “fallenȱ women”ȱ foundȱ relief.ȱ Itȱ wasȱ newȱ toȱ her ȱOfficially,ȱtheȱorderȱisȱcalled:ȱCommunityȱofȱSt.ȱMaryȱtheȱVirgin; theȱheadquartersȱwereȱinȱtheȱEnglishȱvillageȱofȱWantage. 17

ȱSeeȱchapterȱ3.

18

THEȱSAVIOURȱOFȱALL:ȱPANDITAȱRAMABAI

67

thatȱreligionȱcouldȱinspireȱpeopleȱtoȱshowȱmercyȱtoȱpeopleȱwho wereȱinȱtroubleȱbecauseȱofȱwrongȱchoicesȱtheyȱhadȱmade.ȱInȱher Hinduȱ background,ȱ womenȱ whoȱ couldȱ beȱ accusedȱ ofȱ being looseȱwereȱtreatedȱwithȱgreatȱcontemptȱandȱharshness.ȱInȱEngȬ landȱnotȱonlyȱdidȱsheȱseeȱtenderȱreliefȱbutȱsheȱalsoȱlearnedȱhow womenȱ couldȱ changeȱ becauseȱ ofȱ suchȱ careȱ andȱ findȱ newȱ diȬ rectionȱ inȱ life.ȱ Theȱ practicalȱ effectsȱ ofȱ Christanȱ faithȱ wereȱ the firstȱ factorȱ thatȱ convincedȱ Ramabai.ȱ Next,ȱ sheȱ becameȱ increasȬ inglyȱ convincedȱ ofȱ theȱ truthȱ ofȱ theȱ Christianȱ doctrines.ȱ Itȱ was Nehemiahȱ Goreh’sȱ workȱ onȱ Christology,ȱ addressedȱ toȱ herȱ in theȱ formȱ ofȱ aȱ letter,ȱ thatȱ finallyȱ ledȱ herȱ toȱ embraceȱ ChrisȬ tianity.19 Herȱ stayȱ inȱ theȱ Westȱ resultedȱ inȱ moreȱ thanȱ aȱ definitive choiceȱ forȱ theȱ Christianȱ faith.ȱ Ramabaiȱ tookȱ lessonsȱ inȱ English andȱ inȱ theȱ exactȱ sciencesȱ atȱ theȱ Ladiesȱ Collegeȱ inȱ Cheltenham, whereȱsheȱherselfȱtaughtȱcoursesȱinȱSanskrit.ȱButȱaȱtripȱtoȱNorth AmericaȱwasȱofȱmoreȱpracticalȱuseȱforȱherȱfutureȱworkȱinȱIndia thanȱ herȱ stayȱ inȱ England.ȱ Ramabaiȱ wasȱ invitedȱ toȱ attendȱ the grantingȱofȱaȱdoctorateȱtoȱaȱyoungȱwomanȱfromȱPuneȱwhoȱwas finishingȱ upȱ medicalȱ school.ȱ Itȱ wasȱ aȱ uniqueȱ opportunity:ȱ she wasȱtheȱfirstȱHinduȱwomanȱinȱtheȱworldȱtoȱhaveȱgainedȱaȱdocȬ torateȱ inȱ theȱ fieldȱ ofȱ medicine.ȱ Ramabai,ȱ whoȱ hadȱ wantedȱ to studyȱmedicineȱherself,ȱfeltȱaȱgreatȱdealȱofȱaffinityȱforȱthis.ȱBut herȱstayȱinȱtheȱUnitedȱStatesȱwouldȱbeȱveryȱbeneficialȱforȱherȱas well.ȱ Here—muchȱ moreȱ thanȱ inȱ England—sheȱ foundȱ anȱ eager audienceȱ forȱ herȱ pleaȱ forȱ theȱ improvementȱ ofȱ theȱ positionȱ of Hinduȱ women.ȱ Herȱ oppositionȱ toȱ theȱ oppressionȱ throughȱ cenȬ turiesȬoldȱ traditionsȱ foundȱ aȱ connectionȱ withȱ theȱ American struggleȱforȱliberty.ȱMoreover,ȱfromȱallȱsidesȱsheȱreceivedȱpracȬ ticalȱ andȱ financialȱ help.ȱ Inȱ twoȱ andȱ aȱ halfȱ yearsȱ ofȱ travelling throughȱ theȱ Unitedȱ States,ȱ fromȱ theȱ eastȱ coastȱ toȱ theȱ west,ȱ as wellȱasȱCanada,ȱsheȱcreatedȱbackingȱthatȱwasȱsufficientlyȱstrong toȱguaranteeȱtheȱfirstȱtenȱyearsȱofȱreliefȱforȱwidowsȱinȱIndia.ȱShe learnedȱ newȱ skills,ȱ studyingȱ theȱ educationȱ ofȱ preȬschoolersȱ as developedȱbyȱFröbel.ȱOneȱofȱtheȱfruitsȱofȱherȱAmericanȱperiod, furthermore,ȱwasȱtheȱbookȱTheȱHighȬCasteȱHinduȱWoman,ȱwhich ȱNehemiahȱGoreh,ȱProofsȱofȱtheȱDivinityȱofȱourȱLordȱStatedȱinȱAȱLetter toȱaȱFriend:ȱInȱWhichȱitȱalsoȱShownȱthatȱneitherȱBrahmoismȱnorȱPrarthanasamȬ ajismȱcanȱbeȱAcceptedȱasȱaȱSubstituteȱforȱChristianityȱ(Bombay:ȱAngloȬVerȬ nacularȱPress,ȱ1887);ȱseeȱtheȱpreviousȱchapter. 19

68

JESUSȱASȱGURU

wasȱ publishedȱ inȱ Philadelphiaȱ inȱ 1887.ȱ Inȱ thisȱ bookȱ Ramabai poignantlyȱ describesȱ theȱ problemsȱ ofȱ herȱ fellowȱ casteȱ women. BecauseȱofȱthisȱmanyȱAmericanȱwomenȱbecameȱinvolvedȱinȱher project. AfterȱRamabaiȱarrivedȱagainȱinȱIndiaȱinȱFebruaryȱ1889,ȱthe homeȱ forȱ youngȱ highȬcasteȱ womenȱ wasȱ openedȱ alreadyȱ in March.ȱItȱbeganȱwithȱaȱfewȱstudents,ȱbutȱultimatelyȱitȱwouldȱbe ableȱtoȱaccommodateȱseventyȱstudents.ȱTheȱhomeȱwasȱinitially inȱMumbai,ȱbutȱafterȱaȱfewȱyearsȱPuneȱseemedȱtoȱbeȱaȱbetterȱloȬ cation.ȱItȱwasȱcalledȱSharadaȱSadanȱorȱ“HouseȱofȱWisdom.”ȱThe nameȱalreadyȱshowsȱthatȱtheȱaccentȱwasȱonȱeducation.ȱRamabai thoughtȱthatȱpreciselyȱhighȬcasteȱgirlsȱandȱwomenȱhadȱtheȱabilȬ ityȱ toȱ study.ȱ Byȱ followingȱ aȱ courseȱ ofȱ study,ȱ preferablyȱ toȱ beȬ comeȱaȱteacher,ȱtheyȱcouldȱlookȱafterȱthemselvesȱandȱnoȱlonger beȱ dependentȱ onȱ theirȱ inȬlaws.ȱ Moreover,ȱ aȱ snowballȱ effect couldȱ beȱ expected:ȱ withȱ theirȱ knowledgeȱ andȱ experience,ȱ the teachersȱ couldȱ teachȱ otherȱ girlsȱ andȱ conveyȱ betterȱ ideasȱ about theȱ positionȱ ofȱ womenȱ toȱ them.ȱ Ramabaiȱ intentionallyȱ wanted toȱ limitȱ herȱ workȱ toȱ theȱ highȬcasteȱ women,ȱ i.e.ȱ theȱ brahmans. Thereȱwereȱtwoȱreasonsȱforȱthis.ȱFirstȱofȱall,ȱtheȱhighȬcasteȱwoȬ menȱ sufferedȱ theȱ mostȱ fromȱ oppressionȱ andȱ humiliation;ȱ widȬ owsȱ wereȱ treatedȱ moreȱ lenientlyȱ inȱ theȱ lowerȱ castes.ȱ Second, Ramabaiȱ believed—certainlyȱ aȱ casteȱ bias—thatȱ highȬcasteȱ woȬ menȱ wereȱ moreȱ intelligent.20ȱ Toȱ interestȱ brahmanȱ familiesȱ in suchȱ anȱ educationalȱ institution,ȱ theȱ strictȱ conditionȱ wasȱ laid downȱ thatȱ itsȱ rulesȱ wouldȱ correspondȱ toȱ casteȱ rules.ȱ Ramabai thusȱ guaranteedȱ that,ȱ withȱ respectȱ toȱ food,ȱ clothingȱ andȱ etiȬ quette,ȱtheȱschoolȱwouldȱobviouslyȱfollowȱwhatȱwasȱprescribed forȱtheȱhigherȱcastes.ȱThereȱwasȱalsoȱtheȱguaranteeȱhereȱthatȱthe studentsȱ wouldȱ haveȱ completeȱ freedomȱ toȱ followȱ theȱ beliefs andȱritualsȱofȱHinduism.ȱChristianityȱwouldȱnotȱbeȱpropagated inȱanyȱwayȱwhatsoever. Itȱwasȱbecauseȱofȱthisȱstrictȱneutralityȱthatȱtheȱprojectȱwas primarilyȱ successful.ȱ Atȱ theȱ sameȱ timeȱ itȱ wasȱ alsoȱ aȱ position thatȱ graduallyȱ provedȱ toȱ beȱ lessȱ tenable.ȱ Ramabai’sȱ charisma hadȱ itsȱ ownȱ effectȱ onȱ theȱ students.ȱ Sheȱ didȱ notȱ missionizeȱ at

20 ȱSeeȱRamabai,ȱTheȱHighȬCasteȱWoman,ȱpp.ȱ60Ȭ64;ȱRamabai,ȱPandita RamabaiȱthroughȱHerȱOwnȱWords,ȱpp.ȱ174Ȭ78.

THEȱSAVIOURȱOFȱALL:ȱPANDITAȱRAMABAI

69

SharadaȱSadan,ȱbutȱsheȱlivedȱamongȱher studentsȱandȱeasilyȱletȱthemȱshareȱinȱher life.ȱTheȱstoryȱisȱwellȬknownȱthatȱsheȱhad devotionsȱ everyȱ morningȱ withȱ her daughterȱ Manorama,ȱ duringȱ whichȱ the doorȱ toȱ herȱ apartmentȱ wasȱ open.ȱ An increasingȱ numberȱ ofȱ studentsȱ followed theȱ Bibleȱ readingȱ andȱ theȱ prayerȱ onȱ the veranda.ȱ Ultimately,ȱ aȱ fewȱ enteredȱ and joinedȱ in.ȱ Forȱ mostȱ ofȱ herȱ students, RamabaiȱwasȱtheirȱsalvationȱfromȱaȱmisȬ erableȱ existence.ȱ Sheȱ undertookȱ aȱ great dealȱ toȱ getȱ youngȱ widowsȱ whoseȱ lives wereȱparticularlyȱdifficultȱoutȱofȱtheirȱsituationȱandȱintoȱtheȱsafe havenȱ ofȱ herȱ institution.ȱ Wheneverȱ reportsȱ ofȱ distressfulȱ cases reachedȱher,ȱsheȱwasȱnotȱafraidȱtoȱtravelȱdisguisedȱasȱȱaȱlowerȬ casteȱ pilgrimȱ toȱ theȱ placeȱ inȱ questionȱ inȱ orderȱ toȱ getȱ theȱ girl awayȱ fromȱ theȱ familyȱ inȱ anȱ underhandedȱ way.21ȱ Theseȱ actions ledȱ herȱ studentsȱ toȱ ascribeȱ toȱ herȱ almostȱ supernaturalȱ properȬ ties.ȱTheȱdriveȱtoȱidentifyȱwithȱsuchȱaȱfigure,ȱalsoȱinȱritualsȱand beliefs,ȱbecameȱcontinuallyȱstronger. Inȱaddition,ȱRamabaiȱherselfȱfoundȱitȱincreasinglyȱdifficult toȱkeepȱupȱtheȱneutralityȱofȱherȱschoolȱthatȱsheȱhadȱinitiallyȱdeȬ fendedȱ soȱ passionately.ȱ Herȱ religiousȱ searchȱ didȱ notȱ stopȱ with herȱbaptism.ȱInȱ1891,ȱeightȱyearsȱafterȱherȱconversionȱtoȱChrisȬ tianity,ȱ sheȱ experiencedȱ anotherȱ changeȱ inȱ herȱ spiritualȱ develȬ opment,ȱ broughtȱ aboutȱ byȱ aȱ bookȱ byȱ Williamȱ Haslamȱ (1818Ȭ 1905).22ȱThisȱwriter,ȱanȱAnglicanȱtheologian,ȱwasȱoneȱofȱtheȱdriȬ vingȱforcesȱ behindȱtheȱ revivalȱ movementȱ thatȱhadȱ beenȱ taking placeȱinȱEnglishȱchurchesȱsinceȱ1859.23ȱHaslamȱplacedȱgreatȱemȬ phasisȱonȱtheȱnecessityȱofȱrepentanceȱandȱbeingȱbornȱagain.ȱFolȬ lowingȱhisȱexample,ȱRamabaiȱalsoȱdecidedȱtoȱsurrenderȱunconȬ ȱSeeȱtheȱpictureȱaboveȱofȱRamabaiȱdisguisedȱasȱaȱmaharȱwoman, aȱveryȱlowȬcasteȱgroup. 21

ȱThisȱwasȱhisȱFromȱDeathȱintoȱLife,ȱor,ȱTwentyȱYearsȱofȱMyȱMinistry, whichȱwasȱpublishedȱinȱ1880.ȱThisȱbookȱisȱstillȱpopularȱinȱevangelicalȱcirȬ cles—itȱwasȱreprintedȱinȱ1976ȱandȱ1994.ȱ 22

23 ȱSeeȱB.J.ȱPooleȬConnor,ȱVisitationsȱofȱGrace:ȱWithȱSpecialȱReferenceȱto theȱRevivalȱofȱ1859ȱ(London:ȱBritishȱEvangelicalȱCouncil,ȱ1960).ȱ

70

JESUSȱASȱGURU

ditionallyȱtoȱtheȱLord.ȱTheȱexperienceȱofȱbeingȱbornȱagainȱthat sheȱthenȱunderwentȱgaveȱaȱnewȱdirectionȱtoȱherȱthinkingȱabout faithȱandȱmissions.ȱForȱher,ȱitȱwasȱnowȱnoȱlongerȱpossibleȱtoȱbe neutral.ȱAfterȱyearsȱofȱcompromiseȱandȱclashesȱwithȱtheȱHindu membersȱ ofȱ herȱ advisoryȱ body,ȱ itȱ wasȱ finallyȱ decidedȱ inȱ 1897 thatȱSharadaȱSadanȱwouldȱbeȱaȱChristianȱinstitutionȱthatȱwould offerȱelectiveȱeducationȱinȱtheȱChristianȱreligion.ȱFreedomȱofȱreȬ ligionȱ was,ȱ ofȱ course,ȱ guaranteedȱ forȱ thoseȱ whoȱ wantedȱ toȱ reȬ mainȱHindu. Thereȱ wasȱ aȱ departureȱ fromȱ theȱ originalȱ planȱ inȱ another area.ȱAȱmajorȱfamineȱbrokeȱoutȱinȱ1896ȱinȱtheȱmiddleȱofȱtheȱInȬ dianȱ subcontinent,ȱ theȱ Centralȱ Provinces.ȱ Ramabaiȱ travelledȱ to theȱ disasterȱ areaȱ toȱ saveȱ threeȱ hundredȱ girlsȱ andȱ women.ȱ The criterionȱ hereȱ forȱ admissionȱ wasȱ notȱ membershipȱ inȱ aȱ high caste.ȱ Casteȱ boundariesȱ lostȱ anyȱ meaningȱ inȱ theȱ terribleȱ cirȬ cumstancesȱ sheȱ encounteredȱ there.ȱ Characteristicȱ isȱ herȱ story thatȱsheȱwasȱapproachedȱbyȱtwoȱgirlsȱaboutȱeightȱyearsȱoldȱwho hadȱbeenȱthreatenedȱbyȱaȱwolf.ȱTheȱoneȱgirlȱwasȱbrahmanicȱand theȱotherȱcameȱfromȱtheȱimpureȱcasteȱofȱtheȱleatherȱworkers,ȱthe chamars.ȱTheseȱtwoȱrepresentedȱalmostȱtheȱextremesȱinȱtheȱcaste hierarchy.ȱ Naturally,ȱ Ramabaiȱ tookȱ pityȱ onȱ bothȱ ofȱ themȱ and foundedȱ aȱ receptionȱ centreȱ forȱ theȱ victimsȱ ofȱ theȱ famineȱ in Kedgaon,ȱ aȱ villageȱ aboutȱ fiftyȱ kilometresȱ fromȱ Pune.24ȱ Many girlsȱ andȱ womenȱ foundȱ refugeȱ hereȱ inȱ theȱ courseȱ ofȱ theȱ years andȱ wereȱ givenȱ vocationalȱ training.ȱ Itȱ wasȱ aȱ largeȱ institution —ultimatelyȱ thereȱ wasȱ roomȱ forȱ twoȱ thousandȱ students.ȱ RamȬ abaiȱ calledȱ theȱ centreȱ Muktiȱ Sadanȱ orȱ “Houseȱ ofȱ Salvation,”ȱ a nameȱ inspiredȱ byȱ aȱ biblicalȱ text:ȱ “youȱ willȱ callȱ yourȱ walls SalvationȱandȱyourȱgatesȱPraise”ȱ(Isaiahȱ60:18). TheȱshiftȱinȱRamabai’sȱfaithȱisȱveryȱvisibleȱinȱtheȱnamesȱshe gaveȱherȱinstitutions:ȱfromȱHouseȱofȱWisdomȱtoȱHouseȱofȱSalvaȬ tion.ȱ Wisdom,ȱ inȱ whichȱ theȱ Hinduȱ traditionȱ couldȱ alsoȱ share, wasȱ noȱ longerȱ centralȱ butȱ itȱ nowȱ revolvedȱ entirelyȱ aroundȱ the exclusiveȱ salvationȱ inȱ Jesusȱ Christ.ȱ Thisȱ shiftȱ toȱ aȱ Charismatic Christianityȱ wasȱ accompaniedȱ byȱ aȱ choiceȱ forȱ newȱ partnersȱ in herȱwork.ȱIfȱRamabaiȱhadȱbeenȱorientedȱupȱtoȱthatȱpointȱtoȱthe Anglicanȱ Church,ȱ evenȱ thoughȱ sheȱ hadȱ aȱ preferenceȱ forȱ the 24 ȱ Sengupta,ȱ Panditaȱ Ramabaiȱ Saraswati,ȱ p.ȱ 240.ȱ Seeȱ alsoȱ Bapat, “PanditaȱRamabai,”ȱp.ȱ247.

THEȱSAVIOURȱOFȱALL:ȱPANDITAȱRAMABAI

71

CharismaticȱmovementȱofȱHaslamȱandȱothers,ȱnowȱtheȱMethodȬ istsȱ enteredȱ theȱ picture.ȱ Aȱ missionaryȱ fromȱ theȱ Unitedȱ States, MinnieȱAbrams,ȱcameȱtoȱworkȱatȱMuktiȱandȱforȱmanyȱyearsȱhad aȱ strongȱ influenceȱ onȱ theȱ spiritualȱ lifeȱ there.ȱ Anȱ American Methodistȱ ministerȱ inȱ Pune,ȱ W.W.ȱ Bruere,ȱ wasȱ theȱ clergyman whoȱwasȱaskedȱforȱseveralȱdecadesȱtoȱleadȱchurchȱservicesȱand especiallyȱ toȱ baptizeȱ Muktiȱ students.25ȱ Manorama,ȱ Ramabai’s daughter,ȱjoinedȱtheȱMethodistȱchurch. Thereȱ isȱ aȱ certainȱ radicalizationȱ toȱ beȱ perceivedȱ inȱ the CharismaticȱexperienceȱofȱfaithȱwithinȱMuktiȱSadan.ȱThereȱwere newȱ revivalȱ movementsȱ atȱ theȱ beginningȱ ofȱ theȱ twentieth century:ȱ inȱ Australiaȱ (1903)ȱ andȱ inȱ Walesȱ (1904),ȱ toȱ which Ramabaiȱ andȱ theȱ otherȱ residentsȱ atȱ Muktiȱ wereȱ stronglyȱ atȬ tracted.ȱRamabaiȱevenȱsentȱherȱdaughterȱtoȱAustraliaȱtoȱsizeȱup theȱsituationȱofȱtheȱnewȱreligiousȱzealȱinȱperson.ȱInȱ1905,ȱinȱher enthusiasm,ȱ Ramabaiȱ setȱ upȱ aȱ prayerȱ groupȱ aroundȱ thisȱ great event.ȱ Ecstaticȱ experiencesȱ beganȱ occurringȱ atȱ Muktiȱ shortly thereafter.ȱInȱprayerȱmeetingsȱthatȱlastedȱhoursȱpeopleȱspokeȱin tonguesȱ andȱ manyȱ rolledȱ overȱ theȱ groundȱ cryingȱ orȱ brokeȱ out inȱhystericalȱlaughter.ȱThereȱwereȱreportsȱofȱfireȱappearing.ȱThe biographiesȱofȱRamabaiȱhaveȱquiteȱaȱbitȱofȱdifficultyȱwithȱthese ecstaticȱ outbursts,ȱ toȱ whichȱ Ramabaiȱ obviouslyȱ presentedȱ no counterbalanceȱbutȱparticipatedȱfullyȱinȱthem.ȱTheȱofficialȱmemȬ orialȱvolumeȱissuedȱonȱherȱhundredthȱbirthdayȱalsoȱconcludes: “Thatȱsheȱwasȱproneȱtoȱfanaticismȱatȱthisȱtimeȱcannot,ȱIȱfeel,ȱbe denied.”26 HerȱscholarlyȱabilitiesȱwereȱalsoȱplacedȱinȱserviceȱtoȱtheȱexȬ clusiveȱproclamationȱofȱtheȱChristianȱfaithȱinȱitsȱorthodoxȱCharȬ ismaticȱ form.ȱ Alreadyȱ inȱ theȱ firstȱ yearsȱ afterȱ herȱ stayȱ inȱ the West,ȱ theȱ panditaȱ wasȱ busyȱ translatingȱ theȱ Bible.ȱ Thisȱ wasȱ a matterȱ ofȱ makingȱ theȱ existingȱ Marathiȱ translationȱ intoȱ aȱ more readableȱtranslationȱinȱaȱmoreȱpopularȱvariantȱofȱthisȱlanguage. ȱMinnieȱF.ȱAbramsȱ(1859Ȭ1912)ȱworkedȱinȱIndiaȱasȱaȱMethodist “deaconessȬmissionary”ȱfromȱ1887ȱupȱuntilȱherȱdeath.ȱW.W.ȱBruereȱwas aȱministerȱofȱtheȱMethodistȬEpiscopalȱChurchȱinȱPuneȱ(OldhamȱChurch) fromȱ1894ȱon.ȱ 25

ȱSengupta,ȱPanditaȱRamabaiȱSaraswati,ȱp.ȱ288.ȱCf.ȱMacNicol,ȱPandita Ramabaiȱ(Englishȱversion),ȱpp.ȱ117Ȭ21,ȱ125:ȱ“SheȱpassedȱthroughȱanȱexperȬ ienceȱwhichȱintensifiedȱand,ȱperhapsȱweȱmustȱsay,ȱnarrowedȱherȱoutȬ look.” 26

72

JESUSȱASȱGURU

Butȱsheȱwasȱalsoȱbusyȱatȱtheȱsameȱtimeȱwithȱtranslatingȱclassic Hinduȱwritings,ȱlikeȱtheȱBhagavadȬGita,ȱfromȱSanskritȱintoȱMaȬ rathi.ȱ Afterȱ theȱ revivalȱ inȱ Mukti,ȱ however,ȱ everyȱ Hinduȱ text, evenȱSanskritȱasȱaȱlanguage,ȱbecameȱtaboo.ȱNorȱcouldȱRamabai beȱ satisfiedȱ anyȱ moreȱ withȱ theȱ existingȱ Marathiȱ translationȱ of theȱ Bible.ȱ Theȱ religiousȱ terminologyȱ wasȱ derivedȱ partlyȱ from Sanskritȱ andȱ sheȱ suspectedȱ thatȱ elementsȱ ofȱ Hinduismȱ came withȱthem.ȱMoreover,ȱsheȱsuspectedȱthatȱtheȱBritishȱBibleȱsociȬ etyȱhadȱcomeȱunderȱtheȱinfluenceȱofȱtheȱthenȱmodernȱBibleȱcritȬ icism.ȱSheȱwantedȱtoȱavoidȱbothȱpitfallsȱinȱaȱnewȱtranslation:ȱa traditionalȱversionȱofȱtheȱBibleȱinȱaȱMarathiȱthatȱwasȱuncontamȬ inatedȱbyȱHinduȱidiom.ȱRamabaiȱspentȱaȱgreatȱdealȱofȱherȱtime duringȱ severalȱ yearsȱ onȱ thisȱ enormousȱ enterprise.ȱ Sheȱ studied Greekȱ andȱ alsoȱ acquiredȱ someȱ knowledgeȱ ofȱ Hebrew;ȱ moreȬ over,ȱ sheȱ madeȱ useȱ ofȱ theȱ linguisticȱ skillsȱ ofȱ Indiansȱ ofȱ Jewish ancestry,ȱfromȱtheȱ“BeniȬIsraelȱcommunity.”ȱSheȱcompletedȱher translationȱofȱtheȱBibleȱshortlyȱbeforeȱherȱdeathȱinȱ1922. JesusȱinȱView TheȱdevelopmentȱinȱRamabai’sȱfaithȱemergesȱclearlyȱinȱherȱlife story:ȱ fromȱ traditionalȱ Hinduȱ viaȱ theȱ Brahmoȱ Samajȱ toȱ the broadȱ Anglicanȱ traditionȱ andȱ finallyȱ continuallyȱ moreȱ focused onȱ aȱ Charismatic/Evangelicalȱ experienceȱ ofȱ theȱ Christianȱ faith. Itȱ isȱ interestingȱ toȱ discoverȱ viaȱ herȱ writingsȱ howȱ anȱ imageȱ of Jesus—ȱwhichȱtookȱonȱcontinuallyȱclearerȱcontours—tookȱshape duringȱ thatȱ development.ȱ Itȱ isȱ notȱ easyȱ toȱ drawȱ conclusions fromȱ herȱ ownȱ autobiographicalȱ sketchȱ Aȱ Testimonyȱ ofȱ Our Inexhaustibleȱ Treasureȱ concerningȱ herȱ viewsȱ inȱ earlierȱ phasesȱ of herȱlife,ȱforȱthisȱbookȱwasȱwrittenȱafterȱtheȱrevivalȱinȱMuktiȱand thusȱ bearsȱ allȱ tracesȱ ofȱ that.ȱ Sheȱ viewsȱ herȱ wholeȱ lifeȱ fromȱ the perspectiveȱ sheȱ acquiredȱ thenȱ aboutȱ theȱ guidanceȱ ofȱ theȱ Lord whoȱ hadȱ broughtȱ herȱ outȱ ofȱ darkȱ heathendomȱ intoȱ theȱ light. Butȱthatȱwasȱnotȱhowȱsheȱhadȱexperiencedȱitȱinȱearlierȱphases. Nonetheless,ȱAȱTestimonyȱdoesȱrevealȱwhatȱfirstȱfascinated herȱ aboutȱ theȱ figureȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ Christ.ȱ Afterȱ visitingȱ aȱ homeȱ for “fallenȱ women”ȱ withȱ theȱ Wantageȱ Sisters,ȱ sheȱ wonderedȱ what inspiredȱChristiansȱtoȱtakeȱupȱthisȱwork.ȱOneȱofȱtheȱsistersȱthen readȱ toȱ herȱ theȱ storyȱ ofȱ Christ’sȱ encounterȱ withȱ theȱ Samaritan womanȱ (Johnȱ 4).ȱ Whatȱ struckȱ herȱ inȱ thatȱ storyȱ wasȱ thatȱ Christ didȱ notȱ rejectȱ theȱ sinnerȱ butȱ wantedȱ toȱ helpȱ her,ȱ andȱ sheȱ was

THEȱSAVIOURȱOFȱALL:ȱPANDITAȱRAMABAI

73

alsoȱ fascinatedȱ byȱ theȱ wordsȱ aboutȱ theȱ trueȱ worshipȱ “inȱ Spirit andȱ inȱ truth.”ȱ Thisȱ textȱ wasȱ alsoȱ ofȱ greatȱ significanceȱ toȱ RamȬ mohanȱRoy.27ȱRamabaiȱrereadȱtheȱchapterȱandȱlaterȱwrote:ȱ“IȱreȬ alized,ȱ afterȱ readingȱ theȱ 4thȱ Chapterȱ ofȱ St.ȱ John’sȱ Gospel,ȱ that Christȱ wasȱ trulyȱ theȱ Divineȱ Saviourȱ Heȱ claimedȱ toȱ be,ȱ andȱ no oneȱ butȱ Heȱ couldȱ transformȱ andȱ upliftȱ theȱ downtroddenȱ woȬ manhoodȱofȱIndia,ȱandȱofȱeveryȱland.”28ȱItȱisȱdoubtfulȱifȱRamaȬ baiȱ didȱ indeedȱ haveȱ suchȱ anȱ orthodoxȱ viewȱ ofȱ theȱ “Divineȱ SaȬ viour,”ȱ butȱ theȱ secondȱ partȱ ofȱ theȱ sentenceȱ isȱ certainlyȱ charȬ acteristic.ȱ Sheȱ recognizedȱ thatȱ Christ’sȱ workȱ didȱ awayȱ with humanȱ barriersȱ thatȱ excludedȱ orȱ discriminatedȱ againstȱ people. Sheȱ readȱ thatȱ andȱ moreȱ inȱ John’sȱ gospel:ȱ sheȱ sawȱ theȱ practical consequencesȱ ofȱ thatȱ inȱ theȱ socialȱ assistanceȱ providedȱ byȱ the Wantageȱ Sisters.ȱ Itȱ isȱ evidentȱ thatȱ herȱ greatȱ involvementȱ with oppressedȱwomenȱinȱIndiaȱmadeȱherȱextremelyȱsensitiveȱtoȱthe stimulusȱprovidedȱbyȱaȱreligionȱtoȱdoȱjusticeȱandȱtoȱofferȱhelp. Aȱ Hinduȱ authorȱ alsoȱ rightlyȱ concludesȱ thatȱ Ramabaiȱ was attractedȱbyȱtheȱservingȱaspectȱofȱChristianity.29 Inȱ herȱ view,ȱ Jesusȱ wasȱ theȱ oneȱ whoȱ brokeȱ throughȱ bounȬ dariesȱinȱunexpectedȱways.ȱForȱher,ȱitȱwasȱliterallyȱaȱrevelation thatȱ aȱ sonȱ ofȱ Godȱ couldȱ turnȱ toȱ theȱ leastȱ inȱ society,ȱ including thoseȱ whoȱ wereȱ despisedȱ byȱ othersȱ becauseȱ ofȱ theirȱ badȱ conȬ duct.ȱInȱaddition,ȱsheȱwasȱalsoȱstruckȱbyȱtheȱuniversalityȱofȱthe Gospel,ȱ whichȱ couldȱ notȱ beȱ claimedȱ byȱ aȱ specificȱ peopleȱ or class.ȱ Thatȱ contrastedȱ sharplyȱ withȱ classicalȱ Hinduȱ teaching, whichȱ placedȱ Indiaȱ apartȱ andȱ withinȱ Indiaȱ gaveȱ eachȱ casteȱ its ownȱ placeȱ inȱ aȱ hierarchicalȱ orderȱ ofȱ life.ȱ Shortlyȱ afterȱ her conversion,ȱtheȱpanditaȱwrote: Oneȱ canȱ feelȱ thatȱ theȱ teachingȱ ofȱ ourȱ Lordȱ Jesusȱ Christ comesȱ fromȱ theȱ AllȬFather,ȱ whoȱ lovesȱ notȱ oneȱ nation,ȱ not oneȱclass,ȱorȱoneȱcaste,ȱbutȱhearsȱinȱHisȱheartȱeveryȱcreature ofȱHisȱhand,ȱitȱwouldȱbeȱaȱblessedȱdayȱforȱIndia,ȱifȱherȱsons andȱdaughtersȱcouldȱseeȱthat.ȱHeȱisȱtheȱrevelationȱofȱtheȱFaȬ ther,ȱtheȱbrightȱimageȱofȱHisȱ goodness,ȱwhichȱisȱHisȱ glory, ȱSeeȱchapterȱ2.

27

ȱRamabai,ȱAȱTestimonyȱofȱOurȱInexhaustibleȱTreasure,ȱp.ȱ26;ȱRamabai, PanditaȱRamabaiȱthroughȱHerȱOwnȱWords,ȱp.ȱ308. 28

ȱChakravarti,ȱRewritingȱHistory,ȱp.ȱ316.

29

JESUSȱASȱGURU

74

thatȱHeȱisȱableȱthroughȱHisȱspiritȱtoȱliftȱmenȱupȱtoȱGod,ȱand enableȱthemȱsoȱtoȱsympathyȱwithȱsorrow,ȱnoȱtramplingȱupȬ onȱtheȱfeelingsȱofȱothers,ȱnoȱpersecutionȱofȱtheȱunfortunate, noȱ breakingȱ ofȱ heartsȱ byȱ unkindness,ȱ butȱ trueȱ sympathy andȱ love—readinessȱ toȱ suffer,ȱ ifȱ throughȱ sufferingȱ weȱ may helpȱ othersȱ more,ȱ aboveȱ allȱ thereȱ isȱ thatȱ utterȱ trustȱ inȱ the loveȱ ofȱ Godȱ forȱ ourselvesȱ andȱ others,ȱ whichȱ isȱ theȱ joyȱ of life.30

SheȱwroteȱthisȱinȱanȱIndianȱnewspaperȱandȱitȱisȱalsoȱclearȱhow muchȱsheȱexperiencedȱherȱdiscoveryȱofȱtheȱChrist’sȱdoctrineȱof universalȱ salvationȱ asȱ aȱ contrastȱ withȱ theȱ religionȱ ofȱ herȱ comȬ patriots. Nevertheless,ȱ sheȱ didȱ notȱ rejectȱ herȱ earlierȱ religionȱ comȬ pletelyȱduringȱtheseȱyears.ȱToȱtheȱcontrary,ȱsheȱwantedȱtoȱhold onȱ toȱ theȱ goodȱ thatȱ Hinduismȱ hadȱ produced.ȱ Andȱ sheȱ alsoȱ atȬ temptedȱ toȱ honourȱ Hinduism,ȱ overȱ againstȱ theȱ Englishȱ among whomȱsheȱregularlyȱmetȱwithȱignoranceȱandȱrejectionȱofȱherȱanȬ cestralȱ religion.ȱ Whileȱ defendingȱ theȱ Christianȱ faithȱ toȱ Indian readers,ȱ sheȱ attemptedȱ toȱ giveȱ Englishȱ readersȱ aȱ betterȱ underȬ standingȱofȱIndia’sȱ highȱcivilization.ȱ Characteristicȱ isȱanȱ article inȱ theȱ journalȱ ofȱ theȱ Collegeȱ inȱ Cheltenham,ȱ whereȱ sheȱ wasȱ a studentȱandȱaȱteacher.ȱLikeȱRammohanȱRoy,ȱsheȱobjectedȱtoȱthe designationȱ“heathen”ȱforȱaȱHindu.ȱAndȱsheȱportrayedȱHinduȬ ismȱasȱaȱbasisȱonȱwhichȱtheȱChristianȱstructureȱcouldȱbeȱbuilt— aȱcharacteristicȱexampleȱofȱHinduȱfaithȱasȱpraeparatioȱevangelica! Inȱherȱownȱwords: Christȱtellsȱheȱcameȱnotȱtoȱdestroyȱbutȱtoȱfulfil—andȱGod’s methodȱ ofȱ workȱ seemsȱ toȱ beȱ everȱ toȱ buildȱ onȱ theȱ old foundation,ȱ keepingȱ thatȱ whichȱ isȱ good,ȱ andȱ destroying onlyȱthatȱwhichȱisȱevil,ȱdecaying,ȱreadyȱtoȱperish.31

WhatȱJesusȱsaysȱhere,ȱwhichȱformsȱtheȱstartingȱpoint,ȱappliesȱof courseȱtoȱtheȱMosaicȱTorah,ȱofȱwhichȱnotȱoneȱjotȱorȱleastȱstroke ofȱtheȱpenȱwillȱdisappear.ȱButȱRamabai,ȱwithoutȱanyȱdifficulty, ȱPanditaȱRamabaiȱinȱTheȱTimesȱofȱIndiaȱ(September,ȱ1884),ȱcitedȱby Sengupta,ȱPanditaȱRamabaiȱSaraswati,ȱpp.ȱ147Ȭ48. 30

ȱPanditaȱRamabai,ȱinȱCheltenhamȱLadies’ȱCollegeȱMagazineȱ(Spring, 1886),ȱcitedȱinȱSengupta,ȱPanditaȱRamabaiȱSaraswati,ȱp.ȱ149.ȱTheȱBibleȱquoȬ tationȱisȱfromȱMatthewȱ5:17,ȱtheȱKingȱJamesȱVersion. 31

THEȱSAVIOURȱOFȱALL:ȱPANDITAȱRAMABAI

75

sawȱitȱasȱapplyingȱtoȱtheȱHinduȱdharmaȱasȱwell.ȱSheȱassertedȱofȬ tenȱ thatȱtheȱ oldȱHinduȱ writingsȱgaveȱ usȱ wonderfulȱ commands toȱ love,ȱ butȱ theȱ newȱ covenantȱ inȱ Christȱ gaveȱ usȱ theȱ grace throughȱwhichȱtheseȱprinciplesȱcouldȱbeȱputȱintoȱaction.32 Nonetheless,ȱweȱshouldȱrememberȱhowȱgreatȱaȱstepȱitȱwas forȱaȱbrahman,ȱaȱpanditaȱnoȱless,ȱtoȱconvertȱtoȱChristianity.ȱShe struggledȱforȱaȱlongȱtimeȱtoȱcomeȱtoȱaȱdecisionȱand,ȱinȱherȱsituȬ ation,ȱitȱledȱtoȱextremeȱtensions.ȱRamabaiȱstayedȱinȱEnglandȱtoȬ getherȱ withȱ herȱ daughterȱ andȱ aȱ friendȱ whoȱ wasȱ alsoȱ aȱ brahȬ manicȱwoman.ȱThisȱwomanȱhadȱsuchȱdifficultyȱwithȱRamabai’s movingȱtowardȱtheȱchurchȱthatȱsheȱonceȱattemptedȱtoȱstrangle herȱ atȱ nightȱ and,ȱ whenȱ thatȱ didȱ notȱ work,ȱ tookȱ herȱ ownȱ life. Theȱ suicideȱ ofȱ herȱ travellingȱ companionȱ affectedȱ Ramabaiȱ so deeplyȱ thatȱ sheȱ wentȱ throughȱ aȱ seriousȱ crisis,ȱ asȱ aȱ resultȱ of whichȱ herȱ hearingȱ wasȱ seriouslyȱ affected,ȱ thusȱ causingȱ herȱ to giveȱ upȱ herȱ initialȱ plansȱ toȱ studyȱ medicine.33ȱ Theȱ background forȱ thisȱ greatȱ tensionȱ layȱ inȱ theȱ expectedȱ rejectionȱ inȱ India, whereȱ conversionȱ wasȱ seenȱ asȱ betrayalȱ andȱ aȱ scandal.ȱ Butȱ the Britishȱsituationȱwasȱaȱfactorȱ asȱ well.ȱTheȱ church,ȱ certainlyȱthe Anglicanȱchurch,ȱwasȱsoȱinterwovenȱwithȱEnglishȱculture,ȱthat joiningȱ theȱ churchȱ wasȱ tantamountȱ inȱ manyȱ respectsȱ to breakingȱwithȱone’sȱownȱbackground.ȱIllustrativeȱhereȱisȱthatȱit wasȱ consideredȱ necessaryȱ toȱ giveȱ Ramabaiȱ aȱ newȱ Christian nameȱ whenȱ sheȱ wasȱ baptized.ȱ Butȱ thisȱ name,ȱ Mary,ȱ wasȱ so foreignȱ thatȱ sheȱ neverȱ usedȱ itȱ againȱ later.ȱ Itȱ wasȱ withȱ the greatestȱ difficultyȱ thatȱ sheȱ heldȱ onȱ toȱ thoseȱ elementsȱ ofȱ the brahmanicȱ wayȱ ofȱ lifeȱ thatȱ wereȱ importantȱ toȱ her.ȱ Thus,ȱ she continuedȱ toȱ wearȱ Indianȱ clothing,ȱ wasȱ aȱ strictȱ vegetarianȱ and refusedȱ allȱ alcoholicȱ beverages.ȱ Andȱ sheȱ hadȱ toȱ struggleȱ with theȱWantageȱSistersȱonȱallȱtheseȱpoints. Theȱ Christianȱ faithȱ didȱ haveȱ somethingȱ toȱ offer,ȱ however, thatȱsheȱdidȱnotȱfindȱinȱherȱownȱreligiousȱtradition:ȱtheȱGospel couldȱmobilizeȱpeopleȱinȱIndiaȱtoȱbringȱaboutȱchange.ȱInȱanȱinȬ ȱSee,ȱe.g.ȱDyer,ȱPanditaȱRamabai,ȱp.ȱ121.ȱCf.ȱRamabai,ȱTheȱHighȬCaste Woman,ȱp.ȱXXIII. 32

ȱUnderstandably,ȱthisȱstoryȱisȱleftȱoutȱofȱmostȱbooksȱonȱRamabai. TheȱfamousȱIndologist,ȱF.ȱMaxȱMüller,ȱwithȱwhomȱRamabaiȱstayedȱfor aȱlongȱtimeȱafterȱtheȱincident,ȱdidȱwriteȱaboutȱit.ȱSeeȱChakravarti,ȱReȬ writingȱHistory,ȱpp.ȱ317Ȭ18. 33

JESUSȱASȱGURU

76

terviewȱwithȱaȱnewspaperȱinȱChicago,ȱsheȱsaidȱaboutȱChristian missionaries: Iȱ hopeȱ someȱ dayȱ weȱ shallȱ oweȱ toȱ theirȱ laboursȱ andȱ their prayersȱ aȱ greatȱ armyȱ ofȱ Christianȱ apostlesȱ amongȱ ourȱ peoȬ pleȱwhoȱwillȱeventuallyȱregenerateȱtheȱwholeȱHinduȱnation throughȱtheirȱlivesȱandȱtheirȱteachings.34

Forȱher,ȱtherefore,ȱitȱwasȱaȱmatterȱofȱtheȱrenewingȱpowerȱofȱthe messageȱ ofȱ Christ,ȱ forȱ heȱ hadȱ turnedȱ toȱ theȱ sufferingȱ andȱ opȬ pressedȱwithȱhisȱproclamationȱofȱsalvationȱandȱheȱcancelledȱall divisionsȱ betweenȱ people,ȱ soȱ thatȱ oneȱ couldȱ notȱ evenȱ speakȱ of maleȱandȱfemaleȱanyȱmore.35 Ramabaiȱfollowedȱthisȱlineȱofȱthoughtȱfurther.ȱTheȱconvicȬ tionȱthatȱChristȱappealedȱtoȱall,ȱtoȱtheȱleastȱofȱallȱtheȱmost,ȱconȬ tinuedȱtoȱhaveȱgreatȱsignificanceȱforȱherȱforȱtheȱrestȱofȱherȱlife. Butȱ sheȱ beganȱ toȱ haveȱ differentȱ ideasȱ aboutȱ whatȱ Christȱ had broughtȱaboutȱamongȱpeople.ȱDuringȱtheȱyearsȱofȱtheȱrevivalȱin Muktiȱsalvationȱfromȱguiltȱandȱsinȱbecameȱcentral.ȱHereȱtheȱinȬ fluenceȱ ofȱ theȱ Methodistȱ missionariesȱ whoȱ occupiedȱ suchȱ a largeȱ positionȱ inȱ Muktiȱ isȱ undeniable.ȱ Weȱ noȱ longerȱ hearȱ anyȬ thingȱaboutȱtheȱrenewalȱofȱtheȱHinduȱnationȱandȱtheȱsocialȱrelȬ evanceȱ ofȱ theȱ Gospelȱ doesȱ notȱ seemȱ toȱ playȱ aȱ significantȱ role anyȱ more.ȱ Allȱ emphasisȱ isȱ nowȱ onȱ reconciliationȱ withȱ God throughȱtheȱdeathȱofȱChristȱonȱtheȱcross. RamabaiȱherselfȱexperiencedȱthisȱshiftȱasȱaȱsecondȱconverȬ sion.ȱHerȱbookȱAȱTestimonyȱindicatesȱveryȱclearlyȱhowȱsheȱconȬ sideredȱ thisȱnewȱ insightȱ intoȱtheȱ workȱofȱChristȱ asȱ theȱ essence ofȱthatȱwork,ȱwherebyȱherȱearlierȱidealsȱbecameȱworthless.ȱShe writes: Iȱ cameȱ toȱ knowȱ afterȱ eightȱ yearsȱ fromȱ theȱ timeȱ ofȱ myȱ bapȬ tismȱthatȱIȱhadȱfoundȱtheȱChristianȱreligion,ȱwhichȱwasȱgood enoughȱforȱme;ȱbutȱIȱhadȱnotȱfoundȱChrist,ȱWhoȱisȱtheȱLifeȱofȱthe

ȱCitedȱinȱDyer,ȱPanditaȱRamabai,ȱp.ȱ26ȱ(theȱinterviewȱwasȱconductȬ edȱinȱDecember,ȱ1887). 34

ȱGalatiansȱ3:28.ȱRamabaiȱcitesȱthisȱtextȱinȱAȱTestimonyȱofȱOurȱInexȬ haustibleȱ Treasure,ȱ p.ȱ 30;ȱ Ramabai,ȱ Panditaȱ Ramabaiȱ throughȱ Herȱ Own Words,ȱp.ȱ311. 35

THEȱSAVIOURȱOFȱALL:ȱPANDITAȱRAMABAI

77

religion,ȱ andȱ “theȱ Lightȱ ofȱ everyȱ manȱ thatȱ comethȱ intoȱ the world.”36

Itȱ isȱ typicalȱ thatȱ John’sȱ gospelȱ isȱ citedȱ inȱ thisȱ centralȱ text fromȱAȱTestimony,ȱforȱitȱisȱthisȱbookȱthatȱhadȱsuchȱspecialȱmeanȬ ingȱ forȱ Ramabai.ȱ Herȱ acquaintanceȱ withȱ Johnȱ 4,ȱ the conversationȱ withȱ theȱ Samaritanȱ woman,ȱ wasȱ importantȱ when sheȱ initiallyȱ becameȱ aȱ Christian.ȱ Sheȱ studiedȱ thisȱ bookȱ more thoroughlyȱ duringȱ herȱ stayȱ atȱ theȱ Ladiesȱ Collegeȱ inȱ CheltenȬ ham,ȱ whereȱ sheȱ attendedȱ faithfullyȱ theȱ Bibleȱ classesȱ givenȱ by theȱ rectressȱ everyȱ Saturday;ȱ theyȱ spentȱ anȱ entireȱ yearȱ onȱ John 1:1Ȭ8.ȱThisȱgospel,ȱinȱwhichȱtheȱdivinityȱofȱChristȱisȱsoȱstrongly accentuatedȱ couldȱ onlyȱ becomeȱ moreȱ significantȱ inȱ herȱ faith. Butȱitȱwasȱnotȱherȱonlyȱsource. Itȱisȱinterestingȱtoȱ seeȱ whichȱ Bibleȱ booksȱRamabaiȱ usedȱ in writingȱ Aȱ Testimony.ȱ Thisȱ smallȱ bookȱ isȱ pepperedȱ withȱ Bible texts,ȱespeciallyȱtheȱpartȱthatȱdescribesȱherȱsoȬcalledȱbeingȱborn againȱandȱsubsequentȱevents.ȱTheȱheartȱisȱtheȱlettersȱofȱPaulȱ(21 quotations)ȱ andȱ theȱ Johannineȱ writingsȱ (12ȱ quotations).ȱ The numberȱ ofȱ quotesȱ fromȱ theȱ synopticȱ gospelsȱ andȱ theȱ bookȱ of Actsȱ isȱ ratherȱ smallȱ (5ȱ andȱ 2,ȱ respectively),ȱ andȱ theȱ Torahȱ and theȱ prophetsȱ areȱ notȱ stronglyȱ representedȱ eitherȱ (1ȱ andȱ 6 quotations,ȱ respectively).ȱ Asȱ farȱ asȱ theȱ Oldȱ Testamentȱ isȱ conȬ cerned,ȱonlyȱtheȱPsalmsȱareȱquotedȱextensively:ȱ11ȱquotations.ȱIt isȱ clearȱ inȱ theȱ bookȱ thatȱ Ramabaiȱ basesȱ herȱ Christology primarilyȱ onȱ Paulȱandȱ John.ȱThereȱsheȱ readsȱ whatȱ hasȱbecome ofȱ fundamentalȱ significanceȱ forȱ her:ȱ theȱ Sonȱ ofȱ Godȱ cameȱ into theȱworldȱtoȱreconcileȱsinnersȱwithȱGodȱthroughȱhisȱdeath. IfȱtheȱfaithȱofȱJesusȱChristȱwasȱcentralȱforȱRammohanȱRoy, hisȱ sayingsȱ concerningȱ moralityȱ asȱ givenȱ inȱ theȱ synoptics,ȱ for Ramabaiȱ itȱ isȱ faithȱ inȱ Jesusȱ asȱ theȱ atoningȱ sacrificeȱ thatȱ is central.ȱAndȱthatȱresultsȱinȱanȱentirelyȱdifferentȱuseȱofȱtheȱBible. Forȱ Rammohan,ȱ theȱ heartȱ ofȱ theȱ Gospelȱ wasȱ foundȱ inȱ theȱ first threeȱgospelsȱandȱtheȱfourthȱaddedȱaȱlittleȱsomethingȱextra.ȱFor Ramabai,ȱtheȱfourthȱgospelȱandȱtheȱlettersȱareȱtheȱcentreȱofȱthe Christianȱ proclamationȱ andȱ theȱ synopticȱ gospelsȱ playȱ aȱ subȬ ordinateȱ role.ȱ Thatȱ isȱ alsoȱ emphasizedȱ byȱ theȱ remarkableȱ fact thatȱtheȱfewȱtimesȱthatȱRamabaiȱusesȱtheȱfirstȱthreeȱgospels,ȱitȱis 36 ȱ Ramabai,ȱ Aȱ Testimonyȱ ofȱ Ourȱ Inexhaustibleȱ Treasure,ȱ pp.ȱ 27Ȭ28; Ramabai,ȱPanditaȱRamabaiȱthroughȱHerȱOwnȱWords,ȱp.ȱ309ȱ(italicsȱhers).

JESUSȱASȱGURU

78

chieflyȱ forȱ oneȱ theme.ȱ Sheȱ writesȱ thatȱ sheȱ learnedȱ ofȱ theȱ docȬ trineȱ ofȱ theȱ secondȱ comingȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ onlyȱ sinceȱ herȱ secondȱ conȬ version.ȱAndȱitȱisȱinȱthatȱconnectionȱthatȱsheȱquotesȱwhatȱJesus saysȱ inȱ Matthew,ȱ Markȱ andȱ Luke,ȱ inȱ theȱ discourseȱ onȱ theȱ last things,ȱmostȱofȱwhichȱRammohanȱhadȱspecificallyȱomitted. TheȱimageȱofȱChristȱinȱRamabaiȱthusȱbearsȱtheȱfeaturesȱthat wereȱ centralȱ forȱ Methodistsȱ andȱ Pentecostals.ȱ Thatȱ isȱ apparent notȱ onlyȱ fromȱ Aȱ Testimonyȱ butȱ alsoȱ fromȱ anotherȱ work.ȱ The Marathiȱ languageȱ hymnalȱ includesȱ threeȱ songsȱ byȱ Ramabai, twoȱ ofȱ whichȱ areȱ translationsȱ ofȱ evangelicalȱ Englishȱ hymns, whichȱ isȱ alreadyȱ clearȱ fromȱ theȱ titles:ȱ “I’veȱ Foundȱ aȱ Friendȱ in Jesus”ȱandȱ“HaveȱYouȱBeenȱtoȱJesusȱforȱtheȱCleansingȱBlood?” Theȱthirdȱisȱherȱcompositionȱandȱalsoȱisȱentirelyȱaboutȱtheȱlove ofȱChristȱandȱtheȱinvitationȱthatȱgoesȱoutȱfromȱhisȱcross.37 RamabaiȱandȱIndianȱChristianity Whatȱ isȱ actuallyȱ Indianȱ aboutȱ Ramabai’sȱ theology?ȱ According toȱM.M.ȱThomas,ȱherȱsignificanceȱforȱIndianȱtheologyȱliesȱinȱthe factȱthatȱshe,ȱonȱtheȱbasisȱofȱherȱHinduȱupbringingȱandȱinȱspirȬ itualȱ independence,ȱ turnedȱ againstȱ theȱ dogmaticȱ Christianity thatȱhadȱbeenȱimportedȱintoȱIndiaȱfromȱtheȱWestȱwithoutȱanyȬ oneȱreflectingȱonȱitsȱrelevance.38ȱButȱoneȱcanȱmakeȱaȱnumberȱof objectionsȱ toȱ thisȱ thesis.ȱ Itȱ isȱ certainlyȱ trueȱ thatȱ Ramabaiȱ disȬ tancedȱherselfȱincreasinglyȱasȱherȱfaithȱdevelopedȱfromȱtheȱrigid AnglicanȱchurchȱcultureȱinȱwhichȱsheȱhadȱoriginallyȱbecomeȱacȬ quaintedȱwithȱ theȱChristianȱ faith.ȱ Andȱtheȱ finerȱ pointsȱ ofȱdogȬ maticȱdifferencesȱandȱcontroversiesȱamongȱEuropeanȱdenominȬ ationsȱ neverȱ attractedȱ herȱ attentionȱ atȱ all.ȱ Nevertheless,ȱ the theologyȱthatȱsheȱultimatelyȱmadeȱherȱownȱwasȱjustȱasȱWestern inȱtone.ȱItȱwasȱnotȱtheȱAnglicanȱimportȱbutȱratherȱtheȱMethodist one.ȱTheȱinfluenceȱofȱtheȱMethodistȱmissionariesȱlikeȱtheȱAmerȬ icansȱMinnieȱF.ȱAbramsȱandȱW.W.ȱBruereȱcanȱhardlyȱbeȱoveresȬ timated.

ȱMacNicol,ȱPanditaȱRamabaiȱ(Englishȱversion),ȱp.ȱ91.

37

ȱM.M.ȱThomasȱin:ȱFelixȱWilfredȱandȱM.M.ȱThomas,ȱTheologiegeȬ schichteȱderȱDrittenȱWelt,ȱIndienȱ(Munich:ȱChr.ȱKaiserȱVerlag,ȱ1992),ȱpp.ȱ70Ȭ 71. 38

THEȱSAVIOURȱOFȱALL:ȱPANDITAȱRAMABAI

79

Manyȱ lamentȱ theȱ factȱ thatȱ Ramabai’sȱ laterȱ development madeȱallȱdialogueȱwithȱHinduismȱimpossible.39ȱShe,ȱwhoȱhadȱso vehementlyȱopposedȱcallingȱHindusȱ“heathens,”ȱlaterȱusedȱthe sameȱtermȱwithoutȱanyȱscruplesȱtoȱdescribeȱherȱHinduȱcompaȬ triots.ȱ Herȱ ownȱ Sanskritȱ eruditionȱ couldȱ noȱ longerȱ haveȱ any meaningȱforȱherȱandȱherȱinitialȱtolerationȱofȱHinduȱritualȱinȱher institutionsȱturnedȱintoȱaȱcompleteȱrejection. Certainlyȱ theȱ influenceȱ ofȱ foreignȱ missionariesȱ playedȱ a roleȱ inȱ thisȱ development.ȱ Butȱ thereȱ isȱ anotherȱ factorȱ asȱ well, whichȱ mustȱ beȱ takenȱ intoȱ consideration.ȱ Preciselyȱ throughȱ her turbulentȱlifeȱhistoryȱandȱherȱrareȱworkȱforȱoppressedȱandȱsufȬ feringȱwomenȱRamabaiȱwasȱconfrontedȱwithȱtheȱworstȱsidesȱof herȱ nativeȱ religion.ȱ Andȱ inȱ herȱ ownȱ searchȱ forȱ salvationȱ she continuallyȱ encounteredȱ expulsionȱ byȱ theȱ brahmanicȱ patriȬ archalȱ authorityȱ whoȱ controlledȱ theȱ traditionȱ andȱ usedȱ itȱ for theirȱ ownȱ benefit.ȱ Thatȱ isȱ howȱ Ramabaiȱ experiencedȱ itȱ inȱ any case.ȱSheȱwritesȱaboutȱbecomingȱacquaintedȱwithȱtheȱChristian faith:ȱ “Whatȱ goodȱ newsȱ forȱ meȱ aȱ woman,ȱ aȱ womanȱ bornȱ in India,ȱamongȱBrahmansȱwhoȱholdȱoutȱnoȱhopeȱforȱmeȱandȱthe likeȱofȱme.”ȱAnd:ȱ“Iȱhadȱnotȱtoȱwaitȱtillȱafterȱundergoingȱbirths andȱ deathsȱ forȱ countlessȱ millionsȱ ofȱ times,ȱ whenȱ Iȱ should becomeȱaȱBrahmanȱman,ȱinȱorderȱtoȱgetȱtoȱknowȱtheȱBrahma.”40 Againstȱ thatȱ backgroundȱ itȱ isȱ obviousȱ thatȱ theȱ discoveryȱ ofȱ a messageȱ ofȱ salvationȱ ledȱ toȱ anȱ ecstaticȱ experienceȱ ofȱ theȱ faith. Theȱ beliefȱ thatȱ aȱ humanȱ beingȱ inȱ Christȱ mayȱ standȱ beforeȱ the faceȱ ofȱ Godȱ isȱ moreȱ spectacularȱ forȱ Indianȱ oppressedȱ women andȱlowerȱcasteȱpeopleȱthanȱcanȱbeȱimaginedȱinȱtheȱWest.ȱThat isȱ oneȱ ofȱ theȱ reasonsȱ whyȱ inȱ Indiaȱ theȱ ecstaticȱ experienceȱ of faithȱinȱevangelicalȱgroupsȱseemsȱtoȱhaveȱmoreȱappealȱinȱIndia thanȱtheȱestablishedȱchurchesȱevenȱtoday.41ȱInȱtheȱend,ȱRamabai wasȱfullyȱIndian,ȱevenȱwhenȱsheȱsubscribedȱtoȱaȱveryȱAmerican theology. InȱoneȱrespectȱRamabaiȱwouldȱneverȱmakeȱanyȱconcession toȱcriticalȱWesterners,ȱAnglicanȱorȱMethodist.ȱInȱherȱwayȱofȱlife ȱBothȱMacNicolȱandȱSenguptaȱexpressȱthisȱrepeatedly.

39

ȱ Ramabai,ȱ Aȱ Testimonyȱ ofȱ Ourȱ Inexhaustibleȱ Treasure,ȱ pp.ȱ 32,ȱ 33; Ramabai,ȱPanditaȱRamabaiȱthroughȱHerȱOwnȱWords,ȱpp.ȱ312,ȱ313. 40

41 ȱCharlieȱPyeȬSmith,ȱRebelsȱandȱOutcasts:ȱAȱJourneyȱthroughȱChristian Indiaȱ(Harmondsworth:ȱViking,ȱ1997),ȱesp.ȱchapterȱ3.

80

JESUSȱASȱGURU

andȱ inȱ theȱ ritualȱ ofȱ herȱ institutionsȱ sheȱ wantedȱ toȱ remain Indian.ȱOverȱagainstȱtheȱWantageȱSisters,ȱsheȱcontinuedȱtoȱvalȬ ueȱwhatȱwasȱhonourableȱinȱIndia.ȱThus,ȱthereȱwasȱnoȱquestion thatȱsheȱwouldȱadaptȱherȱclothingȱorȱeatingȱhabitsȱtoȱEuropean culture.ȱ Thatȱ alsoȱ obtainedȱ forȱ theȱ religiousȱ aspectsȱ ofȱ herȱ life. Sheȱ resistedȱ theȱ Anglicansȱ whoȱ hadȱ thoughtȱ ofȱ aȱ logoȱ forȱ her organizationȱ consistingȱ ofȱ aȱ crossȱ withȱ aȱ Latinȱ text,ȱ andȱ she choseȱIndianȱformsȱforȱtheȱchurchȱservicesȱinȱMukti.ȱThoseȱwho attendedȱ churchȱ didȱ notȱ sitȱ onȱ pewsȱ but,ȱ inȱ lineȱ withȱ Indian custom,ȱ onȱ theȱ floorȱ withȱ theirȱ legsȱ crossed.ȱ Communionȱ was celebratedȱ withȱ everydayȱ Indianȱ pancakesȱ (chapatis)ȱ andȱ grape juiceȱinsteadȱofȱbreadȱ(whetherȱorȱnotȱasȱaȱwafer)ȱandȱtheȱwine thatȱ wasȱ usualȱ forȱ allȱ churchesȱ inȱ theȱ country.ȱ Thereȱ wereȱ no Englishȱ hymnsȱ butȱ Indianȱ songsȱ (bhajans)ȱ accompaniedȱ byȱ InȬ dianȱinstruments.ȱNoneȱofȱthisȱisȱveryȱrevolutionaryȱbyȱtoday’s standards,ȱ butȱ itȱ certainlyȱ wasȱ atȱ theȱ time.ȱ Allȱ theseȱ Indian elementsȱwereȱheavilyȱopposedȱbyȱtheȱMethodistȱmissionaries, forȱexample.ȱButȱsheȱdidȱnotȱagreeȱwithȱthem. Ramabai’sȱ greatestȱ significanceȱ forȱ theȱ Indianȱ churchȱ and theologyȱ isȱ undoubtedlyȱ thatȱ sheȱ translatedȱ Christ’sȱ message intoȱ concreteȱ assistanceȱ toȱ girlsȱ andȱ womenȱ inȱ dehumanizing situations.ȱMoreȱclearlyȱthanȱanyoneȱelse,ȱinȱnineteenthȬcentury IndiaȱsheȱshowedȱJesusȱtoȱbeȱtheȱliberatorȱofȱtheȱoppressed.ȱHe inspiredȱ herȱ toȱ workȱ onȱ behalfȱ ofȱ theȱ mostȱ despisedȱ peopleȱ in society.ȱ Christȱ thusȱ emergedȱ inȱ theȱ firstȱ placeȱ asȱ theȱ saviour —theȱ saviourȱ ofȱ all.ȱ Ramabaiȱ thereforeȱ soughtȱ newȱ formsȱ for theȱworshipȱserviceȱinȱwhichȱherȱcompatriotsȱcouldȱappropriate thisȱ saviour.ȱ Sheȱ showedȱ Jesusȱ toȱ beȱ theȱ oneȱ forȱ whomȱ there wereȱnoȱboundaries,ȱincludingȱculturalȱones.ȱ

CHAPTERȱ5

TheȱYogaȱMaster TheȱRamakrishnaȱMissionȱ WhenȱPanditaȱRamabaiȱvisitedȱtheȱUnitedȱStatesȱinȱ1898ȱforȱthe secondȱ time,ȱ sheȱ discoveredȱ toȱ herȱ dismayȱ thatȱ Hinduismȱ had alsoȱgainedȱadherentsȱthere.ȱSheȱmet,ȱinȱherȱownȱwords,ȱ“WestȬ ernȱadmirersȱofȱthatȱSwamiȬismȱwhichȱpassesȱforȱHinduismȱin Westernȱ lands.”1ȱ Thingsȱ hadȱ changedȱ sinceȱ herȱ earlierȱ tripȱ of tenȱyearsȱpreviously.ȱInȱ1893ȱaȱmajorȱconferenceȱhadȱbeenȱheld withȱ representativesȱ fromȱ allȱ kindsȱ ofȱ religiousȱ traditions,ȱ the Parliamentȱ ofȱ theȱ World’sȱ Religions.ȱ Twoȱ Hindusȱ fromȱ India hadȱalsoȱspokenȱthere,ȱaȱmemberȱofȱtheȱreformȱmovementȱBrahȬ moȱSamajȱandȱaȱmonkȱasȱaȱrepresentativeȱofȱtraditionalȱHinduȬ ism.ȱ Theȱ latterȱ inȱ particularȱ hadȱ madeȱ anȱ overwhelmingȱ imȬ pressionȱonȱmanyȱAmericans.ȱHisȱnameȱwasȱVivekananda. Swamiȱ Vivekanandaȱ (1863Ȭ1902)ȱ wasȱ aȱ dynamic,ȱ eloquent manȱwithȱgreatȱcharisma.ȱIfȱthereȱwasȱanyoneȱwhoȱcouldȱbeȱenȬ trustedȱ withȱ presentingȱ anȱ entirelyȱ unknownȱ religionȱ toȱ the Westernȱworld,ȱitȱwasȱhe.ȱHisȱperformanceȱinȱChicagoȱmadeȱa deepȱ impressionȱ onȱ manyȱ Americans.ȱ Atȱ thatȱ timeȱ Hinduism wasȱ generallyȱ consideredȱ toȱ beȱ aȱ backwardȱ religionȱ thatȱ could notȱholdȱitsȱownȱagainstȱChristianity.ȱManyȱchurchȱleadersȱalso expectedȱChristianityȱtoȱtriumphȱasȱaȱmatterȱofȱcourseȱoverȱall otherȱ religions.ȱ Butȱ thisȱ Hinduismȱ nowȱ hadȱ aȱ representative whoȱ wonȱ theȱ publicȱ overȱ largelyȱ throughȱ hisȱ actionsȱ andȱ his words.ȱ Theȱ youngȱ man—heȱ hadȱ justȱ turnedȱ thirty—cutȱ anȱ exȬ oticȱ figureȱ inȱ hisȱ longȱ cloakȱ andȱ turban.ȱ Butȱ heȱ convincedȱ his listenersȱprimarilyȱbyȱhisȱselfȬassuredȱpresentationȱofȱHinduism asȱtheȱmotherȱofȱallȱreligions.ȱAfterȱtheȱconferenceȱSwamiȱViveȬ kanandaȱreceivedȱvariousȱinvitationsȱtoȱspeak.ȱThroughȱhisȱlecȬ tureȱ tourȱ Hinduismȱ becameȱ aȱ permanentȱ fixtureȱ onȱ theȱ reliȬ giousȱlandscapeȱofȱtheȱUnitedȱStates.

ȱCitedȱinȱHelenȱS.ȱDyer,ȱPanditaȱRamabai:ȱTheȱStoryȱofȱHerȱLifeȱ(LonȬ don:ȱMorganȱandȱScott,ȱs.a.ȱ[1900]),ȱp.ȱ79. 1

81

82

JESUSȱASȱGURU

Itȱ isȱ notȱ surprisingȱ thatȱ Panditaȱ Ramabaiȱ consideredȱ the swami’sȱmessageȱtoȱ beȱ hisȱ ownȱcreation,ȱ oneȱthatȱdidȱnotȱ give Westernersȱ aȱ veryȱ genuineȱ pictureȱ ofȱ Hinduism.ȱ And,ȱ forȱ that matter,ȱ sheȱ alsoȱ consideredȱ itȱ abhorrentȱ thatȱ Christiansȱ should convertȱ toȱ theȱ religionȱ thatȱ sheȱ herselfȱ hadȱ justȱ renounced. Vivekanandaȱ wasȱ notȱ outȱ toȱ convertȱ people,ȱ however.ȱ Heȱ was convincedȱthatȱallȱreligionsȱhadȱultimatelyȱtheȱsameȱfoundation andȱ thusȱ displayedȱ fundamentalȱ agreements.ȱ Thatȱ viewȱ was notȱcommonȱtoȱHinduismȱbutȱitȱwasȱaȱviewȱthatȱtheȱswamiȱhad learnedȱ inȱ aȱ genuineȱ Hinduȱ tradition.ȱ Itȱ wasȱ notȱ theȱ classic knowledgeȱ ofȱ theȱ Sanskritȱ scriptures,ȱ whichȱ constitutedȱ the guidelineȱ forȱ Ramabaiȱ forȱ decades.ȱ Vivekanandaȱ wasȱ formed byȱtheȱmysticalȱexperienceȱofȱhisȱteacherȱandȱitȱwasȱonȱtheȱbasis ofȱ thatȱ experientialȱ backgroundȱ thatȱ heȱ wantedȱ toȱ confront WesternersȱwithȱanotherȱreligionȱthatȱcouldȱinspireȱthemȱwithȬ outȱrequiringȱthemȱtoȱconvert.ȱAndȱonȱtheȱbasisȱofȱthatȱexperiȬ ence,ȱ heȱ alsoȱ hadȱ developedȱ certainȱ ideasȱ aboutȱ theȱ Christian faithȱandȱinȱparticularȱaboutȱJesusȱChrist. Ramakrishna:ȱBecomingȱJustȱLikeȱJesus Swamiȱ Vivekananda’sȱ teacherȱ wasȱ aȱ simple,ȱ illiterateȱ priest whoȱhadȱbeenȱassociatedȱforȱdecadesȱwithȱaȱtempleȱonȱtheȱoutȬ skirtsȱ ofȱ Kolkatta.ȱ Hisȱ followers,ȱ whoȱ respectedȱ himȱ greatly, calledȱ himȱ Shriȱ Ramakrishnaȱ Paramahamsa.ȱ Thisȱ guru’sȱ secret didȱ notȱ lieȱ inȱ hisȱ knowledgeȱ ofȱ religionȱ butȱ inȱ hisȱ veryȱ special religiousȱ experience.ȱ Ramakrishna,ȱ originallyȱ calledȱ Gadadhar Chatterjee,ȱwasȱbornȱinȱ1836ȱinȱaȱsmallȱvillageȱinȱBengal.ȱHeȱbeȬ longedȱ toȱ theȱ brahmanicȱ caste,ȱ butȱ studyȱ ofȱ Sanskritȱ andȱ the priestlyȱ traditionȱ wasȱ lostȱ onȱ him:ȱ heȱ couldȱ barelyȱ readȱ and writeȱ andȱ wasȱ notȱ interestedȱ inȱ studyingȱ Hinduȱ teachingsȱ or philosophy.ȱButȱasȱaȱbrahman,ȱheȱdidȱhaveȱtheȱrightȱtoȱperform theȱrituals.ȱInȱthatȱway,ȱviaȱaȱmemberȱofȱhisȱfamily,ȱheȱservedȱa newȱtempleȱinȱDakshineshvarȱcloseȱtoȱKolkatta. Theȱtempleȱwasȱdedicatedȱinȱtheȱfirstȱplaceȱtoȱtheȱgoddess Kali,ȱtoȱwhomȱRamakrishnaȱwasȱespeciallyȱdevoted.ȱTheȱcultus ofȱKaliȱinȱBengalȱwasȱoftenȱassociatedȱwithȱtantrism,ȱanȱesoteric traditionȱ thatȱ emphasizedȱ thatȱ allȱ thatȱ existsȱ isȱ permeatedȱ by theȱdivineȱpower.ȱThisȱpower,ȱshakti,ȱcanȱalsoȱbeȱpersonifiedȱin Kali.ȱShe,ȱthen,ȱisȱregardedȱasȱtheȱoneȱwhoȱpermeatesȱtheȱwhole universe,ȱ includingȱ everythingȱ withinȱ it.ȱ Forȱ theȱ initiated,ȱ obȬ

THEȱYOGAȱMASTER:ȱTHEȱRAMAKRISHNAȱMISSION

83

jectsȱandȱactionsȱthatȱorthodoxȱbrahmanismȱconsidersȱtoȱbeȱimȬ pureȱ can,ȱ inȱ tantra,ȱ representȱ theȱ presenceȱ ofȱ theȱ goddess. Ramakrishnaȱ trainedȱ himselfȱ inȱ theseȱ secretȱ ritualsȱ forȱ aȱ long timeȱunderȱtheȱguidanceȱofȱaȱfemaleȱtantricȱmaster.ȱForȱhimself, itȱwasȱconvincingȱproofȱthatȱthisȱreligiousȱpathȱwasȱrightȱwhen heȱ experiencedȱ theȱ greatestȱ mysticalȱ submergenceȱ ofȱ all,ȱ saȬ madhi.ȱ Heȱ hadȱexperiencedȱ thisȱ alreadyȱ atȱ aȱyoungȱ age.ȱHeȱreȬ latedȱlater: WhenȱIȱwasȱtenȱorȱelevenȱyearsȱoldȱ....ȱIȱfirstȱexperiencedȱsaȬ madhi.ȱAsȱIȱwasȱpassingȱthroughȱaȱpaddyȬfield,ȱIȱsawȱsomeȬ thingȱ andȱ wasȱ overwhelmed.ȱ Thereȱ areȱ certainȱ characterisȬ ticsȱofȱGodȬvision.ȱOneȱseesȱlight,ȱfeelsȱjoy,ȱandȱexperiences theȱupsurgeȱofȱaȱgreatȱcurrentȱinȱone’sȱchest,ȱlikeȱtheȱburnȬ ingȱofȱaȱrocket.2

Ramakrishnaȱhadȱtheȱsameȱtranceȱexperienceȱregularlyȱlaterȱin theȱ cultusȱ ofȱ Kaliȱ andȱ inȱ tantricȱ practice.ȱ Toȱ eyewitnesses,ȱ it seemedȱthatȱheȱwasȱnotȱatȱallȱaȱpartȱofȱtheȱworld:ȱhisȱbodyȱbeȬ cameȱ rigidȱ andȱ contactȱ withȱ hisȱ surroundingsȱ stoppedȱ andȱ he mergedȱ entirelyȱ withȱ hisȱ internalȱ life.ȱ Sometimesȱ hisȱ followers hadȱtoȱinterveneȱafterȱhoursȱsoȱthatȱheȱcouldȱreturnȱtoȱordinary life.ȱOneȱtime,ȱtheȱsamadhiȱwasȱsoȱdeepȱandȱintenseȱthatȱitȱwas sixȱmonthsȱbeforeȱheȱcouldȱfunctionȱnormallyȱagain. Butȱ tantraȱ wasȱ notȱ theȱ onlyȱ avenue toȱ suchȱ aȱ mysticalȱ experience.ȱ Theȱ temȬ pleȱ inȱ Dakshineshvarȱ alsoȱ hadȱ aȱ shrine forȱKrishnaȱandȱhisȱconsortȱRadha.ȱForȱa timeȱ Ramakrishnaȱ wasȱ orientedȱ primarȬ ilyȱtoȱdevotionȱtoȱKrishna.ȱTheȱpriestȱnot onlyȱ worshippedȱ theȱ imagesȱ ofȱ Krishna andȱ Radhaȱ butȱ alsoȱ identifiedȱ withȱ the differentȱ personagesȱ whoȱ hadȱ once playedȱ aȱ roleȱ inȱ Krishna’sȱ life.ȱ Inȱ that wayȱ heȱ experiencedȱ theȱ devotionȱ toȱ the divinityȱinȱtheȱdifferentȱattitudesȱdescribedȱbyȱtheȱVaishnavas:ȱin loveȱ likeȱ aȱ parent’sȱ forȱ aȱ child,ȱ inȱ serviceȱ likeȱ aȱ slave’sȱ toȱ his ȱ Mahendranathȱ Gupta,ȱ Theȱ Gospelȱ ofȱ Sriȱ Ramakrishnan,ȱ transl. SwamiȱNikhilananda,ȱ8thȱed.ȱ(Mylapore:ȱSriȱRamakrishnaȱMath,ȱ1985),ȱI, p.ȱ161. 2

JESUSȱASȱGURU

84

master,ȱ inȱ surrenderȱ likeȱ aȱ womanȱ toȱ herȱ lover,ȱ etc.3ȱ RamaȬ krishnaȱwentȱquiteȱfarȱinȱhisȱidentificationȱwithȱtheseȱroles:ȱifȱit wasȱ aȱ femaleȱ role,ȱ heȱ dressedȱ andȱ actedȱ likeȱ aȱ woman.ȱ And whenȱidentifyingȱwithȱtheȱdivineȱservantȱHanuman,ȱtheȱgeneral ofȱ theȱ monkeyȱ armyȱ inȱ mythology,ȱ heȱ tiedȱ aȱ clothȱ aroundȱ his waistȱlikeȱaȱtailȱandȱjumpedȱaroundȱlikeȱaȱmonkey.ȱInȱallȱthese rolesȱheȱattainedȱmysticalȱecstasyȱthatȱprovedȱtoȱhimȱtheȱvalue ofȱ theseȱ spiritualȱ exercises.ȱ Thatȱ obtainedȱ alsoȱ forȱ theȱ abstract Vedantaȱ teaching,ȱ whichȱ heȱ studiedȱ forȱ aȱ longȱ timeȱ underȱ the guidanceȱ ofȱ anȱ itinerantȱ teacher.ȱ Onȱ thisȱ pathȱ asȱ well,ȱ which presupposesȱknowledgeȱofȱtheȱunityȱofȱtheȱsoulȱandȱtheȱdivine All,ȱheȱhadȱtheȱmysticalȱexperienceȱofȱsamadhi.ȱHeȱbecameȱconȬ vincedȱ thatȱ theȱ Brahman,ȱ theȱ divineȱ principleȱ ofȱ theȱ Vedanta teaching,ȱwasȱnothingȱelseȱthanȱtheȱdivineȱMotherȱKali.ȱNeverȬ theless,ȱ Ramakrishnaȱ neverȱ becameȱ aȱ trueȱ vedantin—hisȱ need forȱ devotionȱ andȱ thusȱ forȱ aȱ distinctionȱ betweenȱ theȱ soulȱ and Godȱwasȱtooȱgreatȱforȱthat.ȱHeȱcouldȱtakeȱpartȱinȱtheȱmergingȱof theȱ selfȱ intoȱ theȱ oneȱ Reality,ȱ asȱ theȱ monisticȱ vedantinsȱ experiȬ encedȱ it,ȱ onlyȱ briefly.ȱ Inȱ theȱ end,ȱ heȱ remainedȱ theȱ childȱ ofȱ the divineȱMotherȱKali.ȱHeȱthusȱrepeatedlyȱprayed:ȱ“OȱMother,ȱdo notȱgiveȱmeȱBrahmajnanaȱ[knowledgeȱofȱBrahman].”4 AfterȱhisȱexplorationȱofȱtheȱdifferentȱHinduȱwaysȱofȱsalvaȬ tion,ȱRamakrishnaȱhadȱnoȱdoubtȱthatȱeveryȱformȱofȱreligionȱultiȬ matelyȱleadsȱtoȱtheȱsameȱgoal.ȱHeȱsays: Doȱyouȱknowȱwhatȱtheȱtruthȱis?ȱGodȱhasȱmadeȱdifferentȱreȬ ligionsȱ toȱ suitȱ differentȱ aspirants,ȱ times,ȱ andȱ countries.ȱ All doctrinesȱareȱonlyȱsoȱmanyȱpaths;ȱbutȱaȱpathȱisȱbyȱnoȱmeans GodȱHimself.ȱIndeed,ȱoneȱcanȱreachȱGodȱifȱoneȱfollowsȱany ofȱtheȱpathsȱwithȱwholeȬheartedȱdevotion.5

ȱForȱtheseȱdifferentȱattitudesȱ(bhava)ȱinȱtheȱbhaktiȱseeȱJ.P.ȱSchouten, Goddelijkeȱvergezichten:ȱMystiekȱuitȱIndiaȱvoorȱwesterseȱlezersȱ(Baarn:ȱTen Have,ȱ1996),ȱesp.ȱ185Ȭ98. 3

ȱGupta,ȱTheȱGospelȱofȱSriȱRamakrishna,ȱI,ȱp.ȱ481:ȱBrahmajnanaȱmeans “knowledgeȱofȱBrahman.”ȱSeeȱalsoȱGupta,ȱTheȱGospelȱofȱSriȱRamakrishna, I,ȱp.ȱ172:ȱ“Iȱneverȱfeelȱlikeȱsaying,ȱ‘IȱamȱBrahman.’ȱIȱsay,ȱ‘Thouȱartȱmy LordȱandȱIȱamȱthyȱservant’.” 4

ȱGupta,ȱTheȱGospelȱofȱSriȱRamakrishna,ȱII,ȱp.ȱ559.ȱ

5

THEȱYOGAȱMASTER:ȱTHEȱRAMAKRISHNAȱMISSION

85

Afterȱall,ȱtheȱpurposeȱforȱthisȱmysticȱisȱtoȱ“realize”ȱGod,ȱtheȱinȬ tenseȱfeelingȱofȱtheȱdivineȱpresenceȱinȱmysticalȱexperience.ȱDoes thatȱalsoȱobtainȱforȱtheȱreligionsȱoutsideȱIndia?ȱInȱaȱlaterȱphase ofȱ hisȱ life,ȱ Ramakrishnaȱ studiedȱ bothȱ Islamȱ andȱ Christianity. Forȱ someȱ timeȱ heȱ followedȱ aȱ Muslimȱ lifestyleȱ andȱ thisȱ alsoȱ reȬ sultedȱ inȱ aȱ mysticalȱ experience.ȱ Finally,ȱ heȱ attemptedȱ toȱ find outȱmoreȱaboutȱChristianity. Inȱ1874ȱShriȱRamakrishnaȱfeltȱtheȱneedȱtoȱlearnȱmoreȱabout Christianity.ȱ Oneȱ ofȱ hisȱ followers,ȱ himselfȱ aȱ Hindu,ȱ hadȱ some knowledgeȱofȱtheȱBibleȱandȱreadȱsomeȱofȱitȱtoȱhim.ȱRamakrishȬ naȱ thereforeȱ learnedȱ aboutȱ Jesus’ȱ lifeȱ andȱ proclamationȱ inȱ that way.ȱ Thisȱ resultedȱ inȱ remarkableȱ visionaryȱ experiences.ȱ Itȱ beȬ ganȱ withȱ aȱ visitȱ toȱ anotherȱ follower,ȱ Jaduȱ Nathȱ Mallick,ȱ who ownedȱaȱcountryȱhouseȱinȱDakshineshvar,ȱwhereȱRamakrishna wasȱaȱguest.ȱOnȱtheȱwallsȱinȱtheȱsalonȱwereȱseveralȱprintsȱwith religiousȱ scenes.ȱ Oneȱ ofȱ them,ȱ toȱ whichȱ Ramakrishnaȱ was stronglyȱ attracted,ȱ showedȱ Maryȱ withȱ theȱ childȱ Jesus.ȱ Heȱ reȬ sistedȱitȱandȱappealedȱtoȱtheȱgoddessȱKali:ȱ“WhatȱisȱitȱthatȱThou artȱ doingȱ toȱ me,ȱ Mother?”ȱ Butȱ theȱ imageȱ ofȱ theȱ otherȱ Mother conqueredȱhisȱresistance:ȱallȱdevotionȱtoȱtheȱHinduȱgodsȱdisapȬ pearedȱfromȱRamakrishna’sȱconsciousnessȱandȱheȱhadȱaȱvision filledȱ withȱ “Christian”ȱ images.ȱ Thisȱ visionȱ tookȱ himȱ toȱ ChrisȬ tianȱ churches,ȱ whereȱ believersȱ burnedȱ incenseȱ andȱ candlesȱ in frontȱ ofȱ theȱ imageȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ andȱ prayedȱ toȱ himȱ passionately. BackȱinȱhisȱownȱtempleȱRamakrishnaȱremainedȱunderȱtheȱspell ofȱ thisȱ vision.ȱ Heȱ simplyȱ forgotȱ toȱ makeȱ hisȱ sacrificesȱ toȱ the goddessȱandȱforȱthreeȱdaysȱheȱwasȱengrossedȱinȱtheȱdevotionȱof theȱ Christians.ȱ Heȱ sawȱ churchesȱ andȱ heardȱ priestsȱ preaching; heȱ alsoȱ sawȱ biblicalȱ scenes,ȱ suchȱ asȱ Jesusȱ takingȱ theȱ almost drowningȱPeterȱbyȱtheȱhand.ȱOnȱtheȱfourthȱdayȱheȱsawȱanȱapȬ paritionȱinȱtheȱtempleȱgarden.ȱAȱforeignȬlookingȱmanȱwithȱaȱseȬ reneȱexpressionȱapproachedȱhimȱandȱgazedȱintentlyȱatȱhim.ȱRaȬ makrishnaȱ wonderedȱ whoȱ theȱ strangeȱ visitorȱ mightȱ beȱ andȱ it suddenlyȱ struckȱ him:ȱ “Thisȱ isȱ theȱ Christȱ whoȱ pouredȱ outȱ his heart’sȱ bloodȱ forȱ theȱ redemptionȱ ofȱ mankindȱ andȱ suffered agoniesȱforȱitsȱsake.ȱItȱisȱnoneȱelseȱbutȱthatȱMasterȬYoginȱJesus,

JESUSȱASȱGURU

86

theȱ embodimentȱ ofȱ Love!”6ȱ Ramakrishnaȱ sawȱ thisȱ figureȱ ofȱ JeȬ susȱ approachingȱ him;ȱ Christȱ embracedȱ himȱ andȱ mergedȱ into him.ȱ Atȱ this,ȱ Ramakrishnaȱ fellȱ intoȱ aȱ tranceȱ and,ȱ afterȱ thisȱ exȬ perienceȱofȱsamadhi,ȱheȱwasȱconvincedȱofȱtheȱdivinityȱofȱChrist andȱtheȱvalueȱofȱChristianȱbeliefȱasȱaȱwayȱtoȱGod. Itȱ isȱ fascinatingȱ toȱ seeȱ howȱ Christianȱ andȱ Hinduȱ elements areȱcombinedȱinȱShriȱRamakrishna’sȱvisions.ȱItȱbeginsȱwithȱthe pictureȱofȱtheȱMadonnaȱinȱJaduȱMallick’sȱcountryȱhouse—aȱtypȬ icalȱChristianȱimage:ȱMaryȱwithȱtheȱchildȱJesus.ȱButȱatȱtheȱsame timeȱitȱisȱanȱimageȱthatȱsomeoneȱwhoȱalwaysȱvisualizedȱtheȱdiȬ vinityȱ asȱ theȱ Greatȱ Motherȱ andȱ regardedȱ himselfȱ asȱ herȱ child wouldȱreadilyȱrecognize.ȱItȱisȱnotȱsurprisingȱthatȱitȱwasȱexactly thisȱ imageȱ thatȱ affectedȱ Ramakrishnaȱ soȱ strongly.ȱ Thereȱ was somethingȱpriorȱtoȱthis,ȱi.e.ȱhavingȱtheȱBibleȱreadȱtoȱhim.ȱButȱit isȱcharacteristicȱthatȱtheȱsparkȱdidȱnotȱcatchȱuntilȱheȱsawȱanȱimȬ ageȱthatȱappealedȱtoȱhisȱownȱspirituality:ȱbecomingȱemotionally affectedȱalwaysȱheldȱmuchȱgreaterȱmeaningȱforȱthisȱmysticȱthan acquiringȱknowledgeȱdid. Inȱ hisȱ visionsȱ Ramakrishnaȱ sawȱ Christianȱ piety—or,ȱ at least,ȱ whatȱ heȱ imaginedȱ toȱ beȱ Christianȱ piety!ȱ Theȱ sceneȱ of devoteesȱburningȱincenseȱinȱfrontȱofȱtheȱimageȱofȱJesusȱhas,ȱafȬ terȱall,ȱaȱcertainȱHinduȱ touch.ȱ Atȱ firstȱglance,ȱtheȱ biblicalȱstory thatȱ Ramakrishnaȱ sawȱ inȱ hisȱ visionsȱ isȱ completelyȱ partȱ ofȱ the Christianȱheritage.ȱButȱthatȱisȱnotȱasȱunequivocalȱasȱitȱseems.ȱHe sawȱ theȱ episodeȱ fromȱ theȱ Gospelȱ inȱ whichȱ Peterȱ walksȱ onȱ the waterȱ (Matthewȱ 14:22Ȭ33),ȱ aȱ storyȱ thatȱ exemplifiesȱ faithȱ and grace.ȱWhenȱPeterȱbecomesȱafraidȱandȱlosesȱhisȱfaith,ȱheȱbegins toȱsinkȱandȱcriesȱoutȱtoȱbeȱsaved.ȱJesusȱthenȱcatchesȱholdȱofȱhim andȱsavesȱhim,ȱinȱspiteȱofȱhisȱreprehensibleȱlackȱofȱfaith.ȱButȱRaȬ makrishnaȱseemsȱtoȱgiveȱaȱquiteȱdifferentȱmeaningȱtoȱthisȱscene. Weȱare,ȱofȱcourse,ȱdependentȱonȱwhatȱRamakrishnaȱhimselfȱlatȬ ȱLifeȱofȱSriȱRamakrishna,ȱCompiledȱfromȱVariousȱAuthenticȱSources, 4 ȱed.ȱ(Mayavati,ȱAdvaitaȱAshrama),ȱpp.ȱ253Ȭ55.ȱSeeȱalsoȱJeffreyȱJ.ȱKripal, Kali’sȱChild:ȱTheȱMysticalȱandȱtheȱEroticȱinȱtheȱLifeȱandȱTeachingsȱofȱRamaȬ krishnaȱ(Chicago/London:ȱTheȱUniversityȱofȱChicagoȱPress),ȱpp.ȱ168Ȭ70; HalȱW.ȱFrench,ȱ“ReverenceȱtoȱChristȱthroughȱMysticalȱExperienceȱand IncarnationalȱIdentity:ȱSriȱRamakrishna,”ȱin:ȱA.ȱSharma,ȱNeoȬHinduȱViews ofȱChristianityȱ(Leiden:ȱBrill,ȱ1988),ȱpp.ȱ82Ȭ105;ȱRomainȱRolland,ȱLaȱvieȱde Ramakrishnaȱ(Paris:ȱLibrairieȱStock),ȱpp.ȱ90Ȭ94,ȱandȱtheȱintroductionȱby SwamiȱNikhilanandaȱinȱGupta,ȱTheȱGospelȱofȱSriȱRamakrishna,ȱI,ȱp.ȱ34. 6

th

THEȱYOGAȱMASTER:ȱTHEȱRAMAKRISHNAȱMISSION

87

erȱsaidȱaboutȱthisȱvisionȱandȱhowȱothersȱrecordedȱit.ȱAccording toȱoneȱofȱhisȱfirstȱbiographers,ȱRamakrishnaȱthoughtȱthatȱJesus wasȱreplyingȱtoȱaȱquestionȱraisedȱbyȱoneȱofȱhisȱdisciples:ȱHow canȱ oneȱ reachȱ God?ȱ Jesusȱ leadsȱ himȱ byȱ theȱ hand,ȱ walkingȱ on theȱ sea.ȱ Whenȱ theȱ manȱ beginsȱ toȱ sink,ȱ Jesusȱ asksȱ himȱ howȱ he feels.ȱ Theȱ man,ȱ fightingȱ toȱ survive,ȱ screamsȱ thatȱ heȱ isȱ dying. Thenȱ Jesusȱ speaksȱ toȱ theȱ manȱ whoȱ isȱ gaspingȱ forȱ air:ȱ “When separatedȱfromȱHim,ȱifȱyourȱheartȱfeelsȱlikeȱthis,ȱthenȱyouȱwill attainȱ Him.”7ȱ Thisȱ themeȱ returnsȱ constantlyȱ inȱ Ramakrishna: onlyȱ throughȱ aȱ dominantȱ desire,ȱ suchȱ asȱ aȱ drowningȱ person’s needȱ toȱ survive,ȱ isȱ itȱ possibleȱ toȱ makeȱ thatȱ supremeȱ effortȱ by whichȱmysticalȱunionȱwithȱGodȱcanȱbeȱattained. TheȱsceneȱofȱPeterȱwalkingȱonȱwaterȱisȱthusȱinterpretedȱinȱa wayȱ moreȱ inȱ keepingȱ withȱ Ramakrishna’sȱ Hinduȱ background. Theȱimageȱretainedȱgreatȱsignificanceȱforȱhim.ȱAȱpictureȱofȱthis sceneȱwasȱlaterȱhungȱonȱtheȱwallȱofȱhisȱquartersȱinȱtheȱtemple;ȱit wasȱtheȱonlyȱimageȱthatȱwasȱborrowedȱfromȱtheȱChristianȱtradiȬ tion.8ȱButȱRamakrishnaȱwouldȱalsoȱhaveȱmadeȱaȱconnectionȱbeȬ tweenȱthisȱpictureȱandȱaȱHinduȱmyth.ȱTheȱPuranicȱliteratureȱreȬ latesȱtheȱstoryȱofȱaȱmanȱwhoȱcrossesȱtheȱseaȱbetweenȱSriȱLanka andȱIndiaȱonȱfoot.ȱTheȱpiousȱkingȱVibhishanaȱhadȱgivenȱhimȱa leafȱwithȱsomethingȱwrittenȱonȱit,ȱtiedȱupȱinȱhisȱgarment,ȱwhich enablesȱhimȱtoȱawakenȱtheȱenormousȱspiritualȱpowerȱbyȱwhich heȱcanȱwalkȱonȱwater.ȱHalfwayȱacross,ȱhowever,ȱheȱisȱdistracted byȱcuriosityȱandȱtakesȱoutȱtheȱleaf,ȱbutȱtheȱleafȱonlyȱcontainsȱthe nameȱofȱtheȱgodȱRama.ȱTheȱmanȱthenȱbeginsȱtoȱdoubtȱandȱconȬ sequentlyȱsinksȱintoȱtheȱsea.ȱRamakrishnaȱtoldȱthisȱHinduȱstory toȱhisȱstudents.9ȱInȱcontrastȱtoȱtheȱbiblicalȱstory,ȱthereȱisȱnoȱsalȬ vationȱ forȱ theȱ drowningȱ man:ȱ whoeverȱ isȱ unableȱ toȱ summon theȱpowerȱtoȱriseȱaboveȱtheȱmundaneȱisȱirretrievablyȱlost. Forȱ Ramakrishna,ȱtheȱ centralȱ pointȱ isȱ thatȱhumanȱendeavȬ ourȱ allowsȱ oneȱ toȱ goȱ beyondȱ allȱ boundaries.ȱ Thisȱ requiresȱ the strongestȱmotivationȱasȱwellȱasȱtheȱwillingnessȱtoȱbreakȱthrough allȱlimitations.ȱOneȱmustȱthereforeȱtravelȱtheȱroadȱofȱmethodical ȱRamȱCandraȱDatta,ȱcitedȱbyȱKripal,ȱKali’sȱChild,ȱpp.ȱ168Ȭ69.ȱKripalȇs conclusionȱis:ȱ“OnceȱagainȱweȱseeȱhowȱaȱpreeminentlyȱHinduȱlessonȱis drawnȱfromȱanȱallegedlyȱnonȬHinduȱevent.” 7

ȱGupta,ȱTheȱGospelȱofȱSriȱRamakrishna,ȱI,ȱp.ȱ266.

8

ȱGupta,ȱTheȱGospelȱofȱSriȱRamakrishna,ȱI,ȱp.ȱ87.

9

JESUSȱASȱGURU

88

trainingȱ untilȱ theȱ end.ȱ Ramakrishnaȱ regardsȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ as someoneȱ whoȱ walkedȱ theȱ wholeȱ lengthȱ ofȱ thatȱ road.ȱ Heȱ isȱ the yogaȱ master,ȱ theȱ accomplishedȱ asceticȱ whoȱ realizedȱ theȱ divine inȱ hisȱ ownȱ existenceȱ throughȱ hisȱ physicalȱ andȱ spiritualȱ exerȬ tions.ȱ Ramakrishnaȱ thusȱ seesȱ inȱ theȱ lifeȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ aȱ rejectionȱ of worldlyȱ desireȱ andȱ aȱ yearningȱ forȱ theȱ divineȱ similarȱ toȱ that whichȱ characterizedȱ hisȱ ownȱ life.ȱ Atȱ theȱ sameȱ time,ȱ itȱ appears fromȱhisȱwordsȱthatȱheȱisȱalsoȱawareȱofȱtheȱmeaningȱascribedȱto Christȱ byȱ Christians.ȱ Christ’sȱ passionȱ ȱ andȱ theȱ convictionȱ that humanityȱ findsȱ salvationȱ throughȱ hisȱ bloodȱ areȱ partȱ ofȱ RamaȬ krishna’sȱimageȱofȱJesus.ȱButȱheȱdoesȱnotȱidentifyȱhimselfȱwith peopleȱ whoȱ needȱ suchȱ aȱ salvation.ȱ Onȱ theȱ contrary,ȱ heȱ idenȬ tifiesȱ himselfȱ withȱ Jesus,ȱ asȱ theȱ endȱ ofȱ theȱ visionȱ strikinglyȱ inȬ dicates.ȱChristȱwhoȱisȱableȱtoȱforsakeȱeverything,ȱevenȱhisȱown life,ȱapproachesȱhimȱandȱmergesȱintoȱhim.ȱRamakrishnaȱhasȱbeȬ comeȱJesus. Ramakrishna’sȱfollowersȱdidȱnotȱhaveȱanyȱdifficultyȱaccepȬ tingȱthatȱidentification.ȱTheȱaccountsȱofȱtheȱmaster’sȱtalksȱwith hisȱpupilsȱrepeatedlyȱattestȱthatȱtheyȱconsideredȱhimȱtoȱbeȱaȱdiȬ vineȱincarnation.ȱEspeciallyȱinȱtheȱlastȱyearȱofȱhisȱlifeȱtheȱsense ofȱ suchȱ aȱ divineȱ identityȱ grewȱ amongȱ hisȱ disciples.ȱ Mahendra Nathȱ Gupta,ȱ whoȱ publishedȱ theȱ conversationsȱ ofȱ Ramakrishna underȱ theȱ pseudonymȱ “M,”ȱ discussesȱ theȱ questionȱ repeatedly withȱhisȱguru.ȱTheȱparallelȱwithȱChristȱisȱexpressedȱmoreȱthan once.ȱThus,ȱ“M”ȱsaysȱtoȱRamakrishna:ȱ“Further,ȱyouȱtellȱusȱthat youȱ andȱ theȱ Motherȱ areȱ one.ȱ Likewise,ȱ Christȱ said,ȱ ‘Iȱ andȱ My Fatherȱareȱone’.”10ȱElsewhere,ȱ“M”ȱconcludesȱthatȱChrist,ȱChaiȬ tanya,ȱ andȱ Ramakrishnaȱ “areȱ oneȱ andȱ theȱ same.ȱ Itȱ isȱ theȱ same Personȱ thatȱ hasȱ becomeȱ allȱ theseȱ three.”11ȱ Ramakrishnaȱ isȱ apȬ parentlyȱ allowedȱ aȱ placeȱ inȱ theȱ seriesȱ ofȱ avataras,ȱ divineȱ deȬ scents.ȱEspeciallyȱamongȱtheȱVaishnavas,ȱitȱisȱaȱsignificantȱpoint ofȱdoctrineȱthatȱGodȱappearsȱregularlyȱonȱearthȱinȱhumanȱform. Ramaȱ andȱ Krishnaȱ areȱ theȱ mostȱ importantȱ avataras,ȱ butȱ later saints,ȱ suchȱ asȱ theȱ ecstaticȱ bhaktaȱ Chaitanya,ȱ areȱ alsoȱ oftenȱ reȬ ȱGupta,ȱTheȱGospelȱofȱSriȱRamakrishna,ȱII,ȱp.ȱ838.ȱTheȱtextȱcitedȱfrom theȱGospelȱ(Johnȱ10:30)ȱwillȱproveȱtoȱbeȱofȱgreatȱsignificanceȱinȱtheȱdiaȬ logueȱbetweenȱChristiansȱandȱHindus,ȱparticularlyȱwhenȱtheȱlatterȱare Ramakrishna’sȱfollowers. 10

ȱGupta,ȱTheȱGospelȱofȱSriȱRamakrishna,ȱII,ȱp.ȱ825.ȱ

11

THEȱYOGAȱMASTER:ȱTHEȱRAMAKRISHNAȱMISSION

89

gardedȱ asȱ avataras.12ȱ Ramakrishnaȱ hasȱ nowȱ beenȱ addedȱ toȱ this seriesȱ ofȱ divineȱ descents.ȱ Butȱ notȱ onlyȱ Ramakrishna—Jesus ChristȱasȱwellȱisȱgivenȱaȱplaceȱinȱtheȱHinduȱpantheon.ȱItȱisȱaȱnoȬ tionȱthatȱwillȱchallengeȱmanyȱChristianȱtheologians. Ramakrishna’sȱimportanceȱliesȱinȱtheȱfactȱthatȱhe,ȱasȱoneȱof theȱfirstȱHinduȱgurusȱtoȱdoȱso,ȱpresentedȱtheȱvariousȱreligions, includingȱ Christianity,ȱ asȱ pathsȱ toȱ theȱ sameȱ goal.ȱ Howȱ heȱ enȬ visagedȱ thisȱ goalȱ wasȱ clearlyȱ dictatedȱ byȱ Hinduȱ conviction:ȱ it wasȱtheȱmysticalȱrealizationȱofȱGodȱinȱhumanȱexistence.ȱThereȬ fore,ȱitȱisȱnotȱsurprisingȱthatȱRamakrishnaȱregardedȱJesusȱinȱthe firstȱplaceȱasȱaȱyogi,ȱaȱmasterȱinȱtheȱartȱofȱGodȬrealization.ȱSuch anȱ assessmentȱ couldȱ beȱ demonstratedȱ fromȱ variousȱ Hindu pointsȱ ofȱ view.ȱ Theȱ avataraȱ doctrineȱ ofȱ theȱ Vaishnavasȱ wasȱ an importantȱ contribution.ȱ Theȱ monisticȱ Vedantaȱ doctrineȱ could alsoȱprovideȱaȱframeworkȱforȱHinduȱChristology:ȱitȱwasȱpossiȬ bleȱ toȱ regardȱ allȱ divineȱ figuresȱ asȱ representationsȱ ofȱ whatȱ lies behindȱillusoryȱmundaneȱexistence—theȱultimateȱReality,ȱBrahȬ man.ȱMostȱofȱRamakrishna’sȱdisciplesȱwouldȱfollowȱthatȱlineȱof thought.ȱ Forȱ aȱ longȱ time,ȱ itȱ wasȱ assumedȱ thatȱ Ramakrishna himselfȱwasȱalsoȱprimarilyȱaȱvedantin.ȱHowever,ȱsomeȱmoreȱreȬ centȱ studiesȱ clearlyȱ demonstrateȱ thatȱ Tantrismȱ wasȱ hisȱ main sourceȱ ofȱ inspiration.13ȱ Heȱ consideredȱ theȱ wholeȱ phenomenal worldȱtoȱbeȱpervadedȱbyȱaȱdivineȱpower,ȱtheȱshakti,ȱpersonified asȱ Motherȱ Kali.ȱ Theȱ Motherȱ cameȱ toȱ himȱ inȱ manyȱ different forms—whyȱnotȱinȱtheȱformȱofȱMotherȱMaryȱandȱherȱchild? ChristianityȱbecameȱaȱpartnerȱinȱdialogueȱthroughȱthisȱuniȬ versalisticȱ attitudeȱ basedȱ onȱ mysticism.ȱ Thereȱ wasȱ aȱ common ground,ȱandȱthisȱenabledȱRamakrishnaȇsȱfollowersȱtoȱcomeȱinto contactȱ withȱ Christiansȱ withoutȱ feelingȱ theȱ needȱ toȱ convert

ȱForȱChaitanya,ȱseeȱSchouten,ȱGoddelijkeȱvergezichten,ȱpp.ȱ131Ȭ46.ȱ

12

ȱWalterȱG.ȱNeevel,ȱ“TheȱTransformationȱofȱSriȱRamakrishna,”ȱin: BardwellȱL.ȱSmithȱ(ed.),ȱHinduism:ȱNewȱEssaysȱinȱtheȱHistoryȱofȱReligions, Studiesȱ inȱ theȱ Historyȱ ofȱ Religions,ȱ Suppl.ȱ toȱ Numenȱ XXXIIIȱ (Leiden: Brill),ȱpp.ȱ53Ȭ97.ȱKripal,ȱKali’sȱChild.ȱTheȱlatterȱalsoȱemphasizesȱtheȱhomoȬ eroticȱcomponentȱofȱRamakrishnaȇsȱmysticism.ȱThisȱwas,ȱofȱcourse,ȱopȬ posedȱstronglyȱbyȱtheȱRamakrishnaȱOrder.ȱCf.ȱAtmajnanananda,ȱȱ“ScanȬ dals,ȱ CoverȬups,ȱ andȱ Otherȱ Imaginedȱ Occurrencesȱ inȱ theȱ Lifeȱ ofȱ RaȬ makrishna:ȱAnȱExaminationȱofȱJeffreyȱKripalȇsȱKali’sȱChild,”ȱInternational JournalȱofȱHinduȱStudiesȱ1ȱ(1997):ȱ401Ȭ20. 13

JESUSȱASȱGURU

90

them.ȱAndȱthatȱwasȱpreciselyȱwhatȱSwamiȱVivekanandaȱdidȱas theȱfirstȱHinduȱrepresentativeȱinȱNorthȱAmerica. Vivekananda:ȱJesusȱasȱWorldȱRenouncer WhenȱRamakrishnaȱdiedȱinȱ1886,ȱheȱleftȱbehindȱaȱcircleȱofȱstuȬ dentsȱ whoȱ wantedȱ toȱ pursueȱ theȱ roadȱ theirȱ masterȱ hadȱ shown inȱ hisȱ ownȱ life.ȱ Halfȱ aȱ yearȱ afterȱ hisȱ death,ȱ theȱ initiallyȱ vague plansȱ forȱ aȱ monasticȱ organizationȱ beganȱ toȱ crystallize,ȱ andȱ the storyȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ playedȱ aȱ specialȱ roleȱ inȱ itsȱ genesis.ȱ Onȱ aȱ certain eveningȱ theȱ studentsȱ cameȱ togetherȱ inȱ theȱ villageȱ ofȱ Antpur. Accordingȱ toȱ theȱ tradition,ȱ whichȱ doesȱ haveȱ someȱ legendary features,ȱtheyȱmeditatedȱwhileȱsittingȱaroundȱaȱbonfire.ȱOnȱthis occasionȱNarendra,ȱlaterȱSwamiȱVivekananda,ȱtoldȱtheȱstoryȱof JesusȱChrist’sȱlife,ȱstartingȱwithȱtheȱvirginȱbirthȱrightȱupȱtoȱthe resurrectionȱandȱemphasizingȱtheȱaspectȱofȱworldȱrenunciation inȱ everyȱ episodeȱ ofȱ Jesus’ȱ life.ȱ Heȱ thenȱ sketchedȱ howȱ theȱ mesȬ sageȱofȱsalvationȱhadȱbeenȱdisseminatedȱthroughoutȱtheȱwhole worldȱbyȱtheȱapostles.ȱFinally,ȱNarendraȱmadeȱanȱemotionalȱapȬ pealȱtoȱhisȱfriends,ȱasȱapostlesȱofȱRamakrishna,ȱtoȱpropagateȱthe latter’sȱmessageȱand,ȱtoȱthatȱend,ȱtoȱvowȱtoȱrenounceȱtheȱworld. Allȱofȱthem,ȱtherefore,ȱtookȱtheȱvowȱofȱsannyasa:ȱtheyȱwereȱpreȬ paredȱtoȱliveȱasȱmendicantsȱinȱorderȱtoȱserveȱhumanity.ȱAndȱif weȱbelieveȱtheȱauthorȱofȱtheȱhistoryȱofȱtheȱRamakrishnaȱMoveȬ ment,ȱatȱthatȱmomentȱtheyȱrealizedȱthatȱitȱwasȱChristmasȱEve.14 Thus,ȱJesus’ȱlifeȱhistoryȱisȱfoundationalȱforȱtheirȱinspiration atȱtheȱbeginningȱofȱtheȱRamakrishnaȱOrder.ȱThatȱisȱnotȱthatȱexȬ traordinary,ȱ givenȱ thatȱ Narendraȱ hadȱ attendedȱ aȱ missions school,ȱ theȱ Scottishȱ Churchȱ Collegeȱ inȱ Calcutta.ȱ Heȱ had,ȱ of course,ȱacquiredȱaȱthoroughȱknowledgeȱofȱtheȱBibleȱandȱRamaȬ krishnaȱhadȱcertainlyȱtaughtȱhimȱthatȱtheȱChristianȱfaithȱwasȱalȬ soȱ aȱ wayȱtoȱGod.ȱTheȱapostolicȱelanȱofȱtheȱearlyȱchurchȱwasȱin keepingȱ withȱ hisȱ ownȱ endeavoursȱ toȱ shapeȱ aȱ religiousȱ comȬ munity.ȱ Butȱ itȱ isȱ stillȱ surprisingȱ thatȱ Narendraȱ soȱ vehemently emphasizedȱasceticismȱandȱrenunciationȱofȱtheȱworldȱinȱhisȱpreȬ ȱGambhirananda,ȱHistoryȱofȱtheȱRamakrishnaȱMathȱandȱMissionȱ(CalȬ cutta:ȱAdvaitaȱAshrama,ȱ1957),ȱpp.ȱ50Ȭ51.ȱForȱaȱcriticalȱevaluationȱofȱthe AntpurȱhistoryȱandȱotherȱfoundationȱlegendsȱseeȱJ.P.ȱSchouten,ȱ“HinduȬ ismȱandȱDevelopment:ȱThreeȱCaseȱStudies,”ȱReligionȱandȱSocietyȱXXVIII (1981):ȱ68Ȭ99. 14

THEȱYOGAȱMASTER:ȱTHEȱRAMAKRISHNAȱMISSION

91

sentationȱ ofȱ theȱ lifeȱ ofȱ Jesus.ȱ Thisȱ wouldȱ remainȱ aȱ constant theme,ȱalsoȱinȱhisȱlaterȱlecturesȱonȱChristianityȱasȱSwamiȱViveȬ kananda. Whileȱ Swamiȱ Vivekanandaȇsȱ first accountsȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ areȱ characterizedȱ by greatȱ affinityȱ andȱ recognition,ȱ hisȱ apȬ proachȱ becameȱ moreȱ criticalȱ laterȱ on. Theȱ changeȱ isȱ dueȱ toȱ hisȱ experiencesȱ in theȱ Unitedȱ States—atȱ thatȱ timeȱ aȱ ChrisȬ tianȱ countryȱ parȱ excellence.ȱ Atȱ theȱ ParȬ liamentȱofȱtheȱWorld’sȱReligions,ȱheldȱin Chicagoȱ inȱ 1893,ȱ Swamiȱ Vivekananda madeȱ aȱ profoundȱ impressionȱ onȱ the publicȱ andȱ soonȱ becameȱ aȱ celebrity.ȱ But thatȱ fameȱ hadȱ aȱ price.ȱ Orthodoxȱ ChrisȬ tiansȱreactedȱ withȱresistanceȱandȱcondeȬ scensionȱ toȱ theȱ Hinduȱ presenceȱ amidȱ theȱ Christianȱ diversity. Vivekanandaȱ wasȱ struckȱ byȱ aȱ narrowȬmindedȱ formȱ ofȱ ChrisȬ tianityȱthatȱheȱhadȱnotȱencounteredȱveryȱoftenȱinȱIndia.ȱHeȱwas apparentlyȱoffendedȱbyȱtheȱimpoliteȱtreatmentȱheȱreceivedȱfrom someȱ ofȱ theȱ congressȱ delegatesȱ andȱ theȱ attacksȱ inȱ partsȱ ofȱ the Christianȱpress.ȱOnȱvariousȱ occasionsȱheȱletȱ himselfȱbeȱ enticed intoȱ aȱ counterattack.ȱ Lookingȱ forȱ statementsȱ aboutȱ Jesusȱ and Christianityȱinȱtheȱeightȱvolumesȱofȱhisȱcollectedȱworksȱweȱcan findȱ aȱ multiplicityȱ ofȱ positions,ȱ rangingȱ fromȱ highlyȱ appreciaȬ tiveȱtoȱextremelyȱcritical. Therefore,ȱtheȱcontextȱofȱcertainȱthingsȱheȱsaidȱmustȱbeȱtakȬ enȱintoȱaccount.ȱIsolatedȱutterancesȱofȱhisȱhaveȱoftenȱplayedȱan unjustifiedȱ roleȱ inȱ theȱ historyȱ ofȱ HinduȬChristianȱ dialogue.ȱ A strikingȱexampleȱisȱtheȱfollowingȱcharacterizationȱofȱtheȱChrisȬ tianȱ traditionȱ thatȱ hasȱ becomeȱ ratherȱ famous:ȱ “Everyȱ manȱ in Christianȱcountriesȱhasȱaȱhugeȱcathedralȱonȱhisȱheadȱandȱonȱtop ofȱ thatȱ aȱ book.”15ȱ Itȱ isȱ helpfulȱ toȱ knowȱ thatȱ thisȱ sentenceȱ is foundȱinȱaȱveryȱspecificȱcontextȱinȱaȱlectureȱforȱAmericanȱChrisȬ ȱVivekananda,ȱTheȱCompleteȱWorks:ȱMayavatiȱMemorialȱEdition,ȱvol. VII,ȱ8thȱed.ȱ(Calcutta:ȱAdvaitaȱAshrama,ȱ1972),ȱp.ȱ30.ȱCf.ȱChristopherȱIshȬ erwood,ȱ Myȱ Guruȱ andȱ Hisȱ Discipleȱ (Newȱ York:ȱ Farrar/Straus/Giroux, 1980),ȱp.ȱ13.ȱMoreover,ȱweȱshouldȱkeepȱinȱmindȱthatȱweȱareȱdependent forȱwhatȱVivekanandaȱsaidȱonȱtheȱsometimesȱfragmentaryȱnotesȱofȱhis listeners.ȱ 15

JESUSȱASȱGURU

92

tians.ȱHeȱhadȱjustȱconfrontedȱhisȱaudienceȱwithȱtheȱunfairȱway inȱwhichȱtheȱHindusȱinȱIndiaȱwereȱcriticizedȱbyȱtheȱcolonialȱrulȬ ersȱ becauseȱ ofȱ theirȱ freeȱ religion.ȱ Overȱ againstȱ thatȱ freedomȱ of opinionȱ inȱ Hinduism,ȱ Vivekanandaȱ presentsȱ theȱ bookȱ religion createdȱbyȱtheȱchurchȱinȱwhichȱeverythingȱhasȱtoȱconformȱtoȱthe Bible.ȱHeȱattacksȱinȱparticularȱaȱspecialȱpartȱofȱChristianity:ȱ“[I]t isȱ theȱ mostȱ horribleȱ tyranny,ȱ thisȱ tyrannyȱ ofȱ theȱ Protestantȱ BiȬ ble.”ȱAnȱimageȱofȱsuchȱoppressionȱisȱtheȱmanȱwithȱtheȱcathedral onȱ hisȱ headȱ andȱ onȱ topȱ ofȱ itȱ aȱ book.ȱ Theȱ restȱ ofȱ theȱ sameȱ senȬ tenceȱ is,ȱ however,ȱ oftenȱ leftȱ unquoted:ȱ “...ȱ andȱ yetȱ manȱ lives andȱgrows!ȱDoesȱnotȱthisȱproveȱthatȱmanȱisȱGod?”16 Inȱ thisȱ smallȱ excerptȱ fromȱ oneȱ lectureȱ itȱ alreadyȱ becomes clearȱ whatȱ Vivekanandaȱ appreciatesȱ inȱ Christianityȱ andȱ what heȱrejects.ȱHisȱapproachȱisȱfoundedȱcompletelyȱonȱtheȱVedanta doctrine.ȱUltimately,ȱthereȱisȱonlyȱoneȱreality,ȱBrahman,ȱandȱthe essentialȱcoreȱofȱaȱhumanȱbeing,ȱtheȱatman,ȱisȱnothingȱelseȱthan Brahman.ȱTranslatedȱintoȱChristianȱterminology,ȱhumanȱbeings areȱGod.ȱInȱrealizingȱthat,ȱofȱcourse,ȱtheȱhumanȱbeingȱbecomes free.ȱChristȱisȱtheȱimageȱofȱsuchȱaȱfree,ȱ“realized”ȱhumanȱbeing. But,ȱinȱVivekanandaȇsȱopinion,ȱtheȱchurchȱhasȱnotȱdaredȱtoȱacȬ ceptȱsuchȱfreedom.ȱItȱhasȱlockedȱChristȱupȱinȱaȱfundamentalist system,ȱ basedȱ onȱ aȱ book.ȱ Butȱ thereȱ isȱ nothingȱ wrongȱ withȱ the bookȱ itself.ȱ Vivekanandaȱ hadȱ begunȱ theȱ seriesȱ ofȱ lecturesȱ in questionȱ withȱ theȱ readingȱ ofȱ aȱ scripturalȱ passage,ȱ namelyȱ the prologueȱofȱtheȱgospelȱofȱJohn.ȱOfȱthatȱpassageȱheȱsaid:ȱ“Inȱthe firstȱ fiveȱ versesȱ ofȱ Johnȱ isȱ theȱ wholeȱ essenceȱ ofȱ Christianity: eachȱ verseȱ isȱ fullȱ ofȱ theȱ profoundestȱ philosophy.”17ȱ Andȱ he explainedȱ thatȱ theȱ “Word”ȱ thatȱ “wasȱ God”ȱ pointsȱ toȱ theȱ great incarnationsȱ ofȱ God,ȱ i.e.ȱ Krishna,ȱ theȱ Buddha,ȱ Jesusȱ andȱ RaȬ makrishna.ȱ Or,ȱ inȱ termsȱ moreȱ determinedȱ byȱ Vedantaȱ philoȬ sophy:ȱtheȱAbsolute,ȱBrahman,ȱcanȱbeȱknownȱonlyȱthroughȱthe tintȱofȱhumanity,ȱi.e.,ȱthroughȱChrist. Inȱ Christȱtheȱ mostȱprofoundȱknowledgeȱ isȱ madeȱ available toȱus:ȱtheȱidentityȱofȱhumanȱbeingsȱandȱGod.ȱThatȱisȱtheȱcentral propositionȱ ofȱ Swamiȱ Vivekananda.ȱ Aȱ goodȱ exampleȱ ofȱ aȱ balȬ ancedȱ expositionȱ ofȱ Christianity,ȱ withȱ thisȱ propositionȱ asȱ the centralȱpoint,ȱisȱtheȱlectureȱChrist,ȱtheȱMessengerȱthatȱheȱgaveȱin ȱVivekananda,ȱTheȱCompleteȱWorks,ȱvol.ȱVII,ȱ8thȱed.,ȱp.ȱ30.

16

ȱVivekananda,ȱTheȱCompleteȱWorks,ȱvol.ȱVII,ȱ8thȱed.,ȱp.ȱȱ3.

17

THEȱYOGAȱMASTER:ȱTHEȱRAMAKRISHNAȱMISSION

93

Losȱ Angelesȱ inȱ Januaryȱ 1900.ȱ Theȱ textȱ ofȱ thisȱ lecture,ȱ based uponȱstenographicȱnotes,ȱisȱincludedȱinȱTheȱCompleteȱWorks.ȱThe lecture,ȱheldȱforȱaȱlargeȱaudienceȱinȱaȱcrammedȱhall,ȱprovedȱto beȱ oneȱ ofȱ hisȱ mostȱ successfulȱ performances.18ȱ Vivekananda statesȱmostȱemphaticallyȱthatȱheȱlooksȱatȱJesusȱfromȱanȱEastern pointȱ ofȱ view.ȱ Theȱ argumentȱ wasȱ formulatedȱ forȱ theȱ firstȱ time byȱ Rajaȱ Rammohanȱ Roy:ȱ Jesusȱ wasȱ himselfȱ anȱ Asian,ȱ anȱ OrȬ iental.ȱ Inȱ Vivekananda’sȱ words:ȱ “Manyȱ timesȱ youȱ forget,ȱ also, thatȱtheȱNazareneȱhimselfȱwasȱanȱOrientalȱofȱOrientals.ȱWithȱall yourȱattemptsȱtoȱpaintȱhimȱwithȱblueȱeyesȱandȱyellowȱhair,ȱthe Nazareneȱ wasȱ stillȱ anȱ Oriental.”ȱ Heȱ thenȱ makesȱ aȱ sharpȱ disȬ tinctionȱbetweenȱWesternȱandȱEasternȱculture.ȱItȱisȱhereȱthatȱwe encounterȱ hisȱ famousȱ saying:ȱ “Theȱ voiceȱ ofȱ Asiaȱ hasȱ beenȱ the voiceȱofȱreligion.ȱTheȱvoiceȱofȱEuropeȱisȱtheȱvoiceȱofȱpolitics.”19 Ofȱ course,ȱ thisȱ evaluationȱ isȱ colouredȱ byȱ theȱ speakerȇsȱ awareȬ nessȱ thatȱ heȱ belongsȱ toȱ aȱ nationȱ thatȱ hadȱ beenȱ colonized.ȱ But thereȱareȱdeeperȱlevelsȱasȱwell.ȱVivekanandaȱanalyzesȱEuropean cultureȱ onȱ theȱ basisȱ ofȱ theȱ classicalȱ Greekȱ worldview.ȱ Hereȱ he discoversȱaȱthisȬworldlyȱorientationȱinȱwhichȱevenȱtheȱgodsȱare dominatedȱ byȱ humanȱ passions.ȱ Overȱ againstȱ thisȱ cultureȱ he placesȱ Easternȱ culture,ȱ whichȱ alwaysȱ reachesȱ forȱ whatȱ isȱ beȬ yondȱthatȱwhichȱexists.ȱHeȱpointsȱoutȱtoȱhisȱaudienceȱthatȱallȱdiȬ vineȱmessengers,ȱwithoutȱexception,ȱwereȱOrientals. Vivekanandaȱ thusȱ conveysȱ theȱ orientationȱ ofȱ the messengerȱChristȱasȱdirectedȱatȱthatȱwhichȱsurpassesȱtheȱmunȬ dane.ȱ However,ȱ beingȱ anȱ authenticȱ Oriental,ȱ Christȱ isȱ inȱ this respectȱ “intenselyȱ practical.”ȱ Thisȱ isȱ aȱ keywordȱ inȱ VivekaȬ nandaȇsȱ oeuvre.ȱ Inȱ hisȱ ownȱ religion,ȱ heȱ wantedȱ toȱ developȱ a “practicalȱ Vedanta,”ȱ intendingȱ toȱ presentȱ monisticȱ philosophy inȱsuchȱaȱwayȱthatȱitȱdidȱnotȱbecomeȱentangledȱinȱȱspeculation butȱofferedȱpeopleȱaȱpracticalȱwayȱtoȱachieveȱliberation.ȱAndȱa practicalȱVedantaȱwouldȱalsoȱprovideȱtheȱmotivationȱtoȱlabour 18 ȱVivekananda,ȱTheȱCompleteȱWorks,ȱȱvol.ȱIV,ȱ10thȱed.ȱ(Calcutta:ȱAȬ dvaitaȱAshrama,ȱ1972),ȱpp.ȱ138Ȭ53.ȱOnȱhisȱlectureȱinȱLosȱAngelesȱseeȱThe LifeȱofȱSwamiȱVivekananda,ȱbyȱhisȱEasternȱandȱWesternȱDisciples,ȱvol.ȱIȬII, 2ndȱed.ȱ(Mayavati:ȱAdvaitaȱAshrama,ȱ1933),ȱpp.ȱ805Ȭ08;ȱSailendraȱNath Dhar,ȱAȱComprehensiveȱBiographyȱofȱSwamiȱVivekananda,ȱIIȱ(Madras:ȱViveȬ kanandaȱPrakashanȱKendra,ȱ1975Ȭ76),ȱpp.ȱ1218Ȭ24.

ȱVivekananda,ȱTheȱCompleteȱWorks,ȱȱvol.ȱIV,ȱ10thȱed.,ȱp.ȱ142.

19

94

JESUSȱASȱGURU

forȱtheȱbenefitȱofȱothers.ȱTheȱmonisticȱteachingȱpresupposesȱthe onenessȱofȱallȱthatȱexistsȱandȱthusȱimpliesȱrespectȱforȱfellowȱhuȬ manȱ beingsȱ andȱ concernȱ forȱ theirȱ welfare,ȱ sinceȱ everyȱ human beingȱisȱtheȱseatȱofȱBrahman.20ȱVivekanandaȱhadȱgivenȱpractical contentȱ toȱ thisȱ idealȱ byȱ settingȱ up,ȱ nextȱ toȱ hisȱ monasticȱ order, theȱRamakrishnaȱMath,ȱanȱextensiveȱorganizationȱforȱsocialȱand educationalȱwork,ȱtheȱRamakrishnaȱMission. Christȱalsoȱoffersȱsimilarlyȱaȱ“practical”ȱreligion,ȱaȱwayȱthat canȱ beȱ travelled.ȱ Butȱ Vivekanandaȇsȱ interpretationȱ ofȱ thisȱ reliȬ giousȱwayȱisȱremarkable.ȱHeȱhardlyȱrefersȱtoȱtheȱsolidarityȱand charityȱthatȱheȱwantsȱtoȱemphasizeȱinȱHinduȱcircles.ȱObviously, heȱ considersȱ thatȱ toȱ beȱ sufficientlyȱ elaboratedȱ inȱ Christianity. ButȱChristiansȱhaveȱtoȱlearnȱsomethingȱelseȱandȱthusȱheȱwants toȱteachȱthemȱspirituality.ȱTheȱlifeȱofȱJesusȱimpliesȱdirectionsȱfor hisȱfollowers:ȱheȱdidȱnotȱcommitȱhimselfȱtoȱachievementsȱinȱthis world.ȱ Especiallyȱ significantȱ toȱ Vivekanandaȱ isȱ Jesus’ȱ saying: “Foxesȱhaveȱholesȱandȱbirdsȱofȱtheȱairȱhaveȱnests,ȱbutȱtheȱSonȱof Manȱhasȱnoȱplaceȱtoȱlayȱhisȱhead”ȱ(Matthewȱ8:20;ȱLukeȱ9:58).ȱIt isȱ inȱ suchȱ anȱ abandoningȱ ofȱ worldlyȱ affairsȱ thatȱ theȱ pathȱ to salvationȱlies. TheȱteachingsȱofȱChristȱculminate,ȱaccordingȱtoȱVivekananȬ da,ȱinȱtheȱappealȱtoȱrealizeȱhumanȱdestiny,ȱi.e.ȱtoȱbeȱtheȱsonȱof God.ȱNotȱonlyȱwasȱJesusȱtheȱSonȱofȱGod,ȱbutȱheȱtaughtȱthatȱall peopleȱwereȱfilledȱbyȱanȱimmortalȱspiritȱandȱcouldȱthereforeȱbe calledȱ sonsȱ ofȱ God.ȱ Vivekanandaȱ quotesȱ twoȱ textsȱ fromȱ the Gospelȱ thatȱ haveȱ retainedȱ aȱ centralȱ placeȱ inȱ HinduȬChristian dialogue.ȱ Theȱ firstȱ textȱ is:ȱ “[T]heȱ kingdomȱ ofȱ Godȱ isȱ within you”ȱ (Lukeȱ 17:21).ȱ Thisȱ textȱ originallyȱ expressedȱ Jesus’ȱ belief thatȱ theȱ kingdomȱ ofȱ Godȱ wasȱ notȱ somethingȱ inȱ theȱ futureȱ but wasȱ alreadyȱ present.ȱ Theȱ traditionalȱ Englishȱ translation, however,ȱ couldȱ beȱ misunderstoodȱ asȱ indicatingȱ thatȱ human beingsȱcanȱfindȱtheȱ kingdomȱ ofȱGodȱ inȱ theirȱinnerȱ selves.ȱ This interpretationȱisȱusedȱveryȱoftenȱbyȱHindusȱ(asȱwellȱasȱinȱWestȬ ernȱesotericȱcircles).ȱTheȱsecondȱtextȱisȱtheȱoneȱweȱencountered alreadyȱ inȱ theȱ conversationsȱ ofȱ Shriȱ Ramakrishna:ȱ “Iȱ andȱ my Fatherȱ areȱ one”ȱ (Johnȱ 10:30).ȱ Vivekanandaȱ doesȱ notȱ interpret thisȱtextȱasȱcharacterizingȱtheȱuniqueȱrelationshipȱofȱChristȱwith 20 ȱOnȱtheȱpracticalȱVedantaȱseeȱSchouten,ȱ“HinduismȱandȱDevelopȬ ment.”

THEȱYOGAȱMASTER:ȱTHEȱRAMAKRISHNAȱMISSION

95

hisȱ heavenlyȱ Fatherȱ butȱ asȱ aȱ statementȱ aboutȱ theȱ ontological basisȱ ofȱ everyȱ humanȱ being.ȱ Thus,ȱ theȱ messageȱ ofȱ Christȱ beȬ comesȱanȱechoȱofȱtheȱAdvaitaȱVedanta:ȱbehindȱallȱimaginaryȱdiȬ versityȱ liesȱ theȱ unityȱ ofȱ allȱ thatȱ existsȱ andȱ humanȱ beingsȱ may understandȱthemselvesȱwithinȱthatȱunity—asȱnotȱdifferentȱfrom God. Aȱ possibleȱ objectionȱ toȱ thisȱ explanationȱ couldȱ beȱ thatȱ the Gospelȱ accentuatesȱ otherȱ aspectsȱ asȱ well.ȱ Veryȱ often,ȱ theȱ disȬ tanceȱ betweenȱ Godȱ andȱ humankindȱ isȱ emphasized.ȱ ViveȬ kanandaȱ isȱ certainlyȱ awareȱ ofȱ thatȱ butȱ givesȱ aȱ specialȱ interȬ pretationȱofȱthisȱvarietyȱofȱaspectsȱinȱtheȱrelationȱofȱhumankind toȱ God.ȱ Inȱ hisȱ opinion,ȱ thereȱ areȱ threeȱ levelsȱ onȱ whichȱ human beingsȱperceiveȱGod.ȱForȱtheȱundevelopedȱhumanȱbeing,ȱGodȱis highlyȱexalted,ȱtheȱheavenlyȱjudge.ȱTheȱLord’sȱPrayer,ȱregarded byȱVivekanandaȱasȱaȱchild’sȱprayer,ȱfitsȱthatȱimage:ȱ“OurȱFather whichȱartȱinȱheaven.”ȱItȱisȱnotȱuntrue,ȱbutȱitȱisȱtheȱlowestȱlevel ofȱ spirituality.ȱ Onȱ aȱ higherȱ level,ȱ Godȱ isȱ regardedȱ asȱ omniȬ present.ȱAȱtextȱthatȱisȱinȱkeepingȱwithȱsuchȱaȱconception,ȱisȱthe following:ȱ“IȱamȱinȱmyȱFather,ȱandȱyouȱareȱinȱme,ȱandȱIȱamȱin you”ȱ (Johnȱ 14:20).ȱ Theȱ highestȱ level,ȱ whichȱ canȱ beȱ reachedȱ by onlyȱ aȱ fewȱ people,ȱ isȱ thatȱ whereȱ theȱ unityȱ ofȱ Godȱ andȱ human beingsȱ isȱ recognized.ȱ Hereȱ theȱ wordsȱ ofȱ theȱ psalmistȱ areȱ apȬ propriate:ȱ “Youȱ areȱ ‘gods’;ȱ youȱ areȱ allȱ sonsȱ ofȱ theȱ Mostȱ High” (Psalmȱ 82:6;ȱ quotedȱ inȱ Johnȱ 10:34).ȱ Itȱ isȱ ofȱ theseȱ peopleȱ that Jesusȱ speaksȱ whenȱ heȱ says:ȱ “Blessedȱ areȱ theȱ pureȱ inȱ heart,ȱ for theyȱwillȱseeȱGod”ȱ(Matthewȱ5:8). Whatȱmustȱoneȱdoȱtoȱreachȱthisȱstage?ȱVivekanandaȱisȱconȬ vincedȱ thatȱ Jesusȱ indicatedȱ onlyȱ oneȱ path:ȱ thatȱ ofȱ renunciation ofȱ theȱ world.ȱ Heȱ quotesȱ Jesus’ȱ wordsȱ toȱ theȱ richȱ youngȱ man whoȱ wishedȱ toȱ inheritȱ eternalȱ life:ȱ “Oneȱ thingȱ thouȱ lackest:ȱ go thyȱ way,ȱ sellȱ whatsoeverȱ thouȱ hast,ȱ andȱ giveȱ toȱ theȱ poor,ȱ and thouȱshaltȱhaveȱtreasureȱinȱheaven:ȱandȱcome,ȱtakeȱupȱtheȱcross, andȱ followȱ me”ȱ (Markȱ 10:21).21ȱ Therefore,ȱ itȱ isȱ notȱ surprising that,ȱ forȱ Vivekananda,ȱ theȱ sayingȱ aboutȱ losingȱ one’sȱ lifeȱ for Christȇsȱ sakeȱ constitutesȱ theȱ climaxȱ inȱ theȱ teachingȱ ofȱ the Gospel.ȱ Heȱ passionatelyȱ confrontsȱ hisȱ Christianȱ audienceȱ with theȱvoiceȱofȱJesusȱthatȱexhortsȱeverybodyȱtoȱgiveȱupȱtheirȱlifeȱin 21 ȱHereȱtheȱtextȱisȱcitedȱfromȱtheȱKingȱJamesȱVersion,ȱwhichȱisȱthe versionȱVivekanandaȱused.

JESUSȱASȱGURU

96

orderȱtoȱfindȱtrueȱlifeȱinȱChristȱ(Matthewȱ16:25).ȱTheȱmoralityȱof Jesus’ȱ teachingsȱ obviouslyȱ culminatesȱ inȱ unselfishnessȱ and abandonmentȱofȱproperty:ȱ“toȱbeȱunselfish,ȱperfectlyȱselfless,ȱis salvationȱitself.”22 InȱthisȱardentȱspeechȱaȱtypicalȱimageȱofȱJesusȱemerges.ȱItȱis theȱ imageȱ thatȱ reflectsȱ theȱ lifestyleȱ ofȱ theȱ speakerȱ himself,ȱ a monk.ȱEverythingȱthatȱisȱsaidȱinȱtheȱGospelȱaboutȱtheȱgoodness ofȱearthlyȱlifeȱandȱtheȱtaskȱofȱpeopleȱinȱthatȱrespectȱisȱomittedȱor regardedȱ asȱ aȱ preliminaryȱ phaseȱ inȱ Jesus’ȱ teaching.ȱ Theȱ real messageȱ isȱ theȱ appealȱ toȱ giveȱ upȱ everythingȱ andȱ toȱ leaveȱ the worldȱbehind.ȱThenȱtheȱtrueȱdestinyȱofȱhumanȱbeingsȱbecomes visible:ȱ aȱ humanȱ beingȱ atȱ theȱ divineȱ level.ȱ Inȱ otherȱ lecturesȱ as wellȱVivekanandaȱclearlyȱindicatesȱthatȱheȱconsidersȱJesusȱtoȱbe anȱasceticȱandȱoneȱwhoȱrenouncedȱtheȱworld.ȱTheȱyogaȱmaster whoȱapproachedȱRamakrishnaȱhasȱbeenȱgivenȱotherȱfeatures.ȱIn Ramakrishna’sȱ conception,ȱ itȱ couldȱ beȱ assumedȱ thatȱ Jesus wouldȱ haveȱ attainedȱ theȱ divineȱ levelȱ withinȱ worldlyȱ existence andȱlikewiseȱthatȱheȱshowedȱtoȱhisȱfollowersȱaȱspiritualȱwayȱin theirȱ mundaneȱ life.ȱ Thatȱ wouldȱ fitȱ intoȱ theȱ worldȱ ofȱ tantrism andȱ itȱ wouldȱ alsoȱ beȱ connectedȱ withȱ bhaktiȱ spirituality.23ȱ In Vivekanandaȇsȱpresentation,ȱtheȱbelieverȱhasȱtoȱabandonȱeveryȬ thing.ȱ Hereȱ weȱ seeȱ theȱ monkȱ inȱ theȱ classicalȱ traditionȱ ofȱ VeȬ danta:ȱ ifȱ theȱ wholeȱ phenomenalȱ worldȱ isȱ ultimatelyȱ nothing moreȱthanȱillusionȱ(maya),ȱthenȱtheȱtruthȱcanȱonlyȱbeȱdiscovered byȱ thoseȱ whoȱ renounceȱ theȱ world.ȱ Inȱ anotherȱ lectureȱ ViveȬ kanandaȱ statesȱ plainly:ȱ “Christȱ wasȱ aȱ Sannyasin,ȱ andȱ hisȱ reliȬ gionȱisȱessentiallyȱfitȱforȱSannyasinsȱonly.”24 Itȱ isȱ obviousȱ thatȱ Christiansȱ willȱ missȱ vitalȱ partsȱ ofȱ their faithȱ inȱ thisȱ imageȱ ofȱ Christ.ȱ Butȱ inȱ theȱ Hinduȱ contextȱ asȱ well ȱVivekananda,ȱTheȱCompleteȱWorks,ȱvol.ȱIV,ȱ10thȱed.,ȱp.ȱ150.

22

ȱMostȱmodernȱauthorsȱregardȱRamakrishnaȱprimarilyȱasȱaȱtantrika. SeeȱKripal,ȱKali’sȱChild,ȱ1995;ȱNeevel,ȱ“TheȱTransformationȱofȱSriȱRamaȬ krishna.”ȱN.P.ȱSilȱȱ(“VivekanandaȇsȱRamakrishna:ȱAnȱUntoldȱStoryȱof MythmakingȱandȱPropaganda,”ȱNumenȱ40ȱ(1993):ȱ38Ȭ62)ȱdepictsȱhimȱpriȬ marilyȱasȱaȱbhaktiȱadept.ȱTheȱoneȱdoesȱnotȱexcludeȱtheȱother,ȱbutȱtheȱtanȬ tricȱaspectȱcertainlyȱcannotȱbeȱdenied. 23

ȱVivekananda,ȱTheȱCompleteȱWorks,ȱvol.ȱVI,ȱ9thȱed.ȱ(Calcutta:ȱAdvaiȬ taȱAshrama,ȱ1972),ȱp.ȱ109.ȱThisȱquotation,ȱhowever,ȱisȱtakenȱfromȱnotes madeȱbyȱstudents.ȱTheȱcontextȱisȱunclearȱtoȱsomeȱextent. 24

THEȱYOGAȱMASTER:ȱTHEȱRAMAKRISHNAȱMISSION

97

thisȱapproachȱcouldȱbeȱevaluatedȱasȱbeingȱconsiderablyȱlimited. StanleyȱSamarthaȱrightlyȱconcludesȱthat neitherȱ theȱ ethicalȱ teachingsȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ whichȱ made suchȱanȱimpressionȱonȱRajaȱRamȱMohanȱRoyȇsȱmindȱnorȱthe sufferingsȱandȱcrossȱofȱChristȱwhichȱsoȱtouchedȱtheȱheartȱof Mahatmaȱ Gandhiȱ seemȱ toȱ haveȱ madeȱ anyȱ impressionȱ on SwamiȱVivekananda.25

However,ȱ itȱ shouldȱ beȱ borneȱ inȱ mindȱ thatȱ Vivekananda,ȱ with hisȱ strongȱ senseȱ ofȱ justice,ȱ clashedȱ continuouslyȱ withȱ injustice andȱ hypocrisyȱ inȱ theȱ practiceȱ ofȱ Christianity.ȱ Neitherȱ theȱ coȬ lonialȱchurchȱinȱIndiaȱnorȱtheȱrigidȱorthodoxyȱinȱNorthȱAmerica gaveȱ himȱ theȱ impressionȱ thatȱ Jesus’ȱ wordsȱ couldȱ haveȱ aȱ benȬ eficialȱeffectȱinȱsociety.ȱHeȱwasȱnotȱveryȱimpressedȱbyȱtheȱChrisȬ tianȱ cultureȱ withȱ itsȱ “threeȱ B’s:ȱ Bible,ȱ bayonet,ȱ andȱ brandy.”26 Hisȱ emphasisȱ onȱ renouncingȱ theȱ worldȱ andȱ Johannineȱ mystics mayȱ beȱ oneȬsided,ȱ butȱ itȱ neverthelessȱ revealsȱ aȱ sincereȱ fasȬ cinationȱforȱtheȱpersonȱofȱJesus.ȱAndȱoneȱfacetȱofȱtheȱworkȱand teachingȱ ofȱ Christ,ȱ oftenȱ underestimatedȱ inȱ theȱ West,ȱ has gainedȱ newȱ significanceȱ forȱ manyȱ inȱ Vivekanandaȇsȱ audience, bothȱHindusȱandȱChristians. LaterȱDevelopments Theȱ followingȱ generationsȱ inȱ Vivekanandaȇsȱ monasticȱ order wereȱlikewiseȱsincerelyȱinterestedȱinȱtheȱpersonȱofȱJesusȱChrist. Itȱ hasȱ alwaysȱ remainedȱ theȱ generalȱ convictionȱ inȱ theȱ RamaȬ krishnaȱMovementȱthatȱtheȱspiritualȱteachersȱofȱtheȱnonȬHindu religionsȱmustȱbeȱheldȱinȱesteem.ȱTheȱusualȱargumentationȱwas thatȱ inȱ theirȱ teachingsȱ oneȱ canȱ findȱ elementsȱ ofȱ theȱ universal religionȱ thatȱ isȱ elaboratedȱ completelyȱ inȱ theȱ Vedantaȱ philoȬ sophy.ȱAmongȱtheseȱteachers,ȱJesusȱandȱtheȱBuddhaȱoccupyȱthe mostȱprominentȱplaces.ȱChristmasȱisȱtheȱoccasionȱonȱwhichȱthe significanceȱofȱJesusȱChristȱ andȱ hisȱteachingȱ areȱ highlightedȱin theȱ Ramakrishnaȱ centres.ȱ Theȱ factȱ thatȱ Christmasȱ Eveȱ hadȱ a specialȱplaceȱinȱtheȱlegendsȱaboutȱtheȱfoundationȱofȱtheȱOrder, ȱS.J.ȱSamartha,ȱTheȱHinduȱResponseȱtoȱtheȱUnboundȱChristȱ(Madras: ChristianȱLiteratureȱSociety,ȱ1974),ȱp.ȱ59. 25

26 ȱVivekananda,ȱTheȱCompleteȱWorks,ȱvol.ȱII,ȱ13thȱed.ȱ(Calcutta:ȱAdvaȬ itaȱAshrama,ȱ1976),ȱp.ȱ517.

JESUSȱASȱGURU

98

increasesȱ theȱ importanceȱ ofȱ thatȱ occasion.ȱ Sinceȱ theȱ beginning ofȱ theȱ twentiethȱ centuryȱ Christmasȱ isȱ celebratedȱ everyȱ yearȱ in allȱ centresȱ ofȱ theȱ Ramakrishnaȱ Mathȱ (order)ȱ andȱ Mission.ȱ The ritualȱ thatȱ isȱ practisedȱ suggestsȱ thatȱ itȱ isȱ Christian,ȱ butȱ itȱ isȱ in factȱpurelyȱHindu.ȱAȱdescriptionȱofȱtheȱcelebrationȱatȱtheȱheadȬ quartersȱofȱtheȱmovement,ȱtheȱmonasteryȱatȱBelur,ȱinȱ1914ȱproȬ videsȱ someȱ interestingȱ details.ȱ Oneȱ ofȱ theȱ monksȱ hadȱ dressed upȱ asȱ aȱ Romanȱ Catholicȱ priestȱ andȱ worshippedȱ byȱ presenting offeringsȱtoȱaȱpictureȱofȱtheȱMadonnaȱwithȱChild.ȱTheȱofferings consistedȱofȱcandlelightȱandȱflowers,ȱasȱwellȱasȱaȱfruitcakeȱandȱa cigar,ȱ inȱ orderȱ toȱ underscoreȱ theȱ Westernȱ characterȱ ofȱ theȱ fesȬ tival!ȱAfterȱtheȱservice,ȱaȱmeditationȱsessionȱwasȱheldȱinȱwhich theȱ monksȱ triedȱ toȱ experienceȱ theȱ actualȱ presenceȱ ofȱ Christ.27 Usually,ȱ aȱ readingȱ fromȱ theȱ Bibleȱ wasȱ alsoȱ includedȱ inȱ these Christmasȱ celebrations—Lukeȱ 2ȱ orȱ theȱ Sermonȱ onȱ theȱ Mount wereȱ theȱ favouriteȱ lessons.ȱ Oneȱ ofȱ theȱ monksȱ orȱ aȱ Christian guestȱgaveȱaȱspeech. Theȱ Christȱ Weȱ Adoreȱ isȱ theȱ titleȱ ofȱ aȱ littleȱ bookȱ containing theȱ Christmasȱ addressȱ ofȱ oneȱ ofȱ theȱ laterȱ leadersȱ ofȱ theȱ RamaȬ krishnaȱ Movement.28ȱ Itȱ providesȱ clearȱ insightȱ intoȱ theȱ notions aboutȱJesusȱthatȱareȱconstitutiveȱforȱtheȱChristmasȱcelebrationȱof theȱmonastics.ȱTheȱtitleȱisȱanȱallusionȱtoȱaȱChristmasȱcarolȱthatȱis alsoȱ veryȱ popularȱ inȱ India:ȱ “Oȱ come,ȱ allȱ yeȱ faithful”ȱ withȱ the refrainȱ “Oȱ come,ȱ letȱ usȱ adoreȱ Him.”ȱ Theȱ speakerȱ whoȱ reveals whomȱtheȱmonasticsȱadoreȱisȱSwamiȱRanganathananda,ȱoneȱof theȱ mostȱ influentialȱ monksȱ ofȱ theȱ Orderȱ whoȱ wouldȱ later,ȱ in 1998,ȱ atȱ theȱ ageȱ ofȱ 89ȱ becomeȱ theȱ thirteenthȱ Presidentȱ ofȱ the

ȱPrabhavananda,ȱReligionȱinȱPracticeȱ(Hollywood:ȱVedantaȱPress, 1969),ȱp.ȱ209;ȱPrabhavananda,ȱTheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMountȱaccordingȱtoȱVeȬ dantaȱ(NewȱYork:ȱNewȱAmericanȱLibrary),ȱp.ȱ8.ȱForȱlaterȱcelebrationsȱcf. alsoȱ Christopherȱ Isherwood,ȱ Myȱ Guruȱ andȱ Hisȱ Discipleȱ (Belur,ȱ 1963); GeraldȱB.ȱCooke,ȱAȱNeoȬHinduȱAshramaȱinȱSouthȱIndiaȱ(Bangalore:ȱChrisȬ tianȱInstituteȱforȱtheȱStudyȱofȱReligionȱandȱSociety,ȱ1966),ȱp.ȱ24ȱ(BangaȬ lore,ȱ1960s). 27

28 ȱRanganathananda,ȱTheȱChristȱWeȱAdoreȱ(Calcutta:ȱRamakrishna MissionȱInstituteȱofȱCulture,ȱ1969).

THEȱYOGAȱMASTER:ȱTHEȱRAMAKRISHNAȱMISSION

99

Ramakrishnaȱ Mathȱ andȱ Mission.29ȱ Butȱ thisȱ Christmasȱ address wasȱdeliveredȱasȱearlyȱasȱinȱ1954,ȱwhenȱheȱwasȱtheȱsecretaryȱof theȱ Delhiȱ branch.ȱ Theȱ celebrationȱ tookȱ placeȱ inȱ theȱ scholarly instituteȱ ofȱ theȱ Order,ȱ theȱ Ramakrishnaȱ Missionȱ Instituteȱ of CultureȱinȱCalcutta. Inȱ hisȱ longȱ addressȱ Ranganathanandaȱ givesȱ anȱ elaborate overviewȱ ofȱ theȱ lifeȱ ofȱ Jesus.ȱ Theȱ materialȱ isȱ takenȱ completely fromȱ theȱ gospels.ȱ Itȱ isȱ remarkableȱ thatȱ theȱ swamiȱ chieflyȱ uses theȱsynopticȱgospels.ȱTheȱgreatȱpreferenceȱofȱHinduȱmonksȱfor theȱgospelȱofȱJohnȱisȱnotȱfoundȱinȱhisȱworks.ȱTheȱfirstȱversesȱof thatȱgospelȱthat,ȱaccordingȱtoȱSwamiȱVivekananda,ȱcontainȱthe wholeȱ essenceȱ ofȱ Christianityȱ doȱ notȱ evenȱ occurȱ inȱ hisȱ ChristȬ masȱ address.ȱ Onȱ theȱ otherȱ hand,ȱ theȱ Sermonȱ onȱ theȱ Mountȱ is treatedȱ extensively.ȱ Andȱ thatȱ tooȱ isȱ aȱ newȱ orientationȱ inȱ comȬ parisonȱwithȱVivekananda.ȱTheȱlatterȱdidȱnotȱexactlyȱcareȱmuch forȱtheȱnumerousȱmoralȱpreceptsȱofȱtheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMount. Inȱ hisȱopinion,ȱtheȱ religiousȱ calibreȱ ofȱsuchȱ ethicsȱ wasȱ meagre; onlyȱ theȱ noviceȱ onȱ theȱ spiritualȱ pathȱ couldȱ benefitȱ fromȱ it.ȱ He onceȱcalledȱtheȱfamousȱGoldenȱRule,ȱwithȱwhichȱtheȱSermonȱon theȱMountȱends,ȱ“excessivelyȱvulgar”ȱbecauseȱofȱitsȱorientation toȱ theȱ self.30ȱ Forȱ him,ȱ theȱ heartȱ ofȱ allȱ religionȱ wasȱ toȱ transcend theȱ orientationȱ toȱ theȱ selfȱ andȱ toȱ achieveȱ unityȱ withȱ the godhead.ȱOneȱtextȱinȱtheȱSermonȱofȱtheȱMountȱstoodȱout,ȱinȱhis

ȱHeȱwasȱbornȱinȱDecemberȱ1908ȱinȱTirukkur,ȱKerala.ȱHeȱjoinedȱthe RamakrishnaȱMissionȱwhenȱheȱwasȱ18ȱandȱinȱ1933ȱheȱwasȱinitiatedȱasȱa sannyasiȱ byȱ Swamiȱ Shivananda.ȱ Heȱ firstȱ workedȱ atȱ differentȱ Indian branchesȱofȱtheȱRamakrishnaȱMovement,ȱthenȱinȱRangoonȱandȱinȱKarȬ achi.ȱSubsequently,ȱheȱwasȱforȱaȱtimeȱsecretaryȱofȱtheȱRamakrishnaȱMisȬ sionȱInstituteȱofȱCultureȱinȱCalcutta.ȱHisȱpublicationsȱareȱonȱfaithȱandȱsciȬ ence,ȱandȱonȱtheȱsocialȱethicsȱofȱHinduism.ȱInȱtheȱ1980s,ȱbeforeȱaȱbranch existedȱinȱtheȱNetherlandsȱwithȱitsȱownȱspiritualȱleader,ȱSwamiȱRangaȬ nathanandaȱvisitedȱtheȱcountryȱdifferentȱtimes.ȱInȱ2000ȱheȱwasȱinȱthe newsȱwhenȱheȱrefusedȱtoȱacceptȱtheȱhighestȱdistinctionȱofȱtheȱRepublic ofȱIndia,ȱtheȱPadmaȱVibhushan,ȱbecauseȱheȱdidȱnotȱfindȱpersonalȱmarks ofȱhonourȱfittingȱforȱaȱmonk.ȱRanganathanandaȱdiedȱinȱ2005ȱatȱtheȱage ofȱ96. 29

30 ȱVivekananda,ȱTheȱCompleteȱWorks,ȱvol.ȱIII,ȱ11thȱed.ȱ(Calcutta:ȱAdȬ vaitaȱAshrama,ȱ1973),ȱp.ȱ500.

JESUSȱASȱGURU

100

view,ȱi.e.ȱ“Blessedȱareȱtheȱpureȱinȱheart:ȱforȱtheyȱwillȱseeȱGod” (Matthewȱ5:8).31 Forȱ Swamiȱ Ranganathananda,ȱ too, thisȱisȱaȱcentralȱtextȱinȱtheȱteachingsȱofȱJeȬ sus.ȱ Heȱ regardsȱ thisȱ sayingȱ asȱ theȱ exȬ pressionȱ ofȱ Jesus’ȱ newȱ andȱ revolutionary viewȱ thatȱ itȱ isȱ possibleȱ toȱ realizeȱ unity withȱGodȱinȱthisȱworldȱandȱnotȱonlyȱafter death.ȱ Inȱ thisȱ connectionȱ heȱ refersȱ toȱ that otherȱ Scripturalȱ textȱ thatȱ hasȱ extraordinȬ aryȱ significanceȱ forȱ Hindus:ȱ “Theȱ KingȬ domȱ ofȱ Godȱ isȱ withinȱ you”ȱ (Lukeȱ 17:21). Ranganathanandaȱ alsoȱ interpretsȱ “within you”ȱasȱ“inȱyourȱinnerȱself”:ȱtheȱKingdomȱofȱGodȱcanȱbeȱexperi encedȱinȱtheȱinnerȱlife.ȱPurenessȱinȱheartȱisȱaȱconditionȱforȱsharȬ ingȱinȱthisȱKingdom.ȱButȱwhoeverȱfulfilsȱthisȱconditionȱcanȱrealȬ izeȱunityȱwithȱGodȱandȱthusȱseeȱGod.ȱRanganathanandaȱquotes twoȱtextsȱfromȱtheȱUpanishadsȱinȱorderȱtoȱdemonstrateȱthatȱthe goalȱ inȱ bothȱ religionsȱ isȱ identical.ȱ Theseȱ textsȱ couldȱ beȱ transȬ latedȱasȱ“Verily,ȱtheȱselfȱmustȱbeȱseen,”ȱandȱ“Heȱwhoȱisȱwithout desire,ȱ seesȱ theȱ greatnessȱ ofȱ theȱ self”ȱ (BrihadȬAranyaka Upanishadȱ11:4:5;ȱKathaȱUpanishadȱ1:2:20).ȱTypicalȱforȱtheȱlingȬ uisticȱusageȱinȱtheȱRamakrishnaȱMovementȱisȱthatȱinȱbothȱtexts theȱwordsȱforȱ“see”ȱareȱtranslatedȱbyȱ“realize.”ȱAllȱemphasisȱis onȱdeliberateȱhumanȱendeavour. Ranganathanandaȱ arguesȱ inȱ hisȱ addressȱ thatȱ thisȱ isȱ what Jesusȱ intendedȱ inȱ hisȱ teaching,ȱ andȱ regardsȱ itȱ asȱ contrasting sharplyȱ withȱ theȱ oldȱ Israeliteȱ religion.ȱ Thereȱ Godȱ was,ȱ inȱ his view,ȱ farȱ awayȱ andȱ elevatedȱ aboveȱ humanȱ beingsȱ inȱ heavenly majesty.ȱ Asȱ aȱ result,ȱ thatȱ religionȱ couldȱ onlyȱ guideȱ humanȱ beȬ ingsȱinȱtheirȱmoralȱconductȱinȱlife.ȱThroughȱJohnȱtheȱBaptistȱand Jesus,ȱhowever,ȱaȱnewȱworldview32ȱemergedȱinȱIsrael,ȱinȱwhich theȱ transcendentȱ comesȱ withinȱ reach.ȱ Theȱ relationshipȱ with Godȱisȱnotȱdeterminedȱanyȱlongerȱbyȱobedienceȱandȱfearȱbutȱby love.ȱ Thatȱ theȱ swamiȱ himselfȱ isȱ affectedȱ byȱ thisȱ aspectȱ inȱ the gospelȱappearsȱfromȱtheȱmovingȱwayȱinȱwhichȱheȱwrites:ȱ“Jesus ȱȱVivekananda,ȱTheȱCompleteȱWorks,ȱvol.ȱIV,ȱ10thȱed.,ȱp.ȱ148.

31

32 ȱRanganathanandaȱusesȱtheȱGermanȱwordȱWeltanschauung,ȱwhich isȱpopularȱwithȱseveralȱHinduȱgurus.

THEȱYOGAȱMASTER:ȱTHEȱRAMAKRISHNAȱMISSION

101

proclaimedȱ aȱ religionȱ ofȱ wideȱ andȱ deepȱ horizons;ȱ heȱ brought Godȱ nearȱ toȱ manȱ andȱ boundȱ bothȱ withȱ theȱ cordȱ ofȱ love;ȱ he eliminatedȱ fearȱ asȱ theȱ mediumȱ ofȱ theirȱ relationship.”33ȱ Thisȱ is relevantȱ toȱ Ranganathanandaȱ becauseȱ heȱ considersȱ itȱ toȱ beȱ a strikingȱ parallelȱwithȱ Hinduȱ religion.ȱ Heȱquotesȱ theȱ parableȱ of theȱhouseȱbuiltȱuponȱtheȱrockȱ(Matthewȱ7:24Ȭ27)ȱandȱconnectsȱit withȱaȱsimilarȱthoughtȱinȱtheȱBhagavadȬGita.34ȱHisȱconclusionȱis thatȱ bothȱ Christȱ andȱ Krishnaȱ emphasizeȱ sadhana,ȱ religious practice,ȱinȱorderȱtoȱreachȱanubhava,ȱtheȱrealizationȱofȱGod.35 RanganathanandaȱclearlyȱpresentsȱtheȱmessageȱofȱJesusȱas anȱappealȱtoȱrealizeȱtheȱdivineȱpresenceȱbyȱmeansȱofȱone’sȱown spiritualȱeffort.ȱAndȱthisȱmessageȱisȱmeantȱforȱtheȱmasses:ȱitȱhas universalȱ significance.ȱ Heȱ isȱ convincedȱ thatȱ Jesusȱ published suchȱaȱtruthȱandȱthatȱheȱdidȱsoȱwithȱaȱspecialȱauthority.ȱWhatȱis theȱbasisȱofȱthatȱauthority?ȱRanganathananda’sȱextensiveȱreport ofȱtheȱlifeȱofȱJesusȱpointsȱconstantlyȱtoȱtheȱsameȱconclusion.ȱJeȬ susȱisȱnotȱanȱordinaryȱmanȱbutȱaȱdivineȱincarnation.ȱManyȱepiȬ sodesȱ inȱ hisȱ life,ȱ viewedȱ fromȱ aȱ Hinduȱ perspective,ȱ constitute theȱconvincingȱproofȱofȱhisȱdivinity. Ranganathanandaȱ startsȱ withȱ theȱ angelicȱ choirȱ atȱ Jesus’ birth,ȱ inȱ whichȱ respectȱ heȱ quotesȱ aȱ beautifulȱ textȱ fromȱ the Naradaȱ Bhaktiȱ Sutraȱ aboutȱ godsȱ dancingȱ atȱ theȱ birthȱ ofȱ a saviourȱ (Naradaȱ Bhaktiȱ Sutraȱ 71).ȱ Thenȱ comesȱ theȱ storyȱ about theȱtwelveȬyearȬoldȱJesusȱinȱtheȱtemple,ȱalsoȱmeaningfulȱinȱthis connection.ȱ Theȱ baptismȱ inȱ theȱ Jordanȱ is,ȱ accordingȱ toȱ the swami,ȱtheȱoccasionȱwhenȱJesusȱhadȱhisȱfirstȱrecordedȱspiritual experience,ȱ whenȱ theȱ voiceȱ spokeȱ fromȱ heaven.ȱ Theȱ gathering ofȱtheȱdisciplesȱisȱproofȱtoȱanȱIndianȱthatȱJesusȱwasȱaȱtrueȱspirȬ itualȱ teacher,ȱ aȱ guru.ȱ Thenȱ theȱ “healingȱ touchȱ ofȱ Jesus”ȱ isȱ disȬ cussedȱ andȱ theȱ episodesȱ inȱ whichȱ heȱ demonstratesȱ hisȱ comȬ passion,ȱespeciallyȱwithȱregardȱtoȱsinfulȱwomen.ȱTheȱconclusion

ȱRanganathananda,ȱTheȱChristȱWeȱAdore,ȱp.ȱ7.

33

ȱBhagavadȬGitaȱXII:20:ȱ“Thoseȱdevoteesȱwhoȱpractise,ȱinȱaȱconverȬ gingȱlifeȱendeavour,ȱthisȱteachingȱofȱmineȱwhichȱfulfilsȱallȱrighteousness andȱleadsȱtoȱimmortality,ȱendowedȱwithȱfaithȱandȱaȱgodwardȱpassion, areȱextremelyȱdearȱtoȱme”ȱ(Ranganathananda’sȱtranslation,ȱTheȱChristȱWe Adore,ȱpp.ȱ19Ȭ20). 34

ȱRanganathananda,ȱTheȱChristȱWeȱAdore,ȱp.ȱ20.

35

JESUSȱASȱGURU

102

isȱ unmistakable:ȱ Hindusȱ recognizeȱ suchȱ aȱ personȱ “spontaneȬ ouslyȱ...ȱasȱaȱdivineȱincarnation.”36 Ranganathanandaȱ attachesȱ littleȱ importanceȱ toȱ theȱ sufȬ feringȱofȱJesus,ȱcallingȱitȱaȱtragedy,ȱbereftȱofȱanyȱspecialȱspiritual beauty.ȱ Heȱ comparesȱ itȱ toȱ theȱ endȱ ofȱ Rama’sȱ lifeȱ andȱ thatȱ of Krishna:ȱ bothȱ canȱ alsoȱ beȱ characterizedȱ asȱ tragedies.ȱ “Butȱ we didȱnotȱbuildȱourȱreligionȱonȱthem”ȱisȱhisȱindicationȱofȱtheȱdifȬ ferenceȱbetweenȱtheȱtwoȱreligions.37ȱHeȱevenȱdenotesȱtheȱwayȱin whichȱ Christiansȱ dealȱ withȱ theirȱ founder’sȱ deathȱ aȱ greater tragedyȱ thanȱ hisȱ tragicȱ deathȱ itself:ȱ “Theȱ manȱ ofȱ joy,ȱ which Jesusȱundoubtedlyȱwasȱinȱrealȱlife,ȱbecameȱtransformedȱintoȱthe manȱofȱsorrows,ȱinȱdogma.”38 Thus,ȱ someȱ linesȱ inȱ theȱ viewȱ ofȱ Swamiȱ Vivekananda appearȱtoȱbeȱpursuedȱhere.ȱItȱisȱnotȱtheȱsufferingȱChristȱbutȱthe teacherȱwhoȱisȱprominent.ȱJesusȱChristȱisȱconsideredȱtoȱbeȱaȱSon ofȱGod,ȱaȱdivineȱincarnation.ȱHeȱbringsȱaȱteachingȱthatȱmakesȱit possibleȱ forȱ peopleȱ toȱ realizeȱ unityȱ withȱ Godȱ inȱ theirȱ ownȱ exȬ istence.ȱButȱwhereasȱVivekanandaȱregardedȱJesusȱasȱaȱsannyasi withȱ aȱ messageȱ forȱ sannyasins,ȱ Ranganathanandaȱ isȱ convinced ofȱ theȱ universalȱ importanceȱ ofȱ Jesus’ȱ messageȱ aboutȱ theȱ KingȬ domȱ ofȱ Godȱ thatȱ isȱ withinȱ theȱ individual.ȱ Theȱ Sermonȱ onȱ the Mount,ȱ inȱ particular,ȱ isȱ proofȱ toȱ himȱ thatȱ Jesusȱ intendedȱ to show,ȱ notȱ aȱ fewȱ worldȱ renouncers,ȱ butȱ theȱ massesȱ howȱ God provesȱtoȱbeȱnear.ȱThatȱisȱaȱremarkableȱChristmasȱmessageȱinȱa communityȱofȱmonastics. Thereȱ areȱ alsoȱ someȱ otherȱ monksȱ ofȱ theȱ Ramakrishna Orderȱ whoȱ wereȱ exploringȱ theȱ meaningȱ ofȱ Christ,ȱ andȱ even moreȱ systematicallyȱ andȱ moreȱ intensivelyȱ thanȱ RanganathaȬ nanda.ȱ Theyȱ hadȱ aȱ specialȱ reasonȱ forȱ doingȱ so:ȱ theyȱ hadȱ been sentȱasȱIndianȱmonksȱtoȱAmericaȱasȱmissionaries.ȱAmongȱthem wereȱtwoȱwhoȱexercisedȱaȱstrongȱinfluenceȱonȱHinduȬChristian dialogue,ȱ especiallyȱ inȱ theȱ Unitedȱ States.ȱ Oneȱ workedȱ onȱ the eastȱ coastȱ andȱ theȱ otherȱ onȱ theȱ westȱ coast,ȱ andȱ eachȱ wroteȱ a bookȱonȱJesusȱthatȱattractedȱparticularȱattention.

ȱRanganathananda,ȱTheȱChristȱWeȱAdore,ȱp.ȱ39.

36

ȱRanganathananda,ȱTheȱChristȱWeȱAdore,ȱp.ȱ39.

37

ȱRanganathananda,ȱTheȱChristȱWeȱAdore,ȱp.ȱ43.

38

THEȱYOGAȱMASTER:ȱTHEȱRAMAKRISHNAȱMISSION

103

HinduȱViewȱofȱChristȱisȱtheȱtitleȱof aȱ bookȱ thatȱ containsȱ theȱ textsȱ of twelveȱ lecturesȱ byȱ Swamiȱ AkhilȬ ananda.ȱThisȱRamakrishnaȱmonkȱhad beenȱsentȱtoȱtheȱUnitedȱStatesȱinȱ1926, whenȱ heȱ wasȱ 34ȱ yearsȱ old,ȱ andȱ he wouldȱbeȱactiveȱinȱtheȱNewȱEngland statesȱuntilȱhisȱdeathȱinȱ1962.ȱShortly afterȱ hisȱ arrival,ȱSwamiȱ Akhilananda becameȱtheȱheadȱofȱoneȱofȱtheȱAmerȬ icanȱ branchesȱ ofȱ theȱ Ramakrishna Movement,ȱ i.e.ȱ theȱ Vedantaȱ Societyȱ ofȱ Providence.ȱ Heȱ later foundedȱaȱbranchȱinȱBoston,ȱwhereȱheȱbuiltȱupȱmanyȱcontactsȱin theȱ academicȱ worldȱ andȱ theȱ church.ȱ Akhilanandaȱ gladlyȱ enȬ teredȱintoȱdialogueȱwithȱChristians,ȱespeciallyȱwithȱtheologians atȱ theȱ universitiesȱ andȱ ministersȱ ofȱ theȱ variousȱ churches.ȱ He regardedȱhimselfȱasȱtheirȱcolleague,ȱonȱtheȱsameȱlevelȱbutȱfrom aȱdifferentȱreligion.ȱEvenȱhisȱdressȱreflectedȱthatȱattitude,ȱforȱhe sometimesȱ woreȱ aȱ blackȱ suitȱ withȱ aȱ clericalȱ collarȱ likeȱ theȱ AnȬ glicanȱclergy.ȱHisȱbookȱonȱChristȱwasȱpublishedȱinȱ1949ȱwithȱa forewordȱbyȱtheȱdeanȱofȱtheȱBostonȱUniversityȱSchoolȱofȱTheoȬ logy.ȱ Theȱ bookȱ attractedȱ worldwideȱ attention,ȱ andȱ several Christianȱ theologiansȱ studiedȱ Akhilananda’sȱ Christologicalȱ reȬ flections.39 Swamiȱ Prabhavananda40ȱ hadȱ takenȱ monasticȱ ordersȱ in 1921,ȱatȱtheȱageȱofȱ28.ȱTwoȱyearsȱlaterȱheȱwasȱsentȱtoȱAmericaȱin orderȱtoȱworkȱ asȱ aȱ Hinduȱmissionaryȱ inȱ theȱ statesȱ onȱ theȱ west coast.ȱForȱsomeȱtimeȱheȱwasȱtheȱassistantȱtoȱtheȱmonkȱinȱcharge ofȱ theȱ Sanȱ Franciscoȱ branchȱ butȱ afterwardsȱ foundedȱ hisȱ own centreȱinȱPortland,ȱOregon.ȱInȱ1929ȱheȱsettledȱinȱHollywoodȱat theȱinvitationȱofȱoneȱofȱtheȱAmericanȱdisciplesȱofȱVivekananda, SisterȱLalita.ȱHeȱgatheredȱaȱmodestȱcircleȱofȱpupils,ȱwhoseȱspirȬ itualȱguideȱheȱremainedȱuntilȱhisȱdeathȱinȱ1976.ȱOneȱofȱhisȱnuȬ ȱȱHeinrichȱBarlage,ȱChristȱSaviourȱofȱMankind:ȱAȱChristianȱAppreciaȬ tionȱofȱSwamiȱAkhilananda,ȱVeröffentlichungenȱdesȱMissionspriesterseminȬ arsȱSt.ȱAugustinȱbeiȱBonn,ȱ27ȱ(St.ȱAugustin:ȱSteylerȱVerlag,ȱ1977);ȱSamarȬ tha,ȱ Theȱ Hinduȱ Responseȱ toȱ theȱ Unboundȱ Christ,ȱ pp.ȱ 61Ȭ72;ȱ Ottoȱ Wolff, ChristusȱunterȱdenȱHindusȱ(Gütersloh:ȱGerdȱMohn,ȱ1965),ȱpp.ȱ187Ȭ209. 39

ȱOnȱPrabhavanandaȱseeȱIsherwood,ȱMyȱGuruȱandȱHisȱDisciple.

40

JESUSȱASȱGURU

104

merousȱbooksȱfocusesȱonȱChristianȱbeliefȱandȱisȱcalledȱTheȱSerȬ monȱ onȱ theȱ Mountȱ accordingȱ toȱ Vedantaȱ andȱ containsȱ theȱ revised textsȱ ofȱ aȱ seriesȱ ofȱ lecturesȱ thatȱ theȱ swamiȱ deliveredȱ toȱ his disciples.ȱTheȱfirstȱeditionȱappearedȱinȱ1963ȱandȱwasȱreprinted severalȱtimes;ȱitȱwasȱalsoȱtranslatedȱintoȱDutchȱbyȱtheȱAmsterȬ damȱ“SchoolȱvoorȱFilosofie.”41 BothȱHinduȱ missionariesȱ hadȱmuchȱ inȱcommon.ȱ Theyȱ difȬ feredȱonlyȱoneȱyearȱinȱageȱandȱbothȱhadȱbeenȱpupilsȱofȱSwami BrahmanandaȱwhoȱsucceededȱVivekanandaȱasȱtheȱleaderȱofȱthe Ramakrishnaȱ Movement.ȱ Theirȱ guruȱ Brahmanandaȱ hadȱ once receivedȱ aȱ visionȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ andȱ thisȱ inducedȱ himȱ toȱ a specialȱ devotion.ȱ Itȱ wasȱ onȱ hisȱ initiativeȱ thatȱ allȱ Ramakrishna centresȱcameȱtoȱcelebrateȱChristmasȱeveryȱyear.42ȱBrahmananda stimulatedȱ hisȱ pupilsȱ toȱ continueȱ theȱ activitiesȱ thatȱ ViveȬ kanandaȱ hadȱ startedȱ inȱ America.ȱ Inȱ conformityȱ withȱ theȱ uniȬ versalisticȱidealsȱofȱRamakrishnaȱandȱhisȱfollowers,ȱtheȱpurpose wasȱ notȱ conversionȱ butȱ anȱ enrichmentȱ ofȱ spiritualityȱ inȱ the West.ȱBothȱmissionariesȱconsideredȱthisȱtoȱbeȱtheirȱtask. However,ȱthereȱwereȱalsoȱdifferences.ȱSwamiȱAkhilananda wasȱmoreȱorientedȱtowardsȱWesternȱculture.ȱHeȱfeltȱatȱhomeȱin theȱ urbanȱ environmentȱ ofȱ theȱ eastȱ coastȱ andȱ wasȱ aȱ memberȱ of numerousȱreligiousȱandȱacademicȱassociations.ȱHeȱregardedȱhis specialȱcontributionȱtoȱthatȱmilieuȱtoȱbeȱinȱtheȱfieldȱofȱpractical wisdomȱinspiredȱbyȱIndianȱspirituality.ȱThus,ȱoneȱofȱhisȱbooks dealsȱwithȱHinduȱpsychologyȱandȱbearsȱtheȱstrikingȱsubtitleȱIts Meaningȱ forȱ theȱ West.ȱ Likewise,ȱ hisȱ bookȱ onȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ hasȱ a practicalȱoutlook.ȱManyȱproblemsȱofȱlifeȱareȱdiscussedȱinȱwhich Christ’sȱteachingȱoffersȱaȱsolution,ȱviewedȱfromȱaȱHinduȱstandȬ pointȱ ofȱ course.ȱ Swamiȱ Prabhavanandaȱ didȱ notȱ tryȱ asȱ hardȱ to takeȱ upȱ contactȱ withȱ churchȱ andȱ universityȱ circles.ȱ Theȱ pupils whoȱmetȱatȱhisȱHollywoodȱcentreȱincludedȱaȱnumberȱofȱartists especially,ȱwhomȱheȱacquaintedȱwithȱclassicalȱHinduȱliterature. Inȱ thisȱ contextȱ heȱ publishedȱ Englishȱ translationsȱ ofȱ several ȱOnȱthisȱorganization,ȱwhichȱhasȱclearȱHinduȱleanings,ȱseeȱR.ȱKraȬ nenborg,ȱ“DeȱschoolȱvoorȱfilosofieȱalsȱneoȬhindoeistischeȱbeweging,”ȱin: R.ȱBakkerȱ(ed.),ȱReligieuzeȱbewegingenȱinȱNederland,ȱpartȱ10ȱ(Amsterdam: UitgeverijȱVU,ȱ1985),ȱpp.ȱ7Ȭ65. 41

ȱPrabhavananda,ȱTheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMountȱaccordingȱtoȱVedanta,ȱp.

42

8.

THEȱYOGAȱMASTER:ȱTHEȱRAMAKRISHNAȱMISSION

105

sacredȱ writings,ȱ includingȱ theȱ BhagavadȬGita,ȱ Patanjaliȇsȱ Yoga AphorismsȱandȱalsoȱcollectionsȱfromȱtheȱBhagavataȱPuranaȱand theȱUpanishads.ȱHisȱbookȱonȱtheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMountȱdemonȬ stratesȱ inȱ particularȱ theȱ similaritiesȱ betweenȱ Jesus’ȱ wordsȱ and theȱHinduȱscriptures. AȱcomparisonȱofȱtheȱbooksȱonȱJesusȱbyȱbothȱHinduȱmonks yieldsȱ manyȱ similarities.ȱ Constitutiveȱ forȱ bothȱ isȱ theȱ imageȱ of ChristȱasȱportrayedȱinȱtheȱgospelȱaccordingȱtoȱJohn.ȱBothȱwere fullyȱ inȱ agreementȱ withȱ Vivekananda’sȱ assertionȱ thatȱ theȱ first versesȱofȱthisȱgospelȱcontainȱtheȱwholeȱessenceȱofȱChristianity. SwamiȱAkhilanandaȱevenȱopensȱhisȱbookȱbyȱquotingȱJohnȱ1:1Ȭ5. Forȱhim,ȱChristȱisȱprimarilyȱtheȱWordȱthatȱwasȱinȱtheȱbeginning andȱwasȱnoȱlessȱthanȱGod.ȱHeȱpresentsȱChristȱveryȱexplicitlyȱas theȱSonȱofȱGod,ȱasȱanȱincarnation.ȱButȱwhenȱthisȱimageȱisȱgiven specificȱ content,ȱ theȱ Hinduȱ frameworkȱ withinȱ whichȱ AkhilaȬ nandaȱ placesȱ theȱ Christianȱ faithȱ becomesȱ evident.ȱ Heȱ citesȱ the famousȱ textȱ fromȱ theȱ BhagavadȬGitaȱ inȱ whichȱ Krishnaȱ says “Wheneverȱthereȱisȱdeclineȱofȱdharmaȱ(righteousness,ȱreligion) andȱriseȱofȱadharmaȱ(evil),ȱthenȱIȱbodyȱMyselfȱforth....ȱ[F]orȱthe establishmentȱ ofȱ dharma,ȱ Iȱ comeȱ intoȱ beingȱ inȱ everyȱ age” (BhagavadȬGitaȱ IV:7Ȭ8).ȱ Thisȱ isȱ theȱ keyȱ textȱ forȱ theȱ beliefȱ inȱ a seriesȱ ofȱ incarnations,ȱ asȱ itȱ hasȱ beenȱ developedȱ particularlyȱ by thoseȱ whoȱ worshipȱ Vishnu.43ȱ Jesusȱ isȱ consideredȱ toȱ beȱ oneȱ of theseȱincarnations.ȱAkhilanandaȱisȱdefinitelyȱconvincedȱofȱthat. Toȱ himȱ itȱ meansȱ thatȱ Hinduismȱ andȱ Christianityȱ haveȱ someȬ thingȱinȱcommon:ȱbeingȱtheȱonlyȱtwoȱofȱtheȱgreatȱreligionsȱthat recognizeȱ thatȱ Godȱ incarnatesȱ Himselfȱ asȱ aȱ humanȱ being.ȱ But thereȱ isȱ alsoȱ aȱ difference:ȱ forȱ Christiansȱ thisȱ incarnationȱ is unique,ȱwhereasȱHindusȱseeȱaȱsuccessionȱofȱavataras.ȱNevertheȬ less,ȱJesusȱfitsȱsoȱconvincinglyȱintoȱtheȱavataraȱdoctrineȱthatȱthe similarityȱbetweenȱbothȱreligionsȱhasȱtheȱgreatestȱimpactȱforȱthe swami.ȱAsȱaȱrealȱavatara,ȱJesusȱappearedȱonȱearthȱwithȱaȱdefinite purposeȱofȱwhichȱheȱwasȱcontinuallyȱaware.ȱThus,ȱAkhilananda portraysȱJesusȱasȱaȱselfȬassuredȱdivineȱmessengerȱwithȱnoȱdoubt aboutȱ hisȱ mission.ȱ Asȱ aȱ consequence,ȱ biblicalȱ episodesȱ suchȱ as theȱ temptationȱ inȱ theȱ desertȱ andȱ theȱ internalȱ struggleȱ in Gethsemaneȱdoȱnotȱoccurȱinȱhisȱstory. 43 ȱAkhilananda,ȱHinduȱViewȱofȱChrist,ȱpp.ȱ21,ȱ32;ȱGeoffreyȱParrinder, AvatarȱandȱIncarnationȱ(London:ȱFaberȱandȱFaber,ȱ1970),ȱpp.ȱ36Ȭ37.

JESUSȱASȱGURU

106

AkhilanandaȱwasȱfullyȱawareȱofȱtheȱfactȱthatȱnotȱallȱChrisȬ tiansȱshareȱtheȱsameȱunderstandingȱofȱChrist.ȱItȱisȱfascinatingȱto seeȱ howȱ thisȱ Hinduȱ theologianȱ takesȱ sidesȱ onȱ theȱ theological battlegroundȱofȱtheȱChristians.ȱTheȱHinduȱexperiencesȱmoreȱafȬ finityȱwithȱorthodoxȱChristiansȱthanȱwithȱliberals.ȱAkhilananda rejectsȱ theȱ liberalȱ imageȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ thatȱ deniesȱ thatȱ Christȱ is divine.ȱHeȱagreesȱwithȱorthodoxȱChristiansȱinȱtheirȱemphasisȱon theȱ uniquenessȱ ofȱ Christȱ inȱ comparisonȱ withȱ otherȱ humanȱ beȬ ings.44ȱ Theȱ questionȱ remainsȱ asȱ toȱ whetherȱ preciselyȱ these ChristiansȱcouldȱarouseȱenthusiasmȱaboutȱsupportȱbyȱaȱHindu. Theȱ Johannineȱ Christȱ surfacesȱ evenȱ moreȱ thanȱ inȱ the conceptȱ ofȱ avataraȱ whenȱ Akhilanandaȱ discussesȱ theȱ thoughtȱ of theȱ Vedanta.ȱ Aȱ Christologyȱ canȱ alsoȱ beȱ erectedȱ onȱ thisȱ basis. Theȱ coreȱ statementȱ ofȱ oneȱ whoȱ hasȱ realizedȱ theȱ unityȱ between hisȱownȱsoulȱandȱtheȱallȬpervasiveȱBrahmanȱisȱ“IȱamȱBrahman.” Akhilanandaȱ equatesȱ thisȱ utteranceȱ withȱ Jesus’ȱ sayingȱ inȱ the gospelȱ ofȱ Johnȱ “Iȱ andȱ myȱ Fatherȱ areȱ one”ȱ (Johnȱ 10:30).45ȱ Thus, anotherȱ imageȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ emerges.ȱ Heȱ isȱ notȱ theȱ avataraȱ whoȱ deȬ scendsȱ fromȱ heavenȱ butȱ theȱ humanȱ beingȱ whoȱ isȱ ableȱ byȱ his spiritualȱ endeavoursȱ toȱ riseȱ toȱ theȱ highestȱ levelȱ ofȱ enlightenȬ ment—heȱ isȱ aȱ yogi.ȱ Muchȱ ofȱ whatȱ Jesusȱ says,ȱ primarilyȱ inȱ the gospelȱofȱJohn,ȱsupportsȱthisȱimage.ȱItȱisȱnotȱsurprisingȱthatȱthe storyȱ ofȱ theȱ transfigurationȱ onȱ theȱ mountainȱ isȱ citedȱ inȱ this context.ȱ Bothȱ images,ȱ avataraȱ andȱ yogi,ȱ conflictȱ toȱ someȱ extent, butȱthisȱisȱnotȱaȱproblemȱforȱtheȱHinduȱtheologian.ȱHeȱconsiders Jesusȱ toȱ beȱ aȱ “bornȱ teacher”:ȱ asȱ anȱ incarnationȱ ofȱ God,ȱ heȱ did notȱ needȱ toȱ learnȱ anythingȱ butȱ couldȱ teachȱ theȱ fullnessȱ ofȱ the spiritualȱlifeȱimmediatelyȱtoȱtheȱpeople.46ȱAndȱitȱisȱtheȱmeaning ofȱ thisȱteachingȱ forȱ everydayȱ lifeȱ thatȱconstitutesȱtheȱ subjectȱof SwamiȱAkhilananda’sȱbook.

ȱAkhilananda,ȱHinduȱViewȱofȱChrist,ȱp.ȱ43.

44

ȱAkhilananda,ȱHinduȱViewȱofȱChrist,ȱp.ȱ72.

45

ȱAkhilananda,ȱHinduȱViewȱofȱChrist,ȱp.ȱ96.ȱCf.ȱp.ȱ27ȱwhereȱheȱdeȬ scribesȱChristȱasȱaȱnityaȬsiddha,ȱaȱperfectȱyogiȱfromȱtheȱstartȱwhoȱdoes spiritualȱexercisesȱprimarilyȱtoȱbeȱanȱexampleȱforȱothers. 46

THEȱYOGAȱMASTER:ȱTHEȱRAMAKRISHNAȱMISSION

107

Swamiȱ Prabhavananda’sȱ bookȱ on Jesusȱalsoȱaimsȱtoȱbeȱaȱpracticalȱguideȱfor theȱ spiritualȱ lifeȱ basedȱ onȱ theȱ teachings ofȱ Jesus.ȱ Butȱ heȱ tooȱ cannotȱ escapeȱ the questionȱ ofȱ whoȱ Christȱ inȱ factȱ was.ȱ Itȱ is remarkableȱ thatȱ inȱ hisȱ bookȱ theȱ JoȬ hannineȱ Christȱ againȱ playsȱ theȱ leading role,ȱ althoughȱ heȱ writesȱ hisȱ bookȱ asȱ a commentaryȱ onȱ Matthewȱ 5Ȭ7.ȱ Butȱ howȬ everȱcarefullyȱheȱexplainsȱtheȱSermonȱon theȱ Mountȱ verseȱ byȱ verse,ȱ severalȱ arguȬ mentsȱneverthelessȱstemȱfromȱelsewhere. Thisȱisȱparticularlyȱtheȱcaseȱwhenȱheȱdiscussesȱnotȱtheȱteachings butȱ theȱ personȱ ofȱ Christ.ȱ Theȱ theologyȱ ofȱ theȱ creativeȱ Word, Godȱincarnate,ȱasȱdescribedȱinȱJohnȱ1ȱalsoȱplaysȱaȱmajorȱroleȱin Prabhavananda.ȱ Itȱ appearsȱ thatȱ heȱ hasȱ aȱ profoundȱ knowledge ofȱtheȱdevelopmentȱofȱtheȱconceptȱofȱlogos.ȱViaȱPlato,ȱtheȱStoics andȱPhilo,ȱheȱendsȱupȱwithȱtheȱgospelȱofȱJohnȱwhoȱdescribesȱthe meaningȱ ofȱ Christȱ viaȱ thisȱ concept.ȱ Forȱ Prabhavananda,ȱ there canȱ beȱ noȱ doubtȱ thatȱ itȱ canȱ beȱ saidȱ thatȱ theȱ Wordȱ ofȱ God becameȱ incarnateȱ inȱ Jesusȱ Christ.ȱ Heȱ formulatesȱ theȱ new applicationȱ ofȱ theȱ logosȱ doctrineȱ byȱ Johnȱ asȱ “attributingȱ aȱ real personalityȱtoȱtheȱLogos”ȱandȱ“emphasisingȱnotȱitsȱcreativeȱasȬ pectȱbutȱitsȱredemptiveȱfunction.”47 Moreȱ thanȱ hisȱ confrere,ȱ Prabhavanandaȱ isȱ inclinedȱ toȱ disȬ missȱallȱdifferencesȱbetweenȱChristianȱandȱHinduȱdoctrine.ȱHe holdsȱ thatȱ thereȱ isȱ completeȱ dogmaticȱ agreementȱ betweenȱ the twoȱ religions.ȱ Whatȱ Hindusȱ callȱ avataraȱ isȱ exactlyȱ theȱ sameȱ as whatȱChristiansȱmeanȱbyȱ“SonȱofȱGod”ȱandȱtheȱSermonȱonȱthe Mountȱ simplyȱ offersȱ theȱ sameȱ doctrineȱ asȱ theȱ BhagavadȬGita, evenȱthoughȱtheȱpresentationȱisȱdifferent.ȱAndȱtheȱtextȱfromȱthe Gospelȱ “Inȱ theȱ beginningȱ wasȱ theȱ Word,ȱ andȱ theȱ Wordȱ was withȱGod,ȱandȱtheȱWordȱwasȱGod”ȱisȱequatedȱwithȱanȱoldȱtext fromȱ theȱ Vedicȱ traditionȱ “Inȱ theȱ beginningȱ wasȱ theȱ Lordȱ of Creatures;ȱ secondȱ toȱ himȱ wasȱ theȱ Word.ȱ Theȱ Wordȱ wasȱ verily Brahman.”ȱInȱoneȱofȱhisȱotherȱbooksȱtheȱswamiȱdeclaresȱinȱthis connection:ȱ “Ofȱ course,ȱ Iȱ amȱ notȱ ofȱ theȱ opinionȱ thatȱ John ȱPrabhavananda,ȱTheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMountȱaccordingȱtoȱVedanta,ȱp.

47

42.

JESUSȱASȱGURU

108

translatedȱ fromȱ theȱ Vedas!ȱ Butȱ itȱ indicatesȱ theȱ universalityȱ of truth.”48 Theȱ imageȱ ofȱ Christȱ thatȱ emergesȱ inȱ hisȱ booksȱ isȱ thus stronglyȱ determinedȱ byȱ Hinduȱ tradition.ȱ Typicalȱ isȱ his treatmentȱofȱtheȱwordȱofȱJesusȱ“Iȱamȱtheȱwayȱandȱtheȱtruthȱand theȱ life.ȱNoȱoneȱcomesȱ toȱtheȱ Fatherȱexceptȱthroughȱ me”ȱ(John 14:6).ȱItȱisȱpreciselyȱthisȱtextȱthatȱhasȱbeenȱquotedȱregularlyȱby Christianȱ theologiansȱ inȱ orderȱ toȱ underscoreȱ Christianity’sȱ exȬ clusiveȱmessageȱofȱsalvation.ȱSwamiȱPrabhavanandaȱcitesȱmany textsȱfromȱtheȱsacredȱliteratureȱofȱIndiaȱwhereȱKrishnaȱandȱthe Buddhaȱ sayȱ similarȱ things.ȱ Howȱ isȱ itȱ possibleȱ thatȱ allȱ these divineȱteachersȱregardȱthemselvesȱasȱtheȱonlyȱwayȱtoȱGod?ȱThe swami’sȱ answerȱ isȱ thatȱ theseȱ teachersȱ doȱ notȱ meanȱ theirȱ ego, theirȱ lowerȱ self,ȱ whenȱ sayingȱ “I”ȱ orȱ “me,”ȱ asȱ ordinaryȱ people wouldȱdo.ȱOnȱtheȱcontrary,ȱtheȱ“I”ȱrefersȱtoȱtheȱdivinityȱthatȱis presentȱinȱallȱtheseȱteachers.ȱPrabhavanandaȱcontinues: TheyȱareȱtellingȱusȱthatȱtheȱFather,ȱtheȱGodhead,ȱisȱreached throughȱ theȱ graceȱ ofȱ theȱ Son,ȱ theȱ Incarnation.ȱ Toȱ the Hindus,ȱ theȱ statementsȱ ofȱ theseȱ avatarsȱ areȱ notȱ contradicȬ toryȱ ....ȱ Thereforeȱ theȱ Hinduȱ acceptsȱ allȱ theȱ greatȱ Sonsȱ of Godȱwhoȱareȱworshipedȱinȱdifferentȱreligions.49

Inȱ Prabhavananda’sȱ treatise,ȱ Jesusȱ isȱ again,ȱ obviously,ȱ an incarnationȱ ofȱ God.ȱ Heȱ fitsȱ intoȱ theȱ seriesȱ ofȱ avatarasȱ acknowlȬ edgedȱ byȱ Hinduism.ȱ Prabhavanandaȱ alsoȱ quotesȱ theȱ famous textȱfromȱtheȱBhagavadȬGita,ȱinȱwhichȱKrishnaȱdeclaresȱthatȱhe descendsȱ toȱ earthȱ wheneverȱ dharmaȱ declines.ȱ Inȱ hisȱ view,ȱ the reasonȱ forȱ Jesus’ȱ comingȱ wasȱ theȱ degenerationȱ ofȱ theȱ Jewish religion.ȱInȱsuchȱaȱsituationȱthereȱmustȱbeȱanȱincarnationȱofȱGod onȱ earthȱ toȱ bringȱ aȱ newȱ spiritualȱ elan.ȱ Whileȱ otherȱ human beingsȱ areȱ bornȱ underȱ theȱ influenceȱ ofȱ theirȱ karma,ȱ thisȱ apȬ ȱPrabhavananda,ȱReligionȱinȱPractice,ȱp.ȱ211.ȱCf.ȱhisȱTheȱSermonȱon theȱMountȱaccordingȱtoȱVedanta,ȱp.ȱ42.ȱToȱunderscoreȱtheȱuniversality,ȱthe SanskritȱversesȱareȱrepeatedlyȱadjustedȱtoȱbeȱinȱlineȱwithȱtheȱbiblicalȱconȬ cepts.ȱThisȱtextȱliterallyȱreads:ȱ“InȱtheȱbeginningȱwasȱPrajapatiȱ[theȱLord ofȱtheȱCreatures],ȱfromȱwhomȱtheȱWordȱwasȱasȱsecond.”ȱItȱisȱthenȱrelated howȱPrajapatiȱhasȱsexualȱintercourseȱwithȱLadyȱWordȱandȱimpregnates her.ȱTheȱtextȱisȱfromȱtheȱBlackȱYajurȬVeda,ȱKathakaȱ12:5.ȱ 48

ȱPrabhavananda,ȱTheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMountȱaccordingȱtoȱVedanta,ȱpp.

49

43Ȭ44.

THEȱYOGAȱMASTER:ȱTHEȱRAMAKRISHNAȱMISSION

109

pearanceȱ wasȱ aȱ voluntaryȱ initiativeȱ onȱ theȱ partȱ ofȱ God.ȱ The birthȱ ofȱ Christȱ isȱ thusȱ differentȱ fromȱ theȱ birthsȱ ofȱ others.ȱ PraȬ bhavanandaȱ seesȱ thatȱ distinctionȱ inȱ Jesus’ȱ sayingȱ toȱ those aroundȱ him:ȱ “Youȱ areȱ fromȱ below;ȱ Iȱ amȱ fromȱ above”ȱ (John 8:23).50 Forȱ bothȱ Akhilanandaȱ andȱ Prabhavananda,ȱ however,ȱ itȱ is whatȱ thisȱ incarnationȱ hasȱ toȱ teachȱ thatȱ isȱ theȱ mostȱ important. Theyȱ areȱ convincedȱ thatȱ theȱ wordsȱ ofȱ Christȱ haveȱ notȱ lostȱ any relevanceȱinȱtwentyȱcenturiesȱandȱfindȱitȱdifficultȱtoȱunderstand whyȱ Christiansȱ sometimesȱ makeȱ relativisticȱ remarksȱ aboutȱ the Gospelȱ beingȱ aȱ productȱ ofȱ itsȱ age.ȱ Theȱ messageȱ ofȱ anȱ avatara mustȱhaveȱvalueȱforȱallȱages. BothȱseeȱtheȱcoreȱofȱJesus’ȱpreachingȱasȱanȱappealȱtoȱfollow aȱ spiritualȱ methodȱ thatȱ makesȱ perfectionȱ attainable.ȱ Both swamisȱ emphasizeȱ thatȱ thisȱ perfectionȱ canȱ beȱ reachedȱ within thisȱlife.ȱItȱhasȱnothingȱtoȱdoȱwithȱaȱperspectiveȱafterȱdeathȱbut withȱaȱwayȱinȱlifeȱthatȱcanȱbeȱtravelled.ȱRelevantȱinȱthisȱrespect isȱtheȱtextȱ“Beȱperfect,ȱtherefore,ȱasȱyourȱheavenlyȱFatherȱisȱperȬ fect”ȱ(Matthewȱ5:48).51ȱItȱisȱstartlingȱthatȱthisȱtextȱreceivesȱsuchȱa centralȱ place,ȱ sinceȱ inȱ Christianȱ theologyȱ andȱ spiritualityȱ the textȱisȱusuallyȱaȱmatterȱofȱembarrassment.ȱFromȱaȱHinduȱbackȬ ground,ȱ however,ȱ theȱ textȱ canȱ articulateȱ aȱ clearȱ message. Prabhavanandaȱaddsȱthatȱtheȱgoalȱofȱeveryȱreligionȱisȱtoȱpursue perfection,ȱ thatȱ is:ȱ toȱ realizeȱ God.ȱ Toȱ Akhilananda,ȱ thisȱ isȱ exȬ actlyȱwhatȱJesusȱmeantȱinȱurgingȱothersȱtoȱseekȱtheȱKingdomȱof God.ȱ Theȱ stateȱ ofȱ perfectionȱ isȱ attainable.ȱ Aȱ humanȱ beingȱ can seeȱGodȱifȱheȱmakesȱtheȱproperȱeffort. ItȱisȱprimarilyȱAkhilanandaȱwhoȱhasȱanȱeyeȱalsoȱforȱtheȱdisȬ tinctionsȱbetweenȱHinduismȱandȱChristianȱ faith,ȱ asȱ wellȱasȱ beȬ tweenȱ theȱ differentȱ schoolsȱ withinȱ Christianity.ȱ Onȱ theȱ one hand,ȱ heȱ applaudsȱ Christianȱ orthodoxyȱ withȱ respectȱ toȱ theȱ diȬ vinityȱ ofȱ Christ.ȱ Onȱ theȱ otherȱ hand,ȱ heȱ resistsȱ vehementlyȱ the “neoȬorthodoxy”ȱofȱtheȱBarthians,ȱbecauseȱofȱhisȱinterpretation ofȱ Jesus’ȱ teaching.ȱ Theȱ swamiȱ findsȱ theȱ notionȱ centralȱ toȱ the theologyȱ ofȱ Karlȱ Barthȱ thatȱ humanȱ beingsȱ cannotȱ acquire ȱPrabhavananda,ȱTheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMountȱaccordingȱtoȱVedanta,ȱp.

50

46. 51 ȱAkhilananda,ȱHinduȱViewȱofȱChrist,ȱpp.ȱ168,ȱ64;ȱȱPrabhavananda, TheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMountȱaccordingȱtoȱVedanta,ȱp.ȱ69.

JESUSȱASȱGURU

110

knowledgeȱ ofȱ Godȱ throughȱ theirȱ ownȱ effortȱ extremelyȱ asȬ tonishing.ȱ Heȱ holdsȱ thatȱ suchȱ aȱ theologyȱ takesȱ awayȱ allȱ inȬ centiveȱ forȱ spiritualȱ practice:ȱ Whyȱ shouldȱ oneȱ stillȱ pray,ȱ meȬ ditateȱorȱupholdȱmorals?ȱMoreȱfundamentally,ȱinȱhisȱview,ȱsuch theologyȱ isȱ absurdȱ inȱ theȱ faceȱ ofȱ theȱ teachingsȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ who urgesȱ peopleȱ toȱ developȱ theirȱ spirituality.ȱ Theȱ argumentȱ that Akhilanandaȱaddsȱfromȱhisȱpsychologicalȱbackgroundȱisȱrather clever:ȱoneȱcannotȱloveȱsomeoneȱoneȱdoesȱnotȱknow.ȱOr,ȱstated moreȱ formally:ȱ loveȱ presupposesȱ aȱ certainȱ formȱ ofȱ knowledge ofȱ theȱ objectȱ ofȱ love.ȱ Ifȱ Jesusȱ urgesȱ usȱ toȱ loveȱ God,ȱ some knowledgeȱofȱGodȱmustȱbeȱwithinȱtheȱhumanȱbeing’sȱreach.52 Suchȱaȱproclamationȱofȱloveȱisȱremarkablyȱcongruousȱwith theȱHinduȱbhaktiȱmovement.ȱBothȱauthorsȱagreeȱuponȱthatȱsimiȬ larity.ȱItȱisȱpreciselyȱinȱJesus’ȱappealȱtoȱloveȱthatȱitȱbecomesȱclear thatȱ heȱ wasȱ anȱ Oriental.ȱ Swamiȱ Vivekanandaȱ hadȱ alreadyȱ exȬ plainedȱ thisȱ toȱ hisȱ Americanȱ audience.ȱ Butȱ heȱ hadȱ alsoȱ made criticalȱcommentsȱonȱcertainȱelementsȱinȱJesus’ȱteachingsȱthatȱhe foundȱ tooȱ simpleȱ orȱ tooȱ egoistic.ȱ Thusȱ certainȱ partsȱ ofȱ the SermonȱonȱtheȱMountȱcouldȱnotȱarouseȱmuchȱenthusiasmȱinȱthe firstȱ Hinduȱ preacherȱ inȱ theȱ West.ȱ Theȱ Goldenȱ Ruleȱ andȱ the LordȇsȱPrayerȱarouseȱparticularȱire.ȱTheȱsympatheticȱChristmas addressȱ byȱ Swamiȱ Ranganathanandaȱ alreadyȱ demonstrated thatȱlaterȱmonksȱinȱtheȱOrderȱhaveȱaȱmoreȱpositiveȱview,ȱandȱit isȱthisȱlineȱthatȱisȱcontinuedȱinȱPrabhavananda’sȱbook.ȱHisȱcomȬ pleteȱexpositionȱisȱbasedȱonȱtheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMount.ȱHeȱdisȬ cussesȱextensivelyȱtheȱLord’sȱPrayer,ȱwhichȱheȱcallsȱbothȱsimple andȱ profound.ȱ Theȱ Goldenȱ Rule,ȱ too,ȱ isȱ givenȱ supremeȱ imȬ portance.ȱHeȱconsidersȱthisȱruleȱtoȱbeȱcommonȱtoȱallȱtheȱmajor religions.ȱAndȱheȱthinksȱthatȱheȱhasȱdiscoveredȱtheȱsameȱteachȬ ingȱinȱtheȱMahabharata.53 SwamiȱAkhilanandaȱandȱSwamiȱPrabhavanandaȱhaveȱboth studiedȱ seriouslyȱ theȱ lifeȱ andȱ teachingȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ Christ.ȱ Their ȱAkhilananda,ȱHinduȱViewȱofȱChrist,ȱpp.ȱ49Ȭ52.

52

ȱPrabhavananda,ȱTheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMountȱaccordingȱtoȱVedanta,ȱp. 117.ȱTheȱquotationsȱfromȱtheȱIndianȱepic,ȱhowever,ȱareȱadjustedȱtoȱsuit theȱoccasion.ȱTheȱnegativeȱversionȱoccursȱtwiceȱinȱtheȱepic:ȱȈDoȱnotȱdo toȱanotherȱwhatȱisȱdisagreeableȱtoȱyourself:ȱthisȱisȱtheȱsummaryȱLawȈ (MBh.ȱV:39:57;ȱcf.ȱMBh.ȱXI:113:8).ȱButȱtheȱepicȱdoesȱnotȱcontainȱtheȱposiȬ tiveȱversionȱfoundȱinȱtheȱGospel:ȱ“doȱtoȱothersȱwhatȱyouȱwouldȱhave themȱdoȱtoȱyou”ȱ(Matthewȱ7:12). 53

THEȱYOGAȱMASTER:ȱTHEȱRAMAKRISHNAȱMISSION

111

booksȱ demonstrateȱ thatȱ theȱ personȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ canȱ becomeȱ reȬ cognizableȱ toȱ Hindusȱ andȱ thatȱ muchȱ ofȱ whatȱ heȱ saidȱ may inspireȱHindusȱasȱwell.ȱTheȱcarefulȱwayȱinȱwhichȱbothȱauthors acquaintedȱ themselvesȱ withȱ anotherȱ religiousȱ traditionȱ comȬ mandsȱ respect.ȱ Itȱ mustȱ beȱ said,ȱ however,ȱ thatȱ thereȱ isȱ oneȱ asȬ pectȱ ofȱ Christologyȱ thatȱ theyȱ findȱ mostȱ difficultȱ toȱ appreciate: theyȱ payȱ hardlyȱ anyȱ attentionȱ toȱ theȱ sufferingȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ andȱ his resurrection.ȱ Andȱ theȱ significanceȱ attachedȱ byȱ Christianȱ theoȬ logyȱ toȱ theseȱ eventsȱ leavesȱ themȱ cold.ȱ Prabhavanandaȱ almost ignoresȱ theȱ subject,ȱ andȱ Akhilanandaȱ describesȱ Jesusȱ asȱ anȱ InȬ dianȱ avataraȱ whenȱ heȱ statesȱ thatȱ heȱ “leftȱ theȱ worldȱ cheerfully likeȱaȱgreatȱhero.”54ȱAȱpsychologicalȱlessonȱcanȱcertainlyȱbeȱdeȬ rivedȱ fromȱ theȱ passion:ȱ theȱ crossȱ teachesȱ usȱ thatȱ aggressionȱ is notȱ theȱ wayȱ toȱ solveȱ problems.ȱ Butȱ aȱ Christianȱ wouldȱ notȱ reȬ gardȱthatȱasȱtheȱcoreȱofȱtheȱkerygma.ȱSimilarly,ȱtheȱresurrection isȱ interpretedȱ asȱ aȱ metaphor:ȱ theȱ trueȱ “spiritȱ ofȱ Easter”ȱ isȱ that peopleȱ mayȱ overcomeȱ theȱ limitationsȱ ofȱ theȱ corruptibleȱ lifeȱ in thisȱworld.ȱInȱ connectionȱwithȱ deathȱ andȱ resurrection,ȱ bothȱAȬ khilanandaȱ andȱ Prabhavanandaȱ referȱ toȱ theȱ Shvetashvatara Upanishad.55ȱInȱthisȱsmallȱbookȱofȱHinduȱwisdomȱtheȱdoctrine ofȱ theȱ knowledgeȱ ofȱ Brahmanȱ throughȱ whichȱ oneȱ canȱ attain immortalityȱ isȱ unfolded.ȱ Theȱ bondageȱ ofȱ theȱ soulȱ toȱ theȱ wheel ofȱrebirthȱisȱbrokenȱthroughȱtrueȱinsight.ȱButȱhereȱweȱareȱonȱtoȬ tallyȱ differentȱ groundȱ comparedȱ withȱ theȱ Christianȱ interpretaȬ tionȱofȱEaster. AssessmentsȱbyȱChristianȱtheologians,ȱparticularlyȱwithȱreȬ ferenceȱtoȱAkhilananda,ȱalwaysȱpointȱtoȱthisȱfundamentallyȱdifȬ ferentȱ interpretationȱ ofȱ theȱ crossȱ andȱ resurrection.ȱ Samartha callsȱ itȱ aȱ treatmentȱ inȱ symbolicȱ termsȱ thatȱ isȱ outȱ ofȱ harmony withȱ theȱ basicȱ toneȱ ofȱ theȱ Newȱ Testamentȱ andȱ theȱ faithȱ ofȱ the churchȱ throughȱ theȱ ages.56ȱ Wolffȱ criticizesȱ Akhilananda’sȱ apȬ proachȱ inȱ generalȱ asȱ aȱ theologyȱ ofȱ projectionȱ inȱ whichȱ theȱ hisȬ toricalȱ factsȱ ofȱ theȱ Gospelȱ areȱ projectedȱ ontoȱ aȱ conceptȱ ofȱ reliȬ

ȱAkhilananda,ȱHinduȱViewȱofȱChrist,ȱp.ȱ17.

54

ȱAkhilananda,ȱHinduȱViewȱofȱChrist,ȱp.ȱ217ȱ(quotesȱShvetashvatara UpanishadȱIII:8);ȱPrabhavananda,ȱTheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMountȱaccordingȱto Vedanta,ȱpp.ȱ95Ȭ96ȱ(paraphrasesȱShvetashvataraȱUpanishadȱI:6). 55

ȱSamartha,ȱTheȱHinduȱResponseȱtoȱtheȱUnboundȱChrist,ȱp.ȱ72.

56

JESUSȱASȱGURU

112

gionȱ thatȱ hasȱ beenȱ importedȱ fromȱ Hinduism.57ȱ Barlage,ȱ whoȱ is mostȱ sympatheticȱ towardsȱ Akhilananda,ȱ neverthelessȱ reȬ proachesȱ himȱ forȱ notȱ showingȱ anyȱ empathyȱ forȱ theȱ Christian understandingȱ ofȱ Christ.58ȱ Eachȱ criticȱ certainlyȱ acknowledges theȱsincerityȱandȱtheȱfriendlyȱattitudeȱofȱAkhilanandaȇsȱstyleȱof writingȱaboutȱChristianity,ȱbutȱitȱmustȱbeȱaskedȱifȱaȱmoreȱposiȬ tiveȱ evaluationȱ ofȱ theȱ Christologicalȱ traditionȱ inȱ theȱ RamaȬ krishnaȱMovement,ȱofȱwhichȱAkhilanandaȱisȱsuchȱaȱclearȱadvoȬ cate,ȱmightȱnotȱbeȱpossible. AȱStimulusȱforȱDialogue Ramakrishnaȱandȱhisȱfollowersȱhaveȱhadȱanȱimmenseȱinfluence bothȱinȱIndiaȱandȱtheȱWest.ȱTheȱMovement,ȱasȱitȱwasȱshapedȱby Swamiȱ Vivekananda,ȱ revealsȱ aȱ newȱ selfȬawarenessȱ onȱ theȱ part ofȱ Hindus.ȱ Theȱ newȱ presentationȱ ofȱ Hinduismȱ includedȱ aȱ reȬ sponseȱ toȱ theȱ challengeȱ thatȱ Christianȱ beliefȱ andȱ Westernȱ ciȬ vilizationȱposedȱtoȱIndia.ȱWhileȱmanyȱtraditionalȱHinduȱschools barricadedȱthemselvesȱinȱisolation,ȱtheȱRamakrishnaȱMovement soughtȱdialogue. Inȱ theȱ courseȱ ofȱ timeȱ aȱ certainȱ imageȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ aroseȱ inȱ the Movement,ȱ forȱ whichȱ Ramakrishna’sȱ mysticalȱ inspirationȱ was theȱ startingȱ point.ȱ Throughȱ hisȱ visionsȱ andȱ otherȱ spiritualȱ exȬ periencesȱRamakrishnaȱwasȱconvincedȱthatȱallȱreligionsȱmustȱbe regardedȱ asȱ pathsȱ toȱ theȱ sameȱ goalȱ andȱ ferventlyȱ propagated thisȱconvictionȱamongȱhisȱstudents.ȱItȱhasȱbeenȱinsufficientlyȱreȬ cognizedȱ that,ȱ inȱ theȱ contextȱ ofȱ hisȱ age,ȱ Ramakrishna’sȱ apȬ proachȱmeantȱaȱnewȱopeningȱinȱtheȱrelationshipȱbetweenȱtheȱreȬ ligions.ȱTheȱmessageȱofȱtheȱmissionariesȱandȱtheȱcultureȱofȱthe colonialȱ powersȱ wereȱ usuallyȱ encounteredȱ byȱ strongȱ rejection. Thisȱ wasȱ trueȱ forȱ bothȱ traditionalȱ Hinduȱ circlesȱ andȱ reform movements.59ȱ Theȱ Aryaȱ Samajȱ isȱ theȱ mostȱ strikingȱ exampleȱ of

ȱWolff,ȱChristusȱunterȱdenȱHindus,ȱp.ȱ205.

57

ȱBarlage,ȱChristȱSaviourȱofȱMankind,ȱp.ȱ234.

58

ȱInterestingȱmaterialȱonȱHinduȱapologeticsȱcanȱbeȱfoundȱinȱRichard FoxȱYoung,ȱResistantȱHinduism:ȱSanskritȱSourcesȱonȱAntiȬChristianȱApoloȬ geticsȱ inȱ Earlyȱ NineteenthȬCenturyȱ Indiaȱ (Vienna:ȱ Universityȱ ofȱ Vienna, 1981). 59

THEȱYOGAȱMASTER:ȱTHEȱRAMAKRISHNAȱMISSION

113

theȱ latter:ȱ itsȱ founder,ȱ Swamiȱ Dayanandȱ Sarasvati,ȱ regularly criticizedȱ“theȱfalseȱprophetȱJesus”ȱmaliciously.60 Ofȱ course,ȱ theȱ urbanȱ eliteȱ ofȱ Kolkattaȱ wasȱ alsoȱ influenced byȱ theȱ liberalȱ Brahmoȱ Samaj.ȱ Butȱ forȱ thisȱ movement,ȱ founded byȱRajaȱRammohanȱRoy,ȱtheȱteachingsȱofȱJesus,ȱprimarilyȱwith respectȱ toȱ ethicsȱ wereȱ moreȱ centralȱ thanȱ theȱ religiousȱ aspects. Ramakrishnaȱ wasȱ oneȱ ofȱ theȱ firstȱ Hindusȱ toȱ seeȱ theȱ Christian religionȱ asȱ aȱ wayȱ toȱ God,ȱ equalȱ inȱ valueȱ toȱ otherȱ ways.ȱ Inȱ his view,ȱ Jesusȱ wasȱ primarilyȱ theȱ perfectȱ mysticȱ whoȱ hadȱ realized Godȱ inȱ hisȱ ownȱ existence.ȱ Asȱ aȱ yogaȱ master,ȱ heȱ taughtȱ hisȱ diȬ sciplesȱtoȱreachȱtheȱsameȱspiritualȱheights. Swamiȱ Vivekanandaȱ continuedȱ onȱ theȱ courseȱ thatȱ RamaȬ krishnaȱhadȱbegunȱbutȱstressedȱmoreȱJesusȇȱrenunciationȱofȱthe world.ȱThus,ȱheȱsawȱChristȱasȱaȱmonkȱwhoȱbroughtȱaȱmessage thatȱ onlyȱ otherȱ monksȱ couldȱ understand.ȱ Vivekanandaȱ conȬ nectsȱ Jesusȱ explicitlyȱ withȱ theȱ Hinduȱ traditionȱ ofȱ spirituality, asceticism,ȱ andȱ worldȱ renunciation:ȱ heȱ becomesȱ aȱ sannyasin. BecauseȱVivekananda’sȱknowledgeȱofȱtheȱBibleȱwasȱmuchȱmore extendedȱ thanȱ hisȱ master’s,ȱ diverseȱ textsȱ andȱ imagesȱ fromȱ the NewȱTestamentȱcouldȱbeȱincludedȱinȱtheȱChristologyȱofȱtheȱRaȬ makrishnaȱMovement.ȱInȱparticular,ȱtheȱprologueȱofȱtheȱgospel ofȱ Johnȱ becameȱ aȱ fixedȱ referenceȱ textȱ regardingȱ theȱ divinityȱ of Christ.ȱ Jesusȱ wasȱ invariablyȱ seenȱ asȱ anȱ incarnationȱ ofȱ Godȱ in lineȱwithȱtheȱmodelȱofȱtheȱHinduȱavataraȱdoctrine. Inȱ laterȱ times,ȱ someȱ leadingȱ monksȱ ofȱ theȱ Ramakrishna Movementȱ developedȱ theseȱ initialȱ Christologicalȱ notions.ȱ Itȱ is strikingȱ thatȱ allȱ studiedȱ theȱ Bibleȱ andȱ Christianȱ theologyȱ with muchȱrespectȱandȱsincereȱinterest.ȱAllȱagreeȱthatȱJesusȱmustȱbe regardedȱasȱnoȱlessȱthanȱanȱincarnationȱofȱGod.ȱInȱtheȱusualȱserȬ iesȱ ofȱ avatarasȱ heȱ receivesȱ aȱ definiteȱ placeȱ afterȱ Rama,ȱ Krishna andȱGautamaȱBuddhaȱandȱbeforeȱChaitanyaȱandȱRamakrishna. Withȱ respectȱ toȱ theȱ teachingsȱ ofȱ Christ,ȱ theȱ Sermonȱ onȱ the Mountȱ becameȱ prominent:ȱ itȱ teachesȱ humanȱ beingsȱ toȱ beȱ perȬ fectȱfollowingȱtheȱmodelȱofȱGod.ȱTheȱpractical,ȱmoralȱaspectsȱof Jesus’ȱ preaching,ȱ underestimatedȱ byȱ Vivekananda,ȱ receiveȱ a moreȱimportantȱplace.

ȱJ.T.F.ȱJordens,ȱ“Dayanandaȱ Sarasvati’sȱInterpretationȱofȱChrisȬ tianity,”ȱin:ȱA.ȱSharma,ȱNeoȬHinduȱViewsȱofȱChristianityȱ(Leiden:ȱE.J.ȱBrill, 1988),ȱpp.ȱ120Ȭ42;ȱWolff,ȱChristusȱunterȱdenȱHindus,ȱpp.ȱ106Ȭ25. 60

114

JESUSȱASȱGURU

TheȱtwoȱleadersȱofȱtheȱmovementȱinȱAmerica,ȱAkhilananda andȱ Prabhavananda,ȱ deserveȱ theȱ honourȱ ofȱ havingȱ engaged themselvesȱ mostȱ profoundlyȱ withȱ theȱ meaningȱ ofȱ Christ.ȱ The firstȱ wasȱ orientedȱ moreȱ towardsȱ spiritualȱ andȱ moralȱ practice andȱ theȱ otherȱ moreȱ towardsȱ theȱ similaritiesȱ withȱ theȱ Hindu scriptures.ȱBothȱhaveȱbecomeȱimportantȱpartnersȱinȱdialogue. Unfortunately,ȱtheȱChristianȱsideȱhasȱnotȱalwaysȱtakenȱsufȬ ficientȱnoticeȱofȱtheȱstatementsȱbyȱtheseȱHinduȱtheologians.ȱThe undeniableȱ oneȬsidedȱ statementsȱ andȱ weaknesses,ȱ suchȱ asȱ the weakȱ understandingȱ ofȱ Jesus’ȱ suffering,ȱ haveȱ oftenȱ influenced Christianȱ reactionȱ tooȱ much.ȱ But,ȱ theȱ Hindusȱ haveȱ alsoȱ highȬ lightedȱ someȱ aspectsȱ thatȱ haveȱ beenȱ generallyȱ neglectedȱ in Christianȱ theology.ȱ Conspicuousȱ inȱ theȱ Hinduȱ writersȱ inȱ the firstȱ placeȱ isȱ theirȱ attentionȱ toȱ Jesus’ȱ spirituality.ȱ Hisȱ urgingȱ of othersȱtoȱperfection,ȱwhichȱformsȱaȱstumblingȱblockȱinȱChristian theology,ȱappearsȱtoȱfindȱitsȱnaturalȱplaceȱinȱHinduȱreflections. TheȱpracticalȱethicsȱofȱtheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMount,ȱalthoughȱlikeȬ wiseȱ broughtȱ intoȱ prominenceȱ inȱ certainȱ Christianȱ circles,ȱ apȬ pearsȱtoȱappealȱtoȱHindus.ȱThatȱraisesȱtheȱquestionȱifȱChristians haveȱ alwaysȱ sufficientlyȱ recognizedȱ theȱ universalȱ significance ofȱthisȱteaching.ȱFinally,ȱtheȱHinduȱargumentsȱshouldȱbeȱtaken seriouslyȱ whenȱ theȱ issueȱ ofȱ theȱ divinityȱ ofȱ Christȱ isȱ discussed. TheirȱfamiliarityȱwithȱtheȱideaȱthatȱGodȱdescendsȱtoȱearthȱinȱorȬ derȱtoȱfosterȱrighteousnessȱcouldȱalsoȱbeȱinspiringȱtoȱChristians.

CHAPTERȱ6

JesusȱtheȱAvatara VengalȱChakkarai AmongȱChristianȱtheologiansȱinȱtheȱnineteenthȱcentury,ȱweȱfind merelyȱ initialȱ attemptsȱ atȱ anȱ actualȱ Indianȱ expressionȱ ofȱ faith. Theologiansȱ suchȱ asȱ Nehemiahȱ Gorehȱ madeȱ someȱ cautiousȱ atȬ temptsȱtoȱuseȱconceptsȱfromȱtheȱHinduȱworldȱasȱillustrationsȱin theirȱChristianȱtheology,ȱbutȱtheȱtimeȱwasȱcertainlyȱnotȱripeȱfor aȱ trueȱ inculturationȱ ofȱ theȱ Gospel.ȱ Theȱ churchȱ onȱ theȱ Indian subcontinentȱwasȱruledȱbyȱtheȱEuropeanȱmissionariesȱandȱcivil servants,ȱmostȱofȱwhomȱwereȱextremelyȱdismissiveȱofȱtheȱinfluȬ encesȱ ofȱ otherȱ religions.ȱ Theseȱ missionariesȱ andȱ civilȱ servants feltȱnoȱaffinityȱforȱHinduism:ȱHinduȱconvertsȱwereȱexpectedȱto makeȱaȱcompleteȱbreakȱwithȱtheirȱpast. Butȱ thatȱ viewȱ shiftedȱ drasticallyȱ inȱ theȱ firstȱ halfȱ ofȱ the twentiethȱ century.ȱ Theȱ Indianȱ politicalȱ independenceȱ moveȬ mentȱ wasȱ accompaniedȱ byȱ aȱ renewedȱ culturalȱ selfȬconsciousȬ ness,ȱ whichȱ constitutedȱ aȱ particularȱ problemȱ forȱ Indianȱ ChrisȬ tians.ȱUpȱuntilȱthenȱmostȱhadȱcompletelyȱadjustedȱtoȱtheȱspiritȬ ualityȱandȱtheȱchurchȱcultureȱofȱtheȱEuropeans.ȱAsȱaȱrule,ȱIndiȬ anȱ Christiansȱ hadȱ derivedȱ aȱ senseȱ ofȱ selfȬesteemȱ fromȱ theȱ fact that,ȱ asȱ Christians,ȱ they—moreȱ soȱ thanȱ theirȱ ownȱ people— sharedȱ inȱ theȱ worldȱ ofȱ theȱ colonialȱ rulers.ȱ Butȱ now,ȱ withinȱ a shortȱ time,ȱ thatȱ worldȱ hadȱ becomeȱ suspectȱ amongȱ theȱ people. Joiningȱ theȱ Europeansȱ inȱ theirȱ Europeanȱ religiousȱ perceptions wasȱnoȱlongerȱsomethingȱofȱwhichȱtoȱbeȱproud. IndianȱChristiansȱdevelopedȱaȱstrongȱneedȱtoȱprofileȱthemȬ selvesȱ withinȱ theȱ churchȱ asȱ Indiansȱ andȱ atȱ theȱ sameȱ timeȱ join societyȱasȱChristiansȱloyalȱtoȱtheȱstruggleȱforȱindependenceȱand renewedȱ culturalȱ selfȬconsciousness.ȱ Forȱ theȱ firstȱ time,ȱ Indian ChristiansȱwantedȱtoȱbeȱIndiansȱandȱthatȱwouldȱbecomeȱapparȬ entȱ inȱ theirȱ theologyȱ asȱ well.ȱ Upȱ toȱ thatȱ pointȱ theological thoughtȱwasȱdominatedȱbyȱEurope:ȱtheȱstyleȱofȱdoingȱtheology wasȱcompletelyȱEuropeanȱandȱtheȱconceptsȱandȱtheȱargumentaȬ tionȱ wereȱ importedȱ fromȱ there.ȱ Butȱ anȱ authenticȱ Indianȱ theoȬ logyȱ wasȱ formedȱ withinȱ aȱ fewȱ decades.ȱ Aȱ numberȱ ofȱ theoloȬ 115

JESUSȱASȱGURU

116

giansȱinȱtheȱvariousȱProtestantȱchurchesȱexpressedȱtheȱChristian faithȱinȱaȱnewȱway,ȱinȱrelationȱtoȱtheirȱHinduȱenvironment.ȱFor theȱtimeȱbeing,ȱtheȱRomanȱCatholicsȱdidȱnotȱparticipateȱinȱthis attemptȱtoȱcatchȱupȱinȱtheȱareaȱofȱinculturation,ȱbutȱtheȱProtesȬ tantsȱspokeȱupȱinȱnoȱuncertainȱterms. WhenȱtheȱWorldȱMissionȱ Conferenceȱ wasȱ heldȱinȱIndiaȱ in 1938,ȱ itȱ becameȱ clearȱ toȱ theȱ entireȱ worldȱ thatȱ thisȱ hostȱ country hadȱ developedȱ itsȱ ownȱ theology.1ȱ Butȱ notȱ everyoneȱ wasȱ won overȱinȱmissionȱcircles.ȱTheȱpreparationsȱforȱthisȱWorldȱMission Conferenceȱ wereȱ stronglyȱ determinedȱ byȱ Hendrikȱ Kraemer’s TheȱChristianȱMessageȱinȱaȱNonȬChristianȱWorld,ȱwhichȱhadȱbeen writtenȱ especiallyȱ forȱ theȱ conference.ȱ Thisȱ bookȱ arguedȱ forȱ an exclusiveȱChristology,ȱstronglyȱinfluencedȱbyȱtheȱdialecticalȱtheȬ ologyȱ ofȱ Karlȱ Barthȱ andȱ hisȱ followers,ȱ whoȱ leftȱ noȱ roomȱ for contributionsȱfromȱotherȱreligions.ȱInȱcontrast,ȱaȱgroupȱofȱtheoȬ logiansȱfromȱIndiaȱpresentedȱaȱcompletelyȱdifferentȱapproachȱto theȱChristianȱmessage,ȱbasedȱonȱtheirȱexperiencesȱwithȱlifeȱinȱa nonȬChristianȱ environment.ȱ Thisȱ groupȱ isȱ usuallyȱ calledȱ the “Rethinkingȱ Christianity”ȱ group,ȱ afterȱ theȱ titleȱ ofȱ theirȱ collecȬ tionȱofȱarticlesȱRethinkingȱChristianityȱinȱIndia.ȱWhenȱtheȱconferȬ enceȱ assembledȱ inȱ Decemberȱ 1938ȱ inȱ Tambaram,ȱ southȱ ofȱ MaȬ dras,ȱ theȱ positionsȱ wereȱ directlyȱ opposedȱ toȱ eachȱ other.ȱ EuroȬ peanȱtheologyȱnoȱlongerȱseemedȱtoȱtouchȱbaseȱinȱIndia,ȱbutȱthe Indianȱ alternativeȱ wasȱ unacceptableȱ toȱ theȱ Westernȱ delegates forȱ theȱ mostȱ part.ȱ Forȱ theȱ firstȱ timeȱ thereȱ wasȱ aȱ gapȱ between EastȱandȱWestȱwithinȱtheȱsameȱProtestantȱdenominations. Theȱ mostȱ prominentȱ membersȱ ofȱ theȱ “Rethinkingȱ ChrisȬ tianity”ȱgroupȱwereȱtheȱtheologianȱA.J.ȱAppasamyȱandȱtheȱlawȬ yersȱ P.ȱ Chenchiahȱ andȱ V.ȱ Chakkarai.ȱ Inȱ theȱ decadesȱ prior,ȱ all threeȱhadȱbeenȱintenselyȱinvolvedȱinȱaȱnewȱIndianȱapproachȱto theȱChristianȱfaith.ȱAllȱthreeȱwantedȱtoȱexperienceȱtheirȱfaithȱin Christȱ inȱ termsȱ ofȱ theirȱ Hinduȱ background,ȱ withoutȱ denying whatȱ hadȱ beenȱ dearȱ toȱ theirȱ ancestors.ȱ Asȱ anȱ Anglicanȱ clergyȬ manȱ andȱ laterȱ evenȱ asȱ aȱ bishop,ȱ Appasamyȱ wasȱ interestedȱ in

ȱSeeȱJanȱvanȱLin,ȱShakingȱtheȱFundamentals:ȱReligiousȱPluralityȱand EcumenicalȱMovement,ȱChurchȱandȱTheologyȱinȱContext,ȱvol.ȱ36ȱ(AmsterȬ dam/NewȱYork:ȱRodopi,ȱ2002),ȱpp.ȱ158Ȭ211.ȱCf.ȱH.L.ȱRichard,ȱ“RethinkȬ ingȱ‘Rethinking’,”ȱInternationalȱJournalȱofȱFrontierȱMissionsȱ19ȱ(2002)ȱ3:ȱ7Ȭ 17. 1

JESUSȱTHEȱAVATARA:ȱVENGALȱCHAKKARAI

117

theȱdevelopmentȱofȱaȱspiritualityȱthatȱcouldȱmakeȱtheȱchurchȱin Indiaȱmoreȱattractive.ȱHeȱsawȱaȱimportantȱplaceȱforȱtheȱHindu bhaktiȱtraditionȱinȱwhichȱtheȱlovingȱsurrenderȱtoȱGodȱisȱcentral. Chenchiahȱ was,ȱ inȱ moreȱ thanȱ oneȱ respect,ȱ theȱ mostȱ radicalȱ of theȱthree.ȱHeȱhadȱlittleȱconnectionȱwithȱchurchȱlife,ȱandȱdidȱnot expectȱmuchȱfromȱbuildingȱupȱtheȱchurchȱinȱaȱHinduȱenvironȬ ment.ȱ Heȱ wasȱ concernedȱ withȱ “theȱ rawȱ factȱ ofȱ Christ,”ȱ theȱ exȬ perienceȱofȱChristȱthatȱHindusȱcouldȱshareȱwithȱChristians.ȱThe mostȱsystematicȱthinkerȱinȱtheȱ“RethinkingȱChristianity”ȱgroup wasȱChakkarai,ȱwhoȱwantedȱtoȱdemonstrateȱthroughȱextensive treatisesȱhowȱChristianȱfaithȱcanȱbeȱexpressedȱinȱcompletelyȱInȬ dian—andȱthusȱHindu—concepts.ȱHisȱcontributionȱtoȱtheology inȱIndiaȱhasȱhadȱanȱextraordinaryȱinfluenceȱonȱbothȱChristians andȱ peopleȱ withȱ aȱ Hinduȱ backgroundȱ whoȱ wereȱ interestedȱ in theȱChristianȱfaith. Inȱ1926ȱChakkariȱpublishedȱtheȱbookȱthatȱwouldȱmakeȱhim famous.ȱTheȱtitleȱitselfȱwasȱalreadyȱprogrammatic:ȱJesusȱtheȱAvaȬ tar.ȱObviously,ȱheȱwantedȱtoȱpresentȱaȱChristologyȱinȱterminoȬ logyȱborrowedȱfromȱHinduism,ȱwhereȱJesusȱcouldȱbeȱdescribed asȱanȱavatara,ȱaȱdescentȱofȱGodȱofȱwhichȱHinduȱmythologyȱhas soȱ manyȱ examples.ȱ Moreover,ȱ theȱ titleȱ suggestedȱ thatȱ Jesus shouldȱnotȱsoȱmuchȱbeȱregardedȱasȱoneȱofȱmanyȱavatarasȱbutȱas anȱ exemplaryȱ avatara.ȱ Inȱ theȱ 1920sȱ thisȱ wasȱ aȱ provocativeȱ reȬ mark,ȱnotȱonlyȱforȱChristiansȱbutȱalsoȱforȱHindus. Chakkaraiȱ wasȱ concernedȱ withȱ theȱ inculturationȱ ofȱ the Christianȱfaith—orȱwhatȱheȱhimselfȱcalled,ȱtheȱ“Indianisationȱof Christianity.”ȱ Itȱ hadȱ toȱ beȱ possibleȱ toȱ expressȱ theȱ biblicalȱ mesȬ sageȱandȱtheȱdoctrinesȱofȱtheȱchurchȱinȱsuchȱaȱwayȱthatȱpeople withȱaȱHinduȱbackgroundȱwouldȱbeȱdirectlyȱmovedȱbyȱit.ȱChakȬ karaiȱ wasȱ notȱ concernedȱ withȱ syncretism:ȱ heȱ continuedȱ toȱ be mindfulȱofȱtheȱdifferencesȱbetweenȱtheȱHinduȱandȱChristianȱreȬ ligionsȱandȱaȱcombinationȱofȱbothȱreligionsȱleftȱhimȱcold.ȱThese motivesȱ revealȱ somethingȱ ofȱ theȱ biographyȱ ofȱ theȱ writer.ȱ He himselfȱ cameȱ fromȱ aȱ Hinduȱ familyȱ andȱ feltȱ anȱ affinityȱ forȱ his ancestralȱreligionȱandȱculture.ȱNonetheless,ȱasȱaȱstudentȱheȱhad chosenȱ forȱ theȱ Christianȱ faith.ȱ Itȱ wasȱ importantȱ forȱ himȱ toȱ deȬ fendȱthatȱchoiceȱagainȱandȱagainȱandȱtherebyȱdemonstrateȱthat faithȱ inȱ Christȱ didȱ notȱ needȱ toȱ becomeȱ absorbedȱ byȱ European philosophicalȱframeworksȱandȱchurchȱculture.

JESUSȱASȱGURU

118

VengalȱChakkaraiȱChettiarȱwasȱbornȱinȱ1880ȱasȱtheȱsonȱofȱa bankerȱinȱMadras.ȱTheȱfamilyȱbelongedȱtoȱtheȱchettiȱcaste,ȱwhich isȱ directlyȱ belowȱ theȱ brahmanicȱ inȱ theȱ casteȱ hierarchy.ȱ His familyȱ wasȱ religious,ȱ andȱ participationȱ inȱ theȱ templeȱ cultȱ and otherȱ ritualsȱ wasȱ valuedȱ highly.ȱ Asȱ inȱ manyȱ familiesȱ inȱ anȱ urȬ banȱenvironment,ȱdifferentȱstrandsȱofȱHinduismȱexistedȱsideȱby sideȱ inȱ theȱ family.ȱ Hisȱ fatherȱ wasȱ anȱ adherentȱ ofȱ theȱ monistic Vedantaȱ doctrine,ȱ whileȱ hisȱ motherȱ wasȱ inspiredȱ primarilyȱ by theȱ Vishnuȱ bhakti.ȱ Asȱ aȱ child,ȱ Chakkaraiȱ regularlyȱ visitedȱ the Kaliȱ templeȱ inȱ Madras.ȱ Thereȱ heȱ developedȱ aȱ specialȱ devotion forȱ theȱ heroicȱ godȱ Murugan,ȱ theȱ youngȱ warriorȱ soȱ popular amongȱTamils.ȱHowever,ȱatȱschoolȱheȱencounteredȱaȱcompletely differentȱ religiousȱ influence.ȱ Likeȱ manyȱ otherȱ childrenȱ ofȱ the eliteȱofȱtheȱcity,ȱheȱwasȱsentȱtoȱaȱmissionȱschool,ȱforȱaȱChristian educationȱwasȱknownȱtoȱbeȱtheȱbest.ȱAfterȱtheȱScottishȱMission School,ȱ heȱ attendedȱ theȱ highȱ schoolȱ affiliatedȱ withȱ Madras Christianȱ Collegeȱ andȱ thenȱ studiedȱ philosophyȱ atȱ thatȱ same college. AtȱfirstȱChakkaraiȱrejectedȱtheȱBibleȱlessonsȱandȱtheȱChrisȬ tianȱcultureȱthatȱsurroundedȱhimȱatȱschool,ȱbutȱduringȱhisȱstudy ofȱphilosophyȱheȱbecameȱfascinatedȱbyȱtheȱfigureȱofȱChrist.ȱThe rector,ȱ Williamȱ Miller,ȱ paidȱ aȱ greatȱ dealȱ ofȱ attentionȱ toȱ himȱ in hisȱ religiousȱ searchȱ andȱ taughtȱ himȱ howȱ toȱ focusȱ hisȱ attention onȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ withoutȱ rejectingȱ Hinduȱ values.ȱ Inȱ contrastȱ to manyȱ inȱ hisȱ circles,ȱ Chakkaraiȱ wantedȱ notȱ onlyȱ toȱ familiarize himselfȱwithȱChristȱbutȱalsoȱtoȱdevoteȱhimselfȱexplicitlyȱtoȱhim. HeȱexplainedȱthatȱinȱtheȱtolerantȱHinduȱcultureȱinȱparticularȱit wasȱnoȱsacrificeȱtoȱacknowledgeȱJesusȱChristȱinȱwordȱandȱdeed asȱteacherȱorȱevenȱasȱtheȱperfectȱincarnationȱofȱGod.ȱThatȱwould notȱbeȱstrange,ȱbutȱ“ifȱtheȱdiscipleȱisȱcalledȱuponȱtoȱgiveȱaȱsignal proofȱ ofȱ hisȱ loyaltyȱ toȱ hisȱ Master,ȱ itȱ isȱ notȱ enoughȱ toȱ confess Himȱorallyȱorȱbyȱgoodȱconductȱbeforeȱmen,ȱheȱshouldȱsubmitȱto theȱ riteȱ ofȱ Baptism.”2ȱ Andȱ thus,ȱ atȱ twentyȬthreeȱ yearsȱ ofȱ age, Chakkaraiȱwasȱbaptizedȱwhenȱheȱdidȱconfessionȱofȱfaithȱinȱthe chapelȱofȱMadrasȱChristianȱCollege,ȱtherebyȱbecomingȱaȱmemȬ berȱofȱtheȱFreeȱChurchȱofȱScotland.

ȱInȱaȱ1915ȱarticle,ȱ“WhyȱIȱamȱaȱChristian”;ȱseeȱV.ȱChakkarai,ȱVengal Chakkarai,ȱvol.ȱI,ȱed.ȱP.T.ȱThomasȱ(Madras:ȱTheȱChristianȱLiteratureȱSociȬ ety,ȱ1981),ȱp.ȱ4. 2

JESUSȱTHEȱAVATARA:ȱVENGALȱCHAKKARAI

119

Afterȱ hisȱ studiesȱ Chakkaraiȱ taughtȱ forȱ aȱ numberȱ ofȱ years whileȱstudyingȱlaw.ȱSubsequently,ȱheȱworkedȱforȱsomeȱtimeȱas aȱlawyerȱbutȱdidȱnotȱfindȱtheȱworkȱsatisfying.ȱInȱ1913ȱheȱjoined theȱDanishȱMissionȱinȱMadras,ȱwhereȱheȱpresidedȱoverȱaȱChrisȬ tianȱreadingȱroom.ȱThusȱforȱalmostȱtwentyȱyearsȱheȱworkedȱin missions,ȱ spreadingȱ theȱ Gospelȱ amongȱ intellectuals.ȱ Butȱ misȬ sionaryȱworkȱwasȱnotȱtheȱonlyȱthingȱtoȱwhichȱheȱdevotedȱhimȬ self.ȱAsȱaȱyoungȱman,ȱheȱhadȱbeenȱcaptivatedȱbyȱtheȱIndianȱinȬ dependenceȱ movement.ȱ Heȱ wasȱ aȱ greatȱ championȱ ofȱ Gandhi’s peacefulȱresistance.ȱAsȱaȱChristianȱsocialist,ȱheȱalsoȱputȱhisȱtime andȱ energyȱ intoȱ theȱ emergingȱ tradeȱ unionȱ inȱ Madras.ȱ Itȱ isȱ no wonderȱ thenȱ thatȱ heȱ ultimatelyȱ choseȱ forȱ aȱ politicalȱ career, holdingȱaȱnumberȱofȱimportantȱpositions:ȱheȱwasȱmayorȱofȱthe cityȱ ofȱ Madras,ȱ aȱ memberȱ ofȱ theȱ Legislativeȱ Assemblyȱ ofȱ the stateȱ ofȱ Madrasȱ andȱ chairmanȱ ofȱ theȱ Allȱ Indiaȱ Tradeȱ Union Congress.ȱChakkaraiȱdiedȱinȱ1957. Chakkaraiȱpublishedȱaȱgreatȱdeal,ȱespeciallyȱinȱtheȱformȱof articles.ȱForȱmanyȱyearsȱheȱeditedȱhisȱownȱweekly,ȱTheȱChristian Patriot,ȱ andȱ alsoȱ contributedȱ regularlyȱ toȱ anotherȱ periodicalȱ in Madras,ȱtheȱGuardian.ȱChakkaraiȱwritesȱinȱaȱclassicȱBritishȱstyle, arguingȱinȱaȱbroadȱwayȱinȱornateȱprose.ȱHisȱarticlesȱtestifyȱtoȱhis beingȱaȱwidelyȬreadȱmanȱwithȱaȱgoodȱknowledgeȱofȱphilosophy andȱ theology.ȱ Heȱ wasȱ familiarȱ withȱ theȱ Indianȱ philosophical classicsȱasȱwellȱasȱtheȱmodernȱEuropeanȱthinkers.ȱHeȱwasȱwellȬ informedȱaboutȱtheȱtheologicalȱdebateȱinȱIndiaȱandȱinȱtheȱWest. Heȱ enteredȱ intoȱ theȱ discussionȱ atȱ theȱ timeȱ betweenȱ C.F.ȱ AnȬ drewsȱ andȱ J.N.ȱ Farquharȱ onȱ whetherȱ orȱ notȱ Jesus’ȱ wordsȱ on nonȬviolenceȱ hadȱ aȱ Buddhistȱ background.ȱ Butȱ heȱ alsoȱ became involvedȱ inȱ theȱ debateȱ onȱ Lifeȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ researchȱ inȱ responseȱ to writingsȱbyȱAlbertȱSchweitzer. Chakkarai’sȱ mostȱ famousȱ bookȱ isȱ Jesusȱ theȱ Avatar,ȱ which wasȱ publishedȱ inȱ Madrasȱ atȱ theȱ endȱ ofȱ 1926ȱ (theȱ coverȱ ofȱ the firstȱprintȱgivesȱ1927).ȱItȱwasȱfollowedȱaȱnumberȱofȱyearsȱlater, inȱ 1932,ȱ byȱ Theȱ Crossȱ andȱ Indianȱ Thought,ȱ whichȱ hadȱ muchȱ less influence.ȱBothȱbooksȱareȱrevisionsȱofȱseriesȱofȱarticlesȱthatȱoriȬ ginallyȱappearedȱinȱhisȱownȱmagazineȱTheȱChristianȱPatriot.ȱThe firstȱbookȱreceivedȱaȱgreatȱdealȱofȱattentionȱfromȱIndianȱChrisȬ tiansȱasȱwellȱasȱinȱtheȱcirclesȱofȱEuropeanȱmissionaries.ȱAȱDanȬ ishȱ translationȱ evenȱ appearedȱ inȱ 1928,ȱ noȱ doubtȱ dueȱ toȱ ChakȬ karai’sȱconnectionȱwithȱtheȱDanishȱMissionȱSociety.

JESUSȱASȱGURU

120

Chakkarai’sȱ goalȱ inȱ Jesusȱ theȱ Avatarȱ isȱ toȱ describeȱ Jesus Christȱ usingȱ Hinduȱ concepts.ȱ Forȱ thisȱ Indianȱ Christology,ȱ he doesȱnotȱselectȱanyȱsingleȱdirectionȱinȱHinduismȱotherȱthan,ȱfor example,ȱ theȱ bhaktiȱ theologianȱ Appasamy.ȱ Likeȱ aȱ trueȱ eclectic, Chakkaraiȱ adoptsȱ whateverȱ suitsȱ himȱ fromȱ allȱ strands,ȱ asȱ a resultȱ ofȱ whichȱ theȱ conceptsȱ areȱ detachedȱ fromȱ theirȱ original context.ȱThus,ȱwhenȱheȱusesȱaȱcertainȱHinduȱterm,ȱheȱdoesȱnot attachȱ anyȱ ȱ relatedȱ systemȱ ofȱ convictionȱ andȱ argumentationȱ to itsȱuse.ȱButȱtheȱtermsȱemployedȱalwaysȱhaveȱaȱcertainȱmeaning, ofȱcourse,ȱthatȱaccompaniesȱthemȱintoȱtheȱnewȱChristianȱframeȬ work,ȱ aȱ processȱ thatȱ canȱ beȱ experiencedȱ asȱ eitherȱ enrichingȱ or alienating.ȱAȱsmallȱexampleȱcanȱclarifyȱthis.ȱAȱtypicalȱformulaȬ tionȱ forȱ Chakkaraiȱ isȱ offeredȱ byȱ theȱ followingȱ sentenceȱ onȱ the continuingȱpresenceȱofȱChrist:ȱ“asȱChristianȱanubhavaȱandȱshruti haveȱ agreedȱ inȱ emphasizing,ȱ theȱ Lord,ȱ Jesus,ȱ theȱ Galilean,ȱ is stillȱ withȱ us.”3ȱ Shrutiȱ isȱ usedȱ hereȱ forȱ “Holyȱ Scriptures”ȱ and anubhavaȱmeansȱ“experienceȱofȱfaith.”ȱBothȱtermsȱwillȱsoundȱfaȬ miliarȱtoȱtheȱearsȱofȱtheȱIndianȱreader,ȱandȱthatȱisȱofȱcourseȱthe intention.ȱAtȱfirstȱglance,ȱthereȱdoesȱnotȱappearȱtoȱbeȱanyȱobjecȬ tionȱ toȱ usingȱ thisȱ terminology.ȱ Afterȱ all,ȱ shrutiȱ isȱ aȱ standard Hinduȱ expressionȱ forȱ inspiredȱ booksȱ andȱ hasȱ aȱ strongȱ conȬ notationȱ ofȱ holiness,ȱ andȱ anubhavaȱ isȱ aȱ termȱ oftenȱ usedȱ inȱ conȬ nectionȱ withȱ theȱ spiritualityȱ ofȱ Hinduism.ȱ Andȱ yetȱ theȱ terms evokeȱ questionsȱ inȱ aȱ Christianȱ context.ȱ Shrutiȱ wasȱ originally usedȱ forȱ theȱ holyȱ Vedicȱ writings,ȱ whichȱ areȱ seenȱ asȱ revelation withoutȱanyȱhumanȱintervention.ȱTheȱwordȱmeansȱ“heard”ȱand contrastsȱ withȱ theȱ (alsoȱ inspired)ȱ scripturesȱ inȱ whichȱ aȱ human handȱ canȱ beȱ recognizedȱ andȱ isȱ thereforeȱ calledȱ “remembered” (smriti).ȱWhenȱshrutiȱisȱusedȱtoȱreferȱtoȱtheȱBible,ȱitȱimmediately evokesȱ aȱ conceptȱ ofȱ extremelyȱ mechanicalȱ revelationȱ thatȱ apȬ pearsȱ toȱ makeȱ itȱ impossibleȱ toȱ perceiveȱ anyȱ humanȱ participaȬ tionȱ inȱ theȱ productionȱ ofȱ theȱ book:ȱ shrutiȱ isȱ simplyȱ heardȱ diȬ rectlyȱfromȱheaven.ȱTheȱtermȱanubhavaȱalsoȱhasȱitsȱownȱconnoȬ tation:ȱ theȱ wordȱ refersȱ inȱ Hinduismȱ toȱ aȱ mysticalȱ experience thatȱ isȱ usuallyȱ broughtȱ aboutȱ byȱ systematicȱ humanȱ efforts.ȱ AlȬ thoughȱanubhavaȱcanȱalsoȱbeȱunderstoodȱinȱtheȱbhaktiȱsphereȱas theȱ resultȱ ofȱ divineȱ mercy,ȱ theȱ wordȱ stillȱ evokesȱ theȱ imageȱ of

ȱV.ȱChakkarai,ȱJesusȱtheȱAvatar,ȱin:ȱVengalȱChakkarai,ȱvol.ȱI,ȱp.ȱ181.

3

JESUSȱTHEȱAVATARA:ȱVENGALȱCHAKKARAI

121

theȱ asceticȱ whoȱ appropriatesȱ magicalȱ powerȱ ratherȱ thanȱ aȱ reȬ ceptiveȱbeliever. Chakkaraiȱwasȱveryȱconsciousȱofȱtheȱfactȱthat,ȱbyȱusingȱInȬ dianȱ ideas,ȱ heȱ wasȱ pavingȱ newȱ roadsȱ thatȱ wouldȱ notȱ meetȱ the approvalȱofȱeveryone.ȱAtȱtheȱbeginningȱofȱhisȱsecondȱbook,ȱhe reviewsȱtheȱeffectȱofȱJesusȱtheȱAvatar,ȱwritingȱthatȱthereȱheȱwantȬ edȱ toȱ useȱ “theȱ resourcesȱ ofȱ Indianȱ thoughtȱ andȱ theȱ heritageȱ of theȱIndianȱreligions”ȱandȱthatȱhisȱgoalȱwasȱ“toȱfindȱaȱfullerȱexȬ plicationȱofȱtheȱIncarnationȱinȱtermsȱofȱIndianȱthought.”4ȱChakȬ karaiȱdidȱnotȱwantȱtoȱpresentȱanȱuncriticalȱcomparisonȱofȱvariȬ ousȱreligiousȱtraditionsȱbutȱtoȱenrichȱChristologyȱbyȱtheȱuseȱof theȱIndianȱreligiousȱtradition—thusȱnotȱsyncretismȱbutȱ“IndianȬ ization”ȱorȱinculturation. Thisȱ isȱ Chakkarai’sȱ startingȱ pointȱ forȱ hisȱ Christological project.ȱ Thisȱ partȱ ofȱ theȱ Christianȱ doctrineȱ isȱ ofȱ greatȱ imporȬ tanceȱtoȱhim:ȱheȱhasȱaȱveryȱChristocentricȱviewȱofȱtheȱChristian religion.ȱItȱwas,ȱafterȱall,ȱtheȱimageȱofȱChristȱthatȱhadȱintrigued himȱasȱaȱHindu.ȱHeȱhadȱknownȱaboutȱreligionȱbeforeȱbecoming acquaintedȱ withȱ theȱ Gospel,ȱ butȱ theȱ linkȱ withȱ Christȱ showed everythingȱinȱaȱcompletelyȱdifferentȱlight.ȱInȱhisȱbookȱChakkarȬ aiȱ goesȱ backȱ repeatedlyȱ toȱ hisȱ firstȱ experiencesȱ onȱ theȱ pathȱ toȬ wardsȱ theȱ Christianȱ faith.ȱ Heȱ becameȱ fascinatedȱ byȱ theȱ person ofȱJesusȱChristȱbecauseȱofȱhisȱsimultaneousȱexaltationȱandȱnearȬ ness,ȱ becauseȱ ofȱ theȱ transcendentȱ mysteryȱ ofȱ hisȱ being.ȱ Inȱ his experience,ȱ oneȱ hasȱ aȱ differentȱ relationshipȱ withȱ Godȱ through Jesus.ȱ Chakkaraiȱ writes,ȱ withȱ aȱ fineȱ turnȱ ofȱ phrase:ȱ “Theȱ most outstandingȱ featureȱ ofȱ Christianȱ experienceȱ isȱ thatȱ weȱ canȱ no moreȱ thinkȱ ofȱ Godȱ withoutȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ thanȱ weȱ canȱ thinkȱ of JesusȱChristȱwithoutȱGod.”5 Chakkaraiȱ isȱ convincedȱ thatȱ inȱ Indiaȱ especiallyȱ peopleȱ are capableȱ ofȱ comprehendingȱ somethingȱ ofȱ theȱ secretȱ ofȱ Christ. Onlyȱsomeoneȱwhoȱisȱfamiliarȱwithȱmysticismȱcanȱbeȱawareȱof howȱ theȱ presenceȱ ofȱ Godȱ isȱ illuminatedȱ throughȱ Jesusȱ Christ. Andȱ onlyȱ someoneȱ whoȱ isȱ familiarȱ withȱ theȱ Easternȱ wayȱ of transferringȱknowledgeȱcanȱunderstandȱJesus’ȱrelationshipȱwith hisȱ disciples.ȱ Jesus’ȱ prayerȱ lifeȱ canȱ alsoȱ beȱ clarifiedȱ againstȱ an ȱV.ȱChakkarai,ȱTheȱCrossȱandȱIndianȱThought,ȱin:ȱVengalȱChakkarai, vol.ȱI,ȱp.ȱ199. 4

ȱChakkarai,ȱJesusȱtheȱAvatar,ȱp.ȱ158.

5

JESUSȱASȱGURU

122

Indianȱ background:ȱ itȱ isȱ aȱ kindȱ ofȱ yoga.ȱ Chakkaraiȱ lashesȱ out ratherȱfiercelyȱatȱEuropeanȱtheologiansȱwhoȱcontinueȱtoȱremain stuckȱonȱappearancesȱandȱoverlookȱtheȱessentials.ȱHeȱsuggested stronglyȱtoȱsuchȱanȱauthorȱthatȱheȱmightȱhaveȱunderstoodȱbetȬ terȱifȱheȱhadȱspentȱsomeȱtimeȱinȱtheȱEastȱwithȱaȱguru.6ȱApparȬ ently,ȱtheȱtruthȱofȱChristȱrevealsȱitselfȱbetterȱinȱEasternȱconcepts. ThusȱtheȱcentralȱconceptȱinȱChakkarai’sȱChristologyȱisȱavaȬ tara.ȱInȱHinduismȱthisȱtermȱrefersȱtoȱaȱdivineȱfigureȱwhoȱmerciȬ fullyȱ descendsȱ toȱ theȱ worldȱ andȱ bringsȱ salvationȱ toȱ humans.7 Hinduismȱ containsȱ manyȱ mythsȱ aboutȱ avataras,ȱ andȱ inȱ some schoolsȱ anȱ entireȱ theologicalȱ systemȱ hasȱ arisen.ȱ Vaishnavism hasȱ aȱ taxonomyȱ ofȱ aȱ dozenȱ avatarasȱ whoȱ appearȱ onȱ earthȱ over theȱcourseȱofȱcosmicȱhistory.ȱAgainȱandȱagain,ȱitȱisȱVishnuȱwho, inȱ continuallyȱ newȱ form,ȱ descendsȱ toȱ humansȱ toȱ combatȱ evil. TheȱfamousȱtextȱinȱtheȱBhagavadȬGitaȱthatȱisȱtheȱproofȱtextȱpar excellenceȱofȱthisȱsystem,ȱstates:ȱ“Forȱtheȱprotectionȱofȱtheȱgood, forȱtheȱdestructionȱofȱtheȱevildoers,ȱforȱtheȱsettingȱupȱofȱtheȱlaw ofȱ righteousnessȱ Iȱ comeȱ intoȱ beingȱ ageȱ afterȱ age”ȱ (BhagavadȬ Gitaȱ 4:8).8ȱ Ramaȱ andȱ Krishnaȱ inȱ particularȱ haveȱ receivedȱ a prominentȱ placeȱ inȱ thisȱ seriesȱ ofȱ divineȱ descents.ȱ Theȱ veryȱ exȬ tensiveȱ mythsȱ aboutȱ theseȱ avatarasȱ areȱ linkedȱ toȱ anȱ intensive cultusȱthatȱisȱcentralȱforȱmanyȱHindusȱofȱtheȱVaishnavaȱschool. Butȱ thereȱ areȱ storiesȱ ofȱ avatarasȱ inȱ otherȱ partsȱ ofȱ theȱ Hindu worldȱ asȱ well.ȱ Becauseȱ ofȱ hisȱ background,ȱ Chakkaraiȱ wasȱ esȬ peciallyȱ familiarȱ withȱ theȱ mythsȱ thatȱ dealȱ withȱ theȱ wayȱ in whichȱShivaȱrevealedȱhimselfȱtoȱpiousȱbelieversȱinȱtheȱcountry ofȱ theȱ Tamils.ȱ Theseȱ instancesȱ areȱ moreȱ theophaniesȱ ofȱ short durationȱthanȱincarnationsȱlivingȱamongȱhumans,ȱasȱisȱtheȱcase withȱRamaȱandȱKrishna,ȱbutȱtheȱtermȱavataraȱisȱused:ȱitȱisȱnone lessȱthanȱGodȱwhoȱappearsȱonȱearth. Thusȱ itȱ isȱ alsoȱ clearȱ whyȱ Chakkaraiȱ attachesȱ soȱ muchȱ imȬ portanceȱ toȱ theȱ conceptȱ ofȱ avatara.ȱ Theȱ appearanceȱ ofȱ Jesus ChristȱisȱnothingȱlessȱthanȱGod’sȱpresenceȱonȱearth,ȱandȱnoȱconȬ ȱChakkarai,ȱJesusȱtheȱAvatar,ȱp.ȱ169;ȱdirectedȱatȱT.R.ȱGlover.

6

ȱOnȱtheȱtermȱavataraȱseeȱGeoffreyȱParrinder,ȱAvatarȱandȱIncarnation: TheȱWildeȱLecturesȱinȱNaturalȱandȱComparativeȱReligionȱinȱtheȱUniversityȱof Oxfordȱ(London:ȱFaberȱandȱFaber,ȱ1970). 7

8 ȱR.C.ȱZaehnerȱ(ed.,ȱtransl.),ȱTheȱBhagavadȬGitaȱ(London:ȱOxfordȱUniȬ versityȱPress,ȱ1973),ȱp.ȱ184.

JESUSȱTHEȱAVATARA:ȱVENGALȱCHAKKARAI

123

ceptȱisȱbetterȱsuitedȱtoȱestablishingȱthatȱthanȱtheȱHinduȱavatara. ItȱisȱcharacteristicȱofȱChakkaraiȱthatȱheȱopposesȱEuropeanȱtheoȬ logiansȱ whoȱ searchingȱ forȱ “theȱ historicalȱ Jesus”ȱ andȱ findȱ noȬ thingȱmoreȱthanȱanȱordinaryȱperson,ȱaȱprosaicȱfigureȱlikeȱnearȬ estȱ villageȱ preacher,ȱ asȱ Chakkaraiȱ writes.ȱ Andȱ heȱ continues bitingly: TheȱLordȱsaidȱthatȱmenȱdoȱnotȱgatherȱfigsȱofȱthorns;ȱnorȱcan theyȱcreateȱtheȱFounderȱofȱChristianity,ȱsuchȱasȱHeȱhasȱbeen inȱ humanȱ history,ȱ outȱ ofȱ aȱ dryȱ andȱ drearyȱ moralȱ reformer preachingȱtheȱcommonplacesȱofȱreligions.ȱJesusȱofȱhistoryȱis toȱusȱtheȱAvatarȱofȱGod.9

HinduismȱhasȱanȱaffinityȱforȱtheȱdivinityȱthatȱmanifestsȱitȬ selfȱonȱearth.ȱThatȱisȱwhyȱweȱfindȱinȱIndiaȱespeciallyȱtermsȱthat approachȱtheȱsecretȱofȱtheȱincarnation.ȱThisȱisȱtheȱsurplusȱvalue ofȱtheȱuseȱofȱthisȱterminology:ȱitȱisȱenrichingȱtoȱportrayȱChristȱin thisȱway.ȱButȱoneȱshouldȱalsoȱaskȱwhatȱlessȱappropriateȱmeanȬ ingsȱ areȱ includedȱ inȱ suchȱ aȱ concept.ȱ Chakkaraiȱ isȱ certainly awareȱofȱthis.ȱTheȱexamplesȱespeciallyȱfromȱTamilȱliteratureȱon theȱtheophaniesȱofȱShivaȱoftenȱspeakȱofȱaȱquickȱmanifestationȱof theȱ deity,ȱ whichȱ hardlyȱ allowsȱ oneȱ toȱ speakȱ ofȱ aȱ trueȱ incarnaȬ tion.ȱ Shivaȱ assumesȱ humanȱ formȱ forȱ anȱ instantȱ butȱ doesȱ not takeȱpartȱinȱhumanȱlifeȱwithȱallȱitsȱattendantȱemotions.ȱChakkaȬ raiȱalsoȱseesȱRamaȱandȱKrishnaȱasȱtemporaryȱformsȱthatȱfulfilȱa certainȱtaskȱonȱearthȱandȱthenȱdisappearȱagain.ȱHeȱregardsȱthis asȱ aȱ fundamentalȱ differenceȱ fromȱ theȱ Christianȱ faith:ȱ “Rama andȱ Krishnaȱ wereȱ temporaryȱ andȱ passedȱ away,ȱ theȱ Christian viewȱthatȱweȱareȱdescribingȱisȱthatȱitȱisȱabidingȱandȱpermanent. Theȱ Spiritȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ isȱ incarnatedȱ againȱ andȱ againȱ inȱ human hearts.”10 Hereȱ Chakkaraiȱ appearsȱ toȱ beȱ reactingȱ moreȱ toȱ theȱ Shaiva mythologyȱ ofȱ hisȱ ownȱ Tamilȱ backgroundȱ thanȱ toȱ theȱ Krishna mysticismȱ inȱ northernȱ India,ȱ whereȱ theȱ continualȱ involvement ofȱbelieversȱwithȱtheȱavataraȱisȱexperiencedȱmuchȱmoreȱintenseȬ ly.ȱForȱtheȱordinaryȱKrishnaȱbhaktaȱinȱBengalȱorȱVraj,ȱKrishnaȱis notȱaȱfigureȱofȱtheȱpastȱbutȱaȱlivingȱdeityȱwhoȱstillȱmanifestsȱhis presence.ȱButȱitȱisȱimportantȱthatȱChakkaraiȱshowsȱthatȱheȱisȱnot ȱChakkarai,ȱJesusȱtheȱAvatar,ȱp.ȱ120Ȭ21.

9

ȱChakkarai,ȱJesusȱtheȱAvatar,ȱp.ȱ136.

10

JESUSȱASȱGURU

124

willingȱtoȱadoptȱconceptsȱinȱtheirȱentiretyȱfromȱanotherȱreligion uncritically.ȱCallingȱJesusȱavataraȱsaysȱsomethingȱnewȱaboutȱJeȬ sus,ȱ butȱ atȱ theȱ sameȱ timeȱ theȱ conceptȱ ofȱ avataraȱ alsoȱ receivesȱ a newȱmeaningȱwhenȱappliedȱtoȱJesus.ȱJesusȱisȱseenȱinȱaȱnewȱway whenȱ weȱ seeȱ himȱ asȱ avatara.ȱ Butȱ Jesusȱ isȱ alsoȱ notȱ anȱ avataraȱ in exactlyȱ theȱ sameȱ wayȱ asȱ theȱ otherȱ avatarasȱ thatȱ wereȱ already known.ȱ Thisȱ inculturationȱ processȱ demonstratesȱ doubleȱ transȬ formation,ȱ asȱ Martienȱ Brinkmanȱ hasȱ recentlyȱ demonstratedȱ on theȱbasisȱofȱmanyȱexamplesȱfromȱinterculturalȱtheology.11 Thus,ȱChakkaraiȱfeltȱforcedȱtoȱadjustȱtheȱconceptȱavataraȱin orderȱ toȱ beȱ ableȱ toȱ describeȱ Jesusȱ Christ.ȱ Ifȱ Jesusȱ isȱ anȱ avatara, thenȱ anȱ avataraȱ mustȱ alsoȱ beȱ ableȱ toȱ haveȱ aȱ moreȱ permanent characterȱ thanȱ isȱ usuallyȱ theȱ caseȱ inȱ theȱ Hinduȱ tradition.ȱ Jesus Christȱ cannotȱ beȱ describedȱ asȱ aȱ briefȱ appearance,ȱ aȱ theophany ofȱaȱtemporaryȱnature.ȱHereȱweȱtouchȱuponȱtheȱcoreȱofȱChakkaȬ rai’sȱ Indianȱ Christology.ȱ Theȱ experienceȱ ofȱ theȱ livingȱ Christ nowȱ isȱ moreȱ importantȱ thanȱ theȱ historicalȱ appearanceȱ ofȱ Jesus inȱhisȱdoctrineȱandȱlifeȱandȱhisȱsufferingȱandȱdying.ȱThisȱisȱhow ChakkaraiȱexperiencedȱtheȱimportanceȱofȱJesusȱasȱaȱstudent.ȱFor him,ȱitȱwasȱnotȱnaturalȱtoȱseeȱthisȱfigureȱfromȱanotherȱcontinent asȱtheȱultimateȱmanifestationȱofȱGod.ȱEvenȱafterȱhisȱbaptismȱhe stillȱ wrestledȱ withȱ theȱ issueȱ ofȱ howȱ he,ȱ asȱ anȱ Indian,ȱ should nowȱworshipȱaȱEuropeanizedȱJew.ȱButȱinȱtheȱendȱheȱcanȱdiscard allȱ Westernȱ depictions,ȱ forȱ heȱ experiencesȱ theȱ closenessȱ ofȱ this Jesus:ȱheȱfindsȱhimȱinȱhisȱheart.12 ChakkaraiȱdescribesȱtheȱimportanceȱofȱChristȱbyȱmeansȱof aȱ typicallyȱ Indianȱ approach.ȱ Theȱ resultȱ forȱ hisȱ theologyȱ isȱ that theȱworkingȱofȱtheȱHolyȱSpiritȱisȱgivenȱaȱveryȱcentralȱplace.ȱHe himselfȱmakesȱthisȱconnectionȱasȱwellȱwhenȱheȱwrites:ȱ“TheȱoriȬ entationȱ ofȱ Indianȱ thoughtȱ inȱ respectȱ ofȱ theȱ Incarnationȱ would beȱsetȱonȱtheȱHolyȱSpiritȱandȱtheȱsignificanceȱofȱHisȱindwelling inȱ humanȱ lives.”13ȱ Inȱ India,ȱ religiousȱ experiencesȱ alwaysȱ ultiȬ matelyȱ concernȱ theȱ experienceȱ ofȱ theȱ divineȱ inȱ theȱ depthȱ of one’sȱ ownȱ existence.ȱ Thatȱ isȱ howȱ Chakkaraiȱ wantsȱ toȱ underȬ ȱM.E.ȱBrinkman,ȱTheȱNonȬWesternȱJesus:ȱJesusȱasȱBodhisattva,ȱAvaȬ tara,ȱGuru,ȱProphet,ȱAncestorȱorȱHealer?ȱtransl.ȱHenryȱandȱLucyȱJansen, CrossȱCulturalȱTheologiesȱ(London:ȱEquinox,ȱ2008),ȱforthcoming. 11

ȱChakkarai,ȱJesusȱtheȱAvatar,ȱp.ȱ126.

12

ȱȱChakkarai,ȱJesusȱtheȱAvatar,ȱp.ȱ122.

13

JESUSȱTHEȱAVATARA:ȱVENGALȱCHAKKARAI

125

standȱJesus:ȱasȱtheȱlivingȱoneȱwhoȱcontinuallyȱmanifestsȱhimself inȱ humans.ȱ Christȱ andȱ theȱ Spiritȱ moreȱ orȱ lessȱ mergeȱ intoȱ each other.ȱTheȱHolyȱSpiritȱisȱJesusȱChristȱhimself,ȱwhoȱ“incarnates” himselfȱinȱhumansȱandȱthusȱdeterminesȱtheirȱlives. ChakkaraiȱcanȱfallȱbackȱonȱtheȱHinduȱtraditionȱforȱthisȱasȬ pectȱofȱChristologicalȱthoughtȱasȱwell.ȱHeȱcallsȱtheȱSpiritȱtheȱanȬ taryamin,ȱtheȱinternalȱregulator.ȱWeȱfindȱthisȱtermȱinȱtheȱUpaniȬ shadsȱ asȱ anȱ indicationȱ ofȱ theȱ workingȱ ofȱ theȱ Brahman,ȱ the Supremeȱ Reality,ȱ inȱ humanȱ lifeȱ (Mandukyaȱ Upanishadȱ 6).ȱ It wasȱtheȱgreatȱphilosopherȱRamanujaȱ(d.ȱ1137)ȱinȱparticularȱwho workedȱoutȱthisȱconceptȱforȱdescribingȱtheȱdivineȱpresenceȱinȱa person:ȱGodȱisȱfoundȱinȱone’sȱownȱinnerȱself,ȱandȱwhoeverȱdisȬ coversȱ himȱ discoversȱ theȱ guidingȱ principleȱ ofȱ life.ȱ Inȱ lineȱ with this,ȱChakkaraiȱdescribesȱtheȱworkingȱofȱtheȱSpirit,ȱwhichȱisȱnoȬ thingȱelseȱthanȱJesusȱinȱpeopleȱnow.ȱTheȱimportanceȱofȱtheȱhisȬ toricalȱJesusȱfadesȱhere,ȱforȱweȱshouldȱnotȱlookȱforȱJesusȱ“inȱthe tombȱofȱforgottenȱfactsȱandȱancientȱcircumstancesȱbutȱinȱtheȱinȬ nerȱrecessesȱofȱtheȱatman.ȱThisȱisȱtheȱdominatingȱchallengeȱofȱInȬ dianȱreligiousȱexperience.”14 Isȱ thereȱ stillȱ somethingȱ toȱ beȱ saidȱ aboutȱ theȱ directionȱ in whichȱ theȱ “internalȱ regulator”ȱ leadsȱ us?ȱ Whatȱ doesȱ itȱ meanȱ to findȱthisȱfigureȱofȱChristȱasȱtheȱguidingȱprincipleȱofȱone’sȱown existence?ȱChakkaraiȱ alsoȱmakesȱuseȱhereȱofȱconceptsȱfromȱhis Hinduȱ heritage.ȱ Heȱ seesȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ asȱ anȱ exemplaryȱ human, theȱmodelȱforȱbeingȱhuman.ȱAlreadyȱinȱtheȱancientȱVedicȱwritȬ ingsȱoneȱfindsȱspeculationȱonȱtheȱmythologicalȱfigureȱPurusha, whoȱ isȱ “theȱ humanȱ being,”ȱ theȱ originalȱ formȱ ofȱ humanȱ life. ChakkaraiȱlinksȱupȱwithȱthisȱtraditionȱwhenȱheȱdescribesȱJesus asȱtheȱrealȱhumanȱbeing,ȱtheȱidealȱhumanȱbeing,ȱorȱtheȱhuman beingȱinȱallȱhumans.ȱUsingȱaȱSanskritȱterm,ȱheȱcallsȱhimȱtheȱSat Purushaȱ (theȱ trueȱ humanȱ being).ȱ Heȱ thusȱ emphasizesȱ theȱ imȬ portanceȱofȱtheȱwordsȱandȱworksȱofȱJesusȱChrist.ȱTrueȱhumanȬ ȱChakkarai,ȱJesusȱtheȱAvatar,ȱp.ȱ131.ȱHeȱwouldȱcertainlyȱagreeȱthe withȱ whatȱ theȱ Dutchȱ poetȱ andȱ hymnȱ writer,ȱ Huubȱ Oosterhuisȱ wrote “Nietȱinȱhetȱgrafȱvanȱvoorbij,/ȱnietȱinȱeenȱtempelȱvanȱdromen;/ȱhierȱinȱons middenȱisȱHij,/ȱhierȱinȱdeȱschaduwȱderȱhoop.”ȱI.e.:ȱ“Notȱinȱtheȱgraveȱof yesterday,/ȱnotȱinȱaȱtempleȱofȱdreams;/ȱhereȱisȱheȱinȱourȱmidst,/ȱhereȱin theȱshadowȱofȱhope.”ȱCf.ȱtheȱDutchȱProtestantȱhymnal,ȱLiedboekȱvoorȱde kerkenȱ(‘sȱGravenhage/Leeuwarden:ȱBoekencentrum/Jongbloed),ȱno.ȱ325: 6. 14

JESUSȱASȱGURU

126

ness,ȱ asȱ Godȱ promisedȱ it,ȱ emergesȱ inȱ him:ȱ “Heȱ isȱ theȱ Manȱ of Men,ȱ theȱ Sonȱ ofȱ Man,ȱ theȱ originalȱ patternȱ inȱ theȱ mindȱ ofȱ God Himselfȱafterȱwhomȱallȱmenȱhaveȱbeenȱfashioned.”15ȱIfȱitȱisȱthen thisȱManȱofȱGodȱwhoȱgivesȱdirectionȱtoȱtheȱlifeȱofȱtheȱbeliever, thenȱ humanityȱ asȱ Godȱ intendedȱ itȱ becomesȱ attainable.ȱ Onȱ this pointȱChakkaraiȱhasȱnotȱgivenȱmoreȱthanȱanȱinitialȱstimulusȱfor theologizing.ȱ Laterȱ Christianȱ thinkersȱ inȱ India,ȱ particularlyȱ in theȱashramȱmovement,ȱhaveȱmadeȱgratefulȱuseȱofȱthisȱstimulus. Chakkaraiȱdeservesȱcreditȱforȱbeingȱoneȱofȱtheȱfirstȱtoȱhave constructedȱaȱtrulyȱIndianȱChristology,ȱonȱwhichȱvariousȱtheoȬ logians—bothȱProtestantȱandȱRomanȱCatholic—laterȱbuilt.ȱAnd evenȱ thoughȱ notȱ everyoneȱ wouldȱ wantȱ toȱ followȱ Chakkaraiȱ in allȱofȱhisȱapplicationsȱofȱtheȱHinduȱheritage,ȱthereȱisȱatȱpresentȱa generalȱ acknowledgementȱ inȱ Indiaȱ thatȱ theȱ Christianȱ message mustȱbeȱinculturatedȱinȱaȱwayȱsimilarȱtoȱChakkarai’sȱattempt.ȱIn Chakkarai’sȱdayȱthisȱwasȱnew,ȱandȱnotȱeveryoneȱinȱtheȱchurchȬ esȱ wasȱ enthusiasticȱ aboutȱ suchȱ attemptsȱ atȱ “Indianizing.”ȱ It becameȱapparentȱespeciallyȱaroundȱtheȱtimeȱofȱtheȱWorldȱMisȬ sionȱ Conferenceȱ ofȱ Tambaramȱ inȱ 1938ȱ howȱ differentlyȱ people thoughtȱ aboutȱ thisȱ point.ȱ Theȱ Westernȱ representativesȱ whoȱ alȬ lowedȱ themselvesȱ toȱ beȱ guidedȱ byȱ Hendrikȱ Kraemer’sȱ book withȱhisȱcategoricalȱrejectionȱofȱotherȱreligionsȱcouldȱdoȱnothing withȱtheȱapproachȱtakenȱbyȱChakkaraiȱandȱhisȱfriends.ȱButȱeven Indiansȱ who,ȱ withȱ Chakkarai,ȱ supportedȱ theȱ Gandhianȱ indeȬ pendenceȱ movementȱ couldȱ notȱ alwaysȱ agreeȱ withȱ anȱ Indian theology.ȱOneȱofȱtheseȱwasȱtheȱfirstȱ“native”ȱbishopȱofȱtheȱAnȬ glicanȱChurch,ȱV.S.ȱAzariah,ȱ whoȱhadȱseriousȱobjectionsȱtoȱthe theologyȱofȱtheȱ“RethinkingȱChristianity”ȱgroup.16ȱResistanceȱto theȱ ideaȱ ofȱ distancingȱ oneselfȱ fromȱ theȱ familiarȱ European churchȱcultureȱandȱtheȱfearȱofȱallowingȱunorthodoxȱelementsȱto enterȱ theologyȱ seemedȱ toȱ beȱ strongȱ motives.ȱ Butȱ theȱ newȱ epiȬ sodeȱ ofȱ theȱ Indianȱ historyȱ thatȱ hadȱ alreadyȱ begunȱ requiredȱ a newȱtheologicalȱ consideration.ȱ Thereȱ wasȱincreasingȱsympathy forȱanȱIndianȱexpressionȱofȱChristianȱbelief,ȱandȱChakkaraiȱhad shownȱhowȱitȱwasȱpossibleȱinȱhisȱJesusȱtheȱAvatar. ȱChakkarai,ȱJesusȱtheȱAvatar,ȱp.ȱ130.

15

ȱS.B.ȱHarper,ȱInȱtheȱShadowȱofȱtheȱMahatma:ȱBishopȱV.S.ȱAzariahȱand theȱTravailsȱofȱChristianityȱinȱBritishȱIndiaȱ(GrandȱRapids/Cambridge/RichȬ mond:ȱEerdmans/CurzonȱPress,ȱ2000),ȱp.ȱ207. 16

INTERMEZZO

FrankȱWesley DescribingȱJesusȱasȱanȱavataraȱisȱoneȱthing,ȱbutȱisȱitȱalsoȱpossible toȱ paintȱ Jesusȱ asȱ anȱ avatara?ȱ Vengalȱ Chakkarai’sȱ characterizaȬ tionȱofȱJesusȱChristȱ inȱ theȱ 1920sȱusingȱ Hinduȱ terminologyȱ was newȱ andȱ manyȱ foundȱ itȱ confrontational.ȱ Butȱ imagesȱ areȱ even moreȱconfrontationalȱthanȱwords.ȱTheȱtimeȱwasȱnotȱyetȱripeȱfor applyingȱtheȱavataraȱconceptȱtoȱJesusȱinȱartȱasȱwell.ȱNotȱthatȱarȬ tistsȱ inȱ Indiaȱ didȱ notȱ useȱ Christianȱ themes—onȱ theȱ contrary: manyȱ paintersȱ withȱ aȱ Hinduȱ backgroundȱ tookȱ upȱ theȱ classic Christȱ themesȱ fromȱ Westernȱ artȱ history:ȱ hisȱ birth,ȱ healings, sufferingȱandȱtheȱcrucifixion.ȱButȱthereȱwasȱnoȱattemptȱtoȱlinkȱit toȱHinduȱiconology.ȱAndȱpaintersȱinȱChristianȱcirclesȱwereȱcerȬ tainlyȱnotȱlookingȱforȱsuchȱaȱvisualȱinculturation,ȱinfluencedȱas theyȱ wereȱ byȱ aȱ traditionalȱ ecclesiasticalȱ cultureȱ thatȱ lookedȱ to Europeȱforȱguidance. ItȱwasȱnotȱuntilȱafterȱIndia’sȱindependenceȱthatȱartistsȱcame forwardȱ whoȱ consciouslyȱ madeȱ useȱ ofȱ Hinduȱ stylisticȱ devices toȱ portrayȱ themesȱ fromȱ theȱ Christianȱ faith.ȱ Oneȱ ofȱ themȱ porȬ traysȱJesusȱinȱaȱwayȱthatȱimmediatelyȱevokesȱChakkarai’sȱtheoȬ logy:ȱJesusȱasȱavatara.ȱTheȱartistȱwasȱFrankȱWesleyȱ(1923Ȭ2002). TheȱWesleyȱfamilyȱhadȱbeenȱChristianȱforȱfiveȱgenerations already,ȱandȱtheȱ artistȱ grewȱupȱinȱanȱ atmosphereȱ inȱ whichȱthe Christianȱfaithȱwasȱassumed.ȱTheyȱwereȱMethodists,ȱandȱitȱwas becauseȱofȱthisȱspecificȱbackgroundȱthatȱFrankȱWesleyȱacquired aȱgreatȱinterestȱinȱbiblicalȱhistoryȱandȱtheȱimageȱofȱChrist.ȱAsȱan artist,ȱ however,ȱ heȱ hadȱ notȱ beenȱ trainedȱ withinȱ theȱ Christian tradition.ȱ Heȱ studiedȱ atȱ theȱ famousȱ Governmentȱ Artȱ Schoolȱ in Lucknow,ȱ whereȱ hisȱ mostȱ importantȱ teachersȱ wereȱ Hinduȱ and theȱ classicȱ Indianȱ techniquesȱ andȱ stylesȱ wereȱ central.ȱ Wesley subsequentlyȱstudiedȱinȱJapanȱforȱfiveȱyearsȱtoȱfamiliarizeȱhimȬ selfȱwithȱtheȱEasternȱAsianȱartȱtraditionsȱasȱwell. Frankȱ Wesleyȱ madeȱ artȱ basedȱ onȱ manyȱ biblicalȱ themesȱ in variousȱ techniques:ȱ waterȱ coloursȱ (Lucknow’sȱ specialty),ȱ oil paintings,ȱ miniaturesȱ andȱ woodenȱ carvings.ȱ Heȱ alwaysȱ sought Asianȱformsȱofȱexpressionȱinȱworkingȱwithȱtheseȱthemes.ȱInȱhis view,ȱ Jesusȱ wasȱ notȱ primarilyȱ theȱ historicalȱ figureȱ fromȱ the 127

JESUSȱASȱGURU

128

countryȱofȱJudeaȱbutȱtheȱeternalȱChristȱwhoȱwasȱatȱhomeȱeveryȬ where. TheȱpaintingȱhereȱisȱcalledȱHomeȱinȱNazareth.1ȱItȱisȱimmediȬ atelyȱ apparentȱ thatȱ thisȱ Nazarethȱ looksȱ veryȱ Asian.ȱ Theȱ perȬ spectiveȱ seemsȱ Japanese,ȱ asȱ doȱ theȱ windowsȱ withȱ theirȱ sunȬ shades.ȱTheȱpeople,ȱhowever,ȱareȱfullȬbloodedȱIndians,ȱasȱareȱa numberȱofȱotherȱelements,ȱsuchȱasȱtheȱblossomingȱbananaȱtree, theȱ smallȱ nicheȱ andȱ theȱ shafts,ȱ whichȱ areȱ obviouslyȱ meantȱ for anȱIndianȱoxcart.ȱTheȱartistȱdoesȱnotȱwishȱtoȱtakeȱthoseȱwhoȱsee thisȱpaintingȱoutȱofȱtheirȱownȱworldȱandȱtoȱtransportȱthemȱtoȱa firstȬcenturyȱ Galileanȱ town.ȱ Rather,ȱ itȱ bringsȱ theȱ biblicalȱ epiȬ sodeȱtoȱthem:ȱNazarethȱisȱatȱhomeȱwithȱthem. TheȱpaintingȱisȱpartȱofȱaȱseriesȱthatȱWesleyȱmadeȱinȱ1962ȱon theȱ birthȱ andȱ youthȱ ofȱ Jesus.ȱ Theȱ paintingsȱ areȱ smallȱ (thisȱ one measuresȱ15ȱbyȱ23ȱcm)ȱandȱinȱtheȱstyleȱofȱIndianȱminiaturesȱlike

ȱ Pelgrimȱ inȱ Godsȱ Hand:ȱ Deȱ Indiaseȱ schilderȱ Frankȱ Wesley,ȱ MissieȬ zendingskalenderȱ1996ȱ(Amsterdam/Oegstgeest:ȱNZR/NMR,ȱ1995),ȱMay. SeeȱalsoȱG.ȱWheelerȱandȱL.ȱFarrell,ȱ“TheȱReligiousȱArtȱofȱFrankȱWesley,” Australianȱ EJournalȱ ofȱ Theologyȱ 4ȱ (http://dlibrary.acu.edu.au/research/ theology/ejournal/aejt_4/farrell.ȱhtm). 1

FRANKȱWESLEY

129

thoseȱmadeȱinȱRajasthan.ȱTheȱpaintȱusedȱisȱalsoȱdistemperedȱvia eggȱ yolks.ȱ Thereȱ isȱ aȱ continualȱ attemptȱ toȱ captureȱ someȱ ofȱ the mysteryȱofȱtheȱincarnationȱwithȱtheȱhelpȱofȱelementsȱfromȱIndiȬ anȱiconology.ȱ“HomeȱinȱNazareth”ȱclearlyȱportraysȱthis. Theȱ mostȱ obviousȱ elementȱ isȱ theȱ blueȱ colourȱ usedȱ toȱ porȬ trayȱ theȱ youngȱ Jesus.ȱ Thisȱ colourȱ wasȱ chosenȱ forȱ aȱ veryȱ clear reason.ȱ Blueȱ isȱ theȱ colourȱ ofȱ heavenȱ andȱ aȱ prominentȱ colour usedȱforȱtheȱbodyȱofȱoneȱofȱtheȱHinduȱavataras,ȱKrishna.ȱMoreȬ over,ȱtheȱ foreheadȱ ofȱtheȱ childȱisȱ ofȱ aȱ lighterȱcolour.ȱThisȱ isȱ an indicationȱ ofȱ aȱ holy,ȱ enlightenedȱ figure.ȱ Whenȱ viewingȱ this painting,ȱaȱ Hinduȱwouldȱ withoutȱdoubtȱ thinkȱȱimmediatelyȱ of Krishna.ȱ Itȱ isȱ notȱ onlyȱ theȱ blueȱ thatȱ evokesȱ thisȱ association— Hindusȱ honourȱ Krishnaȱ especiallyȱ inȱ hisȱ manifestationȱ asȱ a child,ȱ asȱ opposedȱ toȱ allȱ otherȱ descendedȱ divinities.ȱ Ofȱ course, theȱyoungȱmanȱKrishna,ȱwhoȱstaysȱamongȱtheȱshepherdȱgirlsȱas aȱfluteȬplayingȱlover,ȱandȱtheȱolderȱKrishnaȱasȱcharioteerȱonȱthe battlefieldȱ andȱ asȱ divineȱ teacherȱ areȱ alsoȱ worshipped.ȱ Butȱ the little,ȱ playfulȱ Krishnaȱ (Balakrishna)ȱ isȱ aȱ veryȱ specificȱ figure withinȱHinduȱspirituality.2 Byȱ usingȱ theseȱ images,ȱ Wesleyȱ showsȱ thatȱ Jesusȱ canȱ be viewedȱasȱaȱdescendedȱdivinity,ȱinȱlineȱwithȱtheȱmodelȱoffered byȱ Hinduȱ avataras.ȱ Andȱ byȱ portrayingȱ theȱ childȱ Jesusȱ inȱ this way,ȱheȱreinforcesȱthisȱimagery.ȱJesusȱisȱnotȱanȱordinaryȱperson whoȱascendedȱtoȱspiritualȱheightsȱafterȱmanyȱyearsȱofȱpreparaȬ tion,ȱlikeȱGautamaȱtheȱBuddha.ȱNorȱisȱJesusȱaȱpersonȱwhoȱwas givenȱaȱspecialȱpositionȱbyȱGodȱasȱanȱadult,ȱasȱinȱanȱadoptionȬ isticȱ Christology.ȱ No,ȱ Wesley’sȱ Jesusȱ isȱ completelyȱ Godȱ from theȱveryȱfirstȱmomentȱofȱhisȱlife,ȱjustȱlikeȱKrishna.ȱThisȱisȱactualȬ lyȱ anȱ orthodoxȱ pointȱ ofȱ view,ȱ evenȱ thoughȱ itȱ isȱ expressedȱ inȱ a Hinduȱ way.ȱ Andȱ thatȱ isȱ preciselyȱ theȱ sameȱ asȱ whatȱ Chakkarai arguedȱinȱwords. Theȱ Christȱ inȱ Frankȱ Wesley’sȱ paintingsȱ isȱ notȱ alwaysȱ an avatara—sometimesȱheȱseemsȱtoȱbeȱmoreȱofȱaȱguru,ȱaȱteacher.ȱIn anyȱevent,ȱheȱhasȱalwaysȱhisȱplaceȱinȱIndianȱsociety.ȱThisȱisȱvisiȬ bleȱ inȱ aȱ veryȱ specialȱ wayȱ inȱ theȱ paintingȱ Jesusȱ inȱ Benares.ȱ The representationȱofȱJesusȱisȱcertainlyȱnotȱveryȱaccurateȱhistoricalȬ ly.ȱ Heȱ isȱ depictedȱ asȱ aȱ guruȱ amongstȱ Hindusȱ arguingȱ atȱ the ȱSee,ȱe.g.,ȱJanȱPeterȱSchouten,ȱGoddelijkeȱvergezichten:ȱMystiekȱuitȱInȬ diaȱvoorȱwesterseȱlezersȱ(Baarn:ȱTenȱHave,ȱ1996),ȱpp.ȱ70Ȭ74. 2

130

JESUSȱASȱGURU

holiestȱplaceȱinȱIndia:ȱtheȱstairsȱonȱtheȱbanksȱofȱtheȱriverȱGanges inȱVaranasi.ȱButȱthisȱmakesȱitȱclearȱhowȱveryȱmuchȱatȱhomeȱJeȬ susȱisȱinȱHinduȱIndia.

CHAPTERȱ7

TheȱSufferingȱChristȱasȱanȱExample MahatmaȱGandhi WhoeverȱhasȱseenȱRichardȱAttenborough’sȱfilmȱGandhiȱwillȱnot easilyȱ forgetȱ Gandhi’sȱ “nonȬviolent”ȱ demonstrationȱ inȱ frontȱ of theȱdoorsȱofȱaȱsaltȱfactory.ȱTheyȱwereȱdemonstratingȱagainstȱthe colonialȱ government’sȱ monopolyȱ onȱ saltȱ production.ȱ Weȱ seeȱ a hugeȱcrowdȱofȱMahatmaȱGandhi’sȱfollowersȱmarchȱtowardȱthe DharasanaȱSaltȱWorks,ȱaȱstateȱenterprise,ȱtoȱoccupyȱit.ȱTheȱmen arrangeȱthemselvesȱinȱorderlyȱrowsȱinȱfrontȱofȱtheȱfactoryȱgates. Thereȱ theyȱ are,ȱ faceȱ toȱ faceȱ withȱ aȱ policeȱ forceȱ thatȱ isȱ armed withȱ lathis,ȱ woodenȱ sticksȱ withȱ anȱ ironȱ tip.ȱ Theȱ demonstrators inȱtheȱfirstȱrowȱmoveȱforwardȱand,ȱwithoutȱofferingȱanyȱresistȬ ance,ȱallowȱthemselvesȱtoȱbeȱ beaten.ȱWomenȱrunȱtowardȱthem toȱ carryȱ awayȱ theȱ badlyȱ woundedȱ activists.ȱ Subsequently,ȱ the nextȱrowȱmovesȱforward,ȱandȱisȱalsoȱbeatenȱdownȱbyȱtheȱsticks. Andȱsoȱitȱcontinues. Theȱ filmȱ showsȱ theȱ consequencesȱ ofȱ Gandhi’sȱ methodoloȬ gyȱofȱnonȬviolentȱresistance:ȱtheȱdemonstratorsȱofferȱthemselves asȱvictimsȱforȱtheirȱidealȱandȱtheirȱdeterminationȱandȱselfȬsacriȬ ficeȱ producesȱ aȱ powerfulȱ effect.ȱ Onlookersȱ cannotȱ helpȱ but chooseȱtheȱsideȱofȱthoseȱwhoȱdareȱtoȱmakeȱsuchȱaȱsacrifice.ȱThe colonialȱ powerȱ isȱ exposedȱ inȱ allȱ itsȱ crueltyȱ andȱ publicȱ opinion willȱloseȱallȱrespectȱforȱtheȱleadersȱwhoȱmaintainȱtheirȱposition inȱthisȱway.ȱThisȱwasȱpreciselyȱGandhi’sȱaimȱwithȱsuchȱprotests. Butȱ thisȱ cinematicȱ representationȱ ofȱ historyȱ clearlyȱ revealsȱ just howȱhighȱtheȱpriceȱwas. Attenborough’sȱ filmȱ challengesȱ theȱ viewer.ȱ Theȱ bloody scenesȱofȱnonȬviolentȱdemonstrationȱraiseȱquestions:ȱIsȱtheȱprice justified?ȱIsȱthisȱtheȱrightȱwayȱtoȱachieveȱanȱideal?ȱAndȱdoesȱthe GospelȱofȱJesusȱChristȱpointȱtoȱthisȱtypeȱofȱactivity?ȱInȱanyȱcase, Mahatmaȱ Gandhiȱ wasȱ convincedȱ thatȱ theȱ resultȱ ofȱ Christ’s preachingȱcouldȱnotȱbeȱanythingȱbutȱacceptanceȱofȱsuchȱaȱsacriȬ fice.ȱInȱhisȱviewȱtheȱGospelȱshowsȱthatȱthereȱisȱnoȱotherȱwayȱto achieveȱ justice.ȱ Howȱ Gandhi,ȱ asȱ theȱ leaderȱ ofȱ theȱ Indianȱ indeȬ

131

JESUSȱASȱGURU

132

pendenceȱmovement,ȱdealsȱwithȱChristianȱvaluesȱisȱtheȱsubject ofȱthisȱchapter. TheȱBibleȱinȱView Mohandasȱ Karamchandȱ Gandhiȱ (1869Ȭ 1948)ȱ wasȱ bornȱ intoȱ aȱ devoutȱ Hindu family.ȱ Hisȱ parentsȱ belongedȱ toȱ the ModhȱBaniaȱcommunity,ȱaȱcasteȱthatȱorȬ iginallyȱ consistedȱ ofȱ grocers.ȱ Theyȱ were vaishnavas—devoteesȱofȱtheȱgodȱVishnu. Gandhi’sȱ motherȱ wasȱ particularlyȱ deȬ vout:ȱ sheȱ cameȱ fromȱ aȱ familyȱ thatȱ beȬ longedȱ toȱ theȱ Pranamiȱ sampradaya,ȱ aȱ reȬ vivalȱmovementȱthatȱaroseȱinȱtheȱsevenȬ teenthȱ centuryȱ withinȱ theȱ Vaishnavistic traditionȱ inȱ whichȱ Vishnuȱ isȱ venerated inȱ hisȱ incarnationȱ asȱ Krishna.ȱ Theȱ praȬ namisȱ areȱ characterizedȱ byȱ aȱ deepȱ emoȬ tionalȱ devotionȱ (bhakti),1ȱ togetherȱ withȱ a greatȱ toleranceȱ ofȱ otherȱ groupsȱ andȱ religions.ȱ Moreȱ soȱ than otherȱHindus,ȱtheȱpranamisȱareȱopenȱtoȱtheȱreligiousȱexperiences ofȱotherȱcommunities,ȱholdingȱthat,ȱultimately,ȱtheȱsameȱdivine realityȱliesȱbehindȱallȱconceptionsȱofȱGod.ȱEvenȱtheȱholyȱbooks ofȱIslamȱandȱChristianityȱareȱacknowledgedȱtoȱbeȱrevelationsȱof theȱoneȱGod. Fromȱ thisȱ backgroundȱ itȱ isȱ notȱ surprisingȱ thatȱ theȱ family cameȱintoȱcontactȱwithȱfollowersȱofȱallȱpossibleȱHinduȱandȱnonȬ Hinduȱ groups.ȱ Mohandas’ȱ motherȱ feltȱ itȱ wasȱ herȱ dutyȱ toȱ visit theȱKrishnaȱtemple,ȱtheȱhaveli,ȱeveryȱday,ȱeitherȱwithȱorȱwithout herȱchildren.ȱButȱyoungȱMohandasȱwasȱalsoȱatȱhomeȱinȱtheȱtemȬ pleȱofȱRama,ȱwhichȱwasȱsituatedȱnextȱtoȱtheirȱhome.ȱWhenȱconȬ venient,ȱotherȱtemples,ȱsuchȱasȱthatȱofȱShiva,ȱwereȱalsoȱattendȬ ed,ȱ andȱ Jainȱ monksȱ regularlyȱ cameȱ toȱ visitȱ theȱ family.ȱ MoreȬ over,ȱ theȱ familyȱ hadȱ bothȱ Muslimȱ andȱ Parsiȱ friends.ȱ Theȱ only onesȱMohandasȱ didȱnotȱmeetȱinȱhisȱyouthȱwereȱChristians.ȱHe ȱOnȱbhaktiȱpietyȱinȱHinduismȱseeȱJ.P.ȱSchouten,ȱGoddelijkeȱvergezichtȬ en:ȱMystiekȱuitȱIndiaȱvoorȱwesterseȱlezersȱ(Baarn:ȱTenȱHave,ȱ1996)ȱandȱJ.P. Schouten,ȱBhakti:ȱSpiritualiteitȱinȱhetȱhindoeïsme,ȱWegwijsȱ(Kampen:ȱKok, 2005). 1

THEȱSUFFERINGȱCHRISTȱASȱANȱEXAMPLE:ȱMAHATMAȱGANDHI

133

hadȱ encounteredȱ onlyȱ aȱ coupleȱ ofȱ Christianȱ streetȱ preachers, whoȱ disgustedȱ himȱ becauseȱ theyȱ reviledȱ theȱ Hindusȱ andȱ their gods. WhenȱMohandasȱGandhiȱwasȱinȱEnglandȱstudyingȱlaw,ȱhe couldȱ notȱ avoidȱ Christians.ȱ Inȱ thoseȱ yearsȱ (1888Ȭ1891)ȱ heȱ studȬ iedȱtheȱreligionȱofȱtheȱcolonialȱpowersȱforȱtheȱfirstȱtime.ȱHisȱauȬ tobiographyȱgivesȱtheȱimpressionȱthatȱitȱcostȱhimȱaȱgreatȱdealȱto penetrateȱtoȱtheȱ religionȱthatȱheȱhadȱ comeȱ toȱ knowȱ asȱ aȱrepreȬ hensibleȱ culture.ȱ Heȱ hadȱ beenȱ greatlyȱ offendedȱ byȱ theȱ English inȱIndiaȱandȱevenȱmoreȱsoȱbyȱtheȱIndianȱconverts,ȱbecauseȱthey ateȱmeatȱandȱdrankȱalcohol.ȱInȱtheȱareaȱwhereȱGandhiȱgrewȱup Hinduismȱ wasȱ characterizedȱ byȱ strictȱ vegetarianismȱ andȱ total abstinence. Onlyȱ atȱ theȱ endȱ ofȱ theȱ secondȱ yearȱ ofȱ hisȱ stayȱ inȱ London didȱheȱacceptȱtheȱchallengeȱtoȱbecomeȱfamiliarȱwithȱtheȱreligion ofȱhisȱenvironment.ȱInȱaȱplaceȱthatȱinspiredȱconfidenceȱofȱhim,ȱa vegetarianȱ restaurant,ȱ heȱ metȱ aȱ manȱ whoȱ beganȱ toȱ talkȱ toȱ him aboutȱtheȱChristianȱfaith.ȱGandhiȱtoldȱhimȱaboutȱhisȱaversionȱto ChristianityȱonȱtheȱbasisȱofȱhisȱexperiencesȱwithȱtheȱlivesȱȱChrisȬ tiansȱ ledȱ inȱ India.ȱ Itȱ struckȱ himȱ thatȱ hisȱ conversationȱ partner distancedȱhimselfȱfromȱhisȱfellowȱbelieversȱandȱpresentedȱhimȬ selfȱasȱaȱChristianȱvegetarianȱandȱteetotallerȱasȱaȱmatterȱofȱprinȬ ciple.ȱ Thisȱ representativeȱ ofȱ Christianityȱ couldȱ inspireȱ trustȱ in theȱHinduȱstudent.ȱHeȱinvitedȱGandhiȱtoȱreadȱtheȱBibleȱandȱofȬ feredȱhimȱaȱcopy. Gandhiȱacceptedȱtheȱinvitationȱand,ȱradicalȱasȱheȱwas,ȱput hisȱmindȱtoȱreadingȱtheȱentireȱBibleȱfromȱbeginningȱtoȱend.ȱBut thisȱlectioȱcontinuaȱprovedȱunsatisfying.ȱHeȱfoundȱtheȱOldȱTestaȬ mentȱboring;ȱtheȱbookȱNumbersȱespeciallyȱreawakenedȱhisȱdisȬ gust.ȱButȱhisȱattitudeȱchangedȱcompletelyȱwhenȱheȱbeganȱreadȬ ingȱ theȱ Newȱ Testament.ȱ Heȱ wroteȱ yearsȱ laterȱ inȱ hisȱ autobioȬ graphy:ȱ“TheȱNewȱTestamentȱproducedȱaȱdifferentȱimpression, especiallyȱtheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMountȱwhichȱwentȱstraightȱtoȱmy heart.”2ȱHeȱwasȱparticularlyȱstruckȱbyȱChrist’sȱcommand:ȱ“ButȱI tellȱyou,ȱDoȱnotȱresistȱanȱevilȱperson.ȱIfȱsomeoneȱstrikesȱyouȱon theȱ rightȱ cheek,ȱ turnȱ toȱ himȱ theȱ otherȱ also.ȱ Andȱ ifȱ someone ȱM.K.ȱGandhi,ȱAnȱAutobiographyȱor:ȱTheȱStoryȱofȱMyȱExperimentsȱwith Truth,ȱtransl.ȱfromȱGujaratiȱ(Ahmedabad:ȱNavajivanȱPublishingȱHouse, 1982), p. 58; originally published 1927. 2

JESUSȱASȱGURU

134

wantsȱtoȱsueȱyouȱandȱtakeȱyourȱtunic,ȱletȱhimȱhaveȱyourȱcloak asȱ well”ȱ (Matthewȱ 5:39Ȭ40).ȱ Gandhiȱ referredȱ toȱ thisȱ textȱ many timesȱinȱarticlesȱandȱspeeches—itȱdidȱindeedȱgoȱtoȱhisȱheart. Gandhi’sȱ fascinationȱ withȱ theȱ Sermonȱ onȱ theȱ Mountȱ has variousȱaspects.ȱInȱhisȱfirstȱencounterȱwithȱtheȱcontentȱofȱtheȱBiȬ ble,ȱheȱwasȱlookingȱforȱaȱmessageȱthatȱfitȱinȱwithȱwhatȱhisȱbackȬ groundȱ hadȱ givenȱ him.ȱ Jesus’ȱ ethicalȱ instructionȱ madeȱ him thinkȱ ofȱ Hinduȱ valuesȱ thatȱ hadȱ aȱ specialȱ meaningȱ forȱ him.ȱ In thisȱconnectionȱheȱpointsȱinȱhisȱautobiographyȱtoȱtheȱBhagavadȬ Gita,ȱwhichȱheȱhadȱalsoȱstudiedȱforȱtheȱfirstȱtimeȱinȱLondon,ȱas wellȱasȱtoȱaȱpoemȱheȱhadȱlearnedȱinȱhisȱyouth. Theȱsimilarityȱtoȱthisȱlastȱtextȱisȱtheȱeasiestȱtoȱunderstand. Itȱ concernsȱ aȱ poemȱ inȱ theȱ Gujaratiȱ byȱ theȱ bhaktiȱ poetȱ Shamal Bhattȱ(1718Ȭ1765),ȱwhichȱinȱtranslationȱreads: Forȱaȱbowlȱofȱwaterȱgiveȱaȱgoodlyȱmeal; Forȱaȱkindlyȱgreetingȱbowȱthouȱdownȱwithȱzeal; Forȱaȱsimpleȱpennyȱpayȱthouȱbackȱwithȱgold; Ifȱthyȱlifeȱbeȱrescued,ȱlifeȱdoȱnotȱwithhold. Thusȱtheȱwordsȱandȱactionsȱofȱtheȱwiseȱregard; Everyȱlittleȱserviceȱtenfoldȱtheyȱreward. Butȱtheȱtrulyȱnobleȱknowȱallȱmenȱasȱone, Andȱreturnȱwithȱgladnessȱgoodȱforȱevilȱdone.3

Theȱ moralȱ ofȱ thisȱ poemȱ isȱ clear:ȱ forȱ allȱ theȱ goodȱ received,ȱ we shouldȱ returnȱ moreȱ thanȱ weȱ haveȱ received.ȱ Theȱ goodȱ deedȱ of anotherȱ deservesȱ toȱ beȱ repaidȱ inȱ theȱ plural.ȱ Andȱ evenȱ theȱ evil thatȱoneȱreceivesȱfromȱanotherȱmustȱbeȱparriedȱbyȱgood.ȱClear similaritiesȱ withȱ biblicalȱ valuesȱ shouldȱ certainlyȱ beȱ seenȱ inȱ the fourthȱ andȱ eighthȱ sentences.ȱ Oneȱ mustȱ notȱ evenȱ wishȱ toȱ save hisȱownȱlifeȱ(cf.ȱMatthewȱ10:39)ȱandȱtheȱevilȱofȱanotherȱmustȱbe repaidȱwithȱgoodȱ(cf.ȱMatthewȱ5:39,ȱ46Ȭ47;ȱRomansȱ12:17,ȱ20). HowȱtheȱNewȱTestamentȱandȱtheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMountȱin particularȱmadeȱGandhiȱthinkȱofȱtheȱdoctrineȱofȱtheȱBhagavadȬ Gitaȱ isȱ lessȱ clear.ȱ Anȱ importantȱ partȱ ofȱ thisȱ isȱ Krishna’sȱ sumȬ monsȱtoȱtheȱwarriorȱArjunaȱnotȱtoȱavoidȱtheȱwarȱwithȱhisȱrelaȬ tivesȱbutȱtoȱdoȱhisȱdutyȱbyȱtakingȱupȱarms.ȱArjunaȱisȱveryȱhesiȬ tantȱ toȱ shedȱ bloodȱ and,ȱ overwhelmedȱ byȱ sadness,ȱ heȱ throws awayȱhisȱbowȱandȱarrowsȱandȱcallsȱout:ȱ“OȱletȱtheȱsonsȱofȱDhriȬ ȱGandhi,ȱAnȱAutobiography,ȱp.ȱ30.

3

THEȱSUFFERINGȱCHRISTȱASȱANȱEXAMPLE:ȱMAHATMAȱGANDHI

135

tarashtra,ȱ armsȱ inȱ hand,ȱ slayȱ meȱ inȱ battleȱ thoughȱ I,ȱ unarmed myself,ȱwillȱofferȱnoȱdefence;ȱthereinȱwereȱgreaterȱhappinessȱfor me”ȱ (BhagavadȬGitaȱ 1:46).4ȱ Oneȱ couldȱ compareȱ Arjuna’sȱ attiȬ tudeȱwithȱtheȱteachingȱofȱtheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMount,ȱbutȱthereȱis absolutelyȱ noȱ echoȱ ofȱ thisȱ attitudeȱ inȱ theȱ divineȱ teacherȱ inȱ the BhagavadȬGita.ȱ Krishna’sȱ messageȱ isȱ unequivocal:ȱ oneȱ bornȱ as aȱwarriorȱcannotȱavoidȱone’sȱdutyȱbutȱmustȱenterȱtheȱbattleȱand tryȱ toȱ killȱ hisȱ opponent.ȱ Gandhiȱ alwaysȱ explainedȱ theȱ BhagaȬ vadȬGitaȱ inȱ suchȱ aȱ wayȱ thatȱ Arjuna’sȱ battleȱ isȱ aȱ metaphorȱ for theȱ spiritualȱ tensionȱ requiredȱ fromȱ aȱ personȱ inȱ life.ȱ Thisȱ battle mustȱ beȱ wagedȱ outȱ ofȱ dutyȱ andȱ notȱ beȱ goalȬoriented.ȱ Theȱ ethȬ icalȱ coreȱ textȱ ofȱ theȱ bookȱ states:ȱ “Workȱ aloneȱ isȱ yourȱ proper business,ȱneverȱtheȱfruitsȱitȱmayȱproduce:ȱletȱnotȱyourȱmotiveȱbe theȱ fruitȱ ofȱ workȱ norȱ yourȱ attachmentȱ toȱ mereȱ worklessness” (BhagavadȬGitaȱ2:47).5ȱItȱconcernsȱnishkamakarma,ȱeffortȱwithout aȱ connectionȱ toȱ theȱ results.ȱ Andȱ exactlyȱ atȱ thisȱ pointȱ Gandhi seesȱtheȱagreementȱwithȱtheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMount.ȱAfterȱall,ȱJeȬ susȱalsoȱcallsȱhisȱdisciplesȱtoȱchooseȱaȱmoralȱattitude,ȱregardless ofȱitsȱeffectȱonȱfellowȱhumanȱbeings:ȱ“Beȱcarefulȱnotȱtoȱdoȱyour actsȱofȱrighteousnessȱbeforeȱmen,ȱtoȱbeȱseenȱbyȱthem”(Matthew 6:1).ȱTheȱconcurrenceȱbetweenȱbothȱreligiousȱtraditionsȱlies,ȱacȬ cordingȱtoȱGandhi,ȱinȱtheȱrenunciationȱtoȱwhichȱtheȱpeopleȱare called. ButȱGandhiȱisȱaffectedȱbyȱtheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMountȱnotȱonȬ lyȱbecauseȱJesus’ȱinstructionsȱareȱtheȱsameȱasȱtheȱethicsȱheȱknew fromȱhisȱHinduȱbackground.ȱThenȱtheȱreadingȱofȱthisȱsectionȱof theȱBibleȱwouldȱnotȱhaveȱmadeȱsuchȱaȱprofoundȱimpressionȱon him.ȱItȱhasȱalsoȱbecomeȱhisȱconvictionȱthatȱwhoeverȱignoresȱJeȬ susȱ missesȱ outȱ onȱ something.ȱ Heȱ veryȱ emphaticallyȱ statesȱ that inȱaȱlectureȱheȱgaveȱtoȱstudentsȱatȱaȱcollegeȱinȱCeylon.ȱHeȱtold themȱthatȱheȱregardedȱJesusȱasȱoneȱofȱtheȱgreatestȱteachersȱthat theȱworldȱhasȱhadȱandȱcontinued:ȱ“Iȱshallȱsayȱtoȱtheȱ75ȱperȱcent HindusȱreceivingȱinstructionȱinȱthisȱCollegeȱthatȱyourȱlivesȱwill beȱ incompleteȱ unlessȱ youȱ reverentlyȱ studyȱ theȱ teachingȱ ofȱ JeȬ

ȱR.C.ȱZaehnerȱ(ed.,ȱtransl.),ȱTheȱBhagavadȬGitaȱ(London:ȱOxfordȱUniȬ versityȱPress,ȱ1973),ȱp.ȱ119. 4

ȱZaehner,ȱTheȱBhagavadȬGita,ȱp.ȱ145.

5

JESUSȱASȱGURU

136

sus.”6ȱ Inȱ hisȱ youngerȱ yearsȱ Gandhiȱ alsoȱ seriouslyȱ considered convertingȱtoȱChristianity.ȱWhatȱattractedȱhim,ȱunderstandably, wasȱnotȱtheȱlifeȱofȱtheȱchurchȱbut,ȱasȱheȱsaid: theȱgentleȱfigureȱofȱChrist,ȱsoȱpatient,ȱsoȱkind,ȱsoȱloving,ȱso fullȱofȱforgivenessȱthatȱheȱtaughtȱHisȱfollowersȱnotȱtoȱretaliȬ ateȱ whenȱ abusedȱ orȱ struck,ȱ butȱ toȱ turnȱ theȱ otherȱ cheek—I thoughtȱitȱwasȱaȱbeautifulȱexampleȱofȱtheȱperfectȱman.7

Mahatmaȱ Gandhiȱ isȱ oneȱ ofȱ aȱ longȱ lineȱ ofȱ Hinduȱ thinkers whoȱfeelsȱaffectedȱbyȱJesusȱChrist’sȱethicalȱinstructionsȱandȱreȬ fersȱparticularlyȱtoȱtheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMountȱonȱthisȱpoint.ȱAlȬ readyȱ inȱ 1820ȱ theȱ Hinduȱ reformerȱ Rajaȱ Rammohanȱ Royȱ wrote aboutȱ theȱ doctrineȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ andȱ placedȱ theȱ Sermonȱ onȱ the Mountȱ inȱ theȱ forefront.8ȱ Itȱ wasȱ alsoȱ Rammohanȱ whoȱ causedȱ a greatȱ stirȱ withȱ hisȱ claimȱ thatȱ Jesusȱ belongsȱ moreȱ toȱ theȱ Indian peopleȱ thanȱ toȱ Europeansȱ becauseȱ heȱ wasȱ himselfȱ Asian.9ȱ We findȱechoesȱofȱthisȱinȱGandhiȱasȱwellȱwhenȱheȱaccusesȱtheȱChrisȬ tianȱ churchȱ ofȱ twistingȱ Christ’sȱ message:ȱ “Heȱ wasȱ anȱ Asiatic whoseȱmessageȱ wasȱdeliveredȱthroughȱmanyȱmediaȱandȱwhen itȱhadȱtheȱbackingȱofȱaȱRomanȱEmperorȱitȱbecameȱanȱimperialist faithȱ asȱ itȱ remainsȱ toȱ thisȱ day.”10ȱ Butȱ Gandhiȱ doesȱ moreȱ than passȱ onȱ theȱ messageȱ ofȱ anȱ Asianȱ teacherȱ withȱ whomȱ heȱ feels

ȱM.K.ȱGandhi,ȱTheȱCollectedȱWorksȱofȱMahatmaȱGandhi,ȱvol.ȱXXXV (Delhi:ȱ Ministryȱ ofȱ Informationȱ andȱ Broadcasting,ȱ 1958Ȭ1984),ȱ p.ȱ 343 (speechȱatȱCentralȱCollege,ȱJaffna,ȱ29Ȭ11Ȭ1927).ȱThisȱtextȱisȱoftenȱcitedȱparȬ tially,ȱthusȱacquiringȱtheȱnatureȱofȱaȱgeneralȱcallȱtoȱtheȱHinduȱpopulation ofȱIndia.ȱHowever,ȱthatȱdoesȱnoȱjusticeȱtoȱtheȱcontext. 6

ȱFromȱaȱconversationȱwithȱaȱChristianȱsympathizerȱinȱSouthȱAfrica, MillieȱGrahamȱPolak,ȱcitedȱbyȱher.ȱCf.ȱM.G.ȱPolak,ȱMr.ȱGandhi:ȱTheȱMan (London:ȱGeorgeȱAllenȱ&ȱUnwin,ȱ1931),ȱp.ȱ40. 7

ȱRammohanȱRoy,ȱTheȱPreceptsȱofȱJesus:ȱTheȱGuideȱtoȱPeaceȱandȱHapȬ piness.ȱExtractedȱfromȱtheȱBooksȱofȱtheȱNewȱTestamentȱAscribedȱtoȱtheȱFour Evangelists,ȱwithȱTranslationsȱintoȱSungscritȱandȱBengalee,ȱin:ȱRammohan Roy,ȱTheȱEnglishȱWorksȱofȱRammohunȱRoy,ȱvol.ȱIIIȱ(NewȱDelhi:ȱ Cosmo Publications,ȱ1982),ȱpp.ȱ481Ȭ543.ȱSeeȱchapterȱ2ȱofȱthisȱbookȱforȱaȱdiscusȬ sionȱofȱRammohanȱRoy. 8

ȱRoy,ȱTheȱEnglishȱWorksȱofȱRajaȱRammohunȱRoy,ȱvol.ȱIV,ȱp.ȱ906.

9

ȱGandhi,ȱTheȱCollectedȱWorks,ȱvol.ȱLXII,ȱp.ȱ388ȱ(Harijanȱ30Ȭ5Ȭ1936).

10

THEȱSUFFERINGȱCHRISTȱASȱANȱEXAMPLE:ȱMAHATMAȱGANDHI

137

someȱ affinity.ȱ Heȱ alsoȱ showsȱ signsȱ ofȱ havingȱ beenȱ deeplyȱ afȬ fectedȱ byȱ theȱ personȱ ofȱ Christ,ȱ whoȱ expressedȱ hisȱ teachingsȱ in hisȱlifeȱasȱwell.ȱMoreȱsoȱthanȱtheȱHinduȱphilosophersȱwhoȱpreȬ cededȱ him,ȱ Gandhiȱ canȱ thusȱ alsoȱ attachȱ greatȱ meaningȱ toȱ the sufferingȱandȱdyingȱofȱJesusȱChrist. JesusȱChristȱandȱHimȱCrucified WhenȱGandhi’sȱinfluenceȱhadȱreachedȱitsȱpeakȱinȱtheȱ1940s,ȱthe centreȱofȱhisȱmovementȱwasȱinȱtheȱSevagramȱashramȱnearȱWarȬ dha.ȱ Theȱ Mahatmaȱ (greatȱ soul),ȱ asȱ heȱ wasȱ generallyȱ calledȱ by then,ȱlivedȱȱinȱaȱsimpleȱhutȱthere,ȱandȱinȱthatȱhutȱthereȱwasȱonly oneȱ printȱ onȱ theȱ wall,ȱ oneȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ kneelingȱ inȱ Gethsemane, calledȱ Heȱ isȱ ourȱ Peaceȱ (Ephesiansȱ 2:14).ȱ Gandhiȱ hadȱ beenȱ given theȱ printȱ byȱ oneȱ ofȱ hisȱ mostȱ prominentȱ followers,ȱ aȱ Christian womanȱ ofȱ nobleȱ ancestry,ȱ Rajkumariȱ (Princess)ȱ Amritȱ Kaur.ȱ It wasȱaȱfittingȱgift,ȱforȱtheȱMahatmaȱwasȱparticularlyȱtouchedȱby thisȱrepresentationȱofȱtheȱsufferingȱChrist. GandhiȱhadȱtoȱformulateȱhisȱownȱunderstandingȱofȱtheȱsufȬ feringȱofȱChristȱforȱtheȱfirstȱtimeȱwhenȱheȱwasȱworkingȱinȱSouth Africaȱ(1893Ȭ1914).ȱMuchȱmoreȱthanȱduringȱhisȱstudiesȱinȱLonȬ don,ȱ heȱ wasȱ inȱ contactȱ duringȱ thisȱ timeȱ withȱ churchȱ communȬ itiesȱ andȱ individualȱ Christiansȱ whomȱ heȱ encounteredȱ ȱ among theȱIndianȱcontractȱlabourersȱinȱNatalȱandȱtheirȱdescendantsȱon whoseȱ behalfȱ heȱ worked.ȱ Heȱ foundȱ aȱ greatȱ dealȱ ofȱ support amongȱ theȱ Christianȱ youthȱ especiallyȱ forȱ organizingȱ aȱ protest againstȱtheȱpoliticalȱdiscriminationȱagainstȱIndians.ȱButȱbothȱin Natalȱ andȱ Transvaalȱ heȱ alsoȱ cameȱ intoȱ contactȱ withȱ idealistic whiteȱ Christiansȱ whoȱ wereȱ notȱ hamperedȱ byȱ racialȱ prejudices. Theyȱ wereȱ oftenȱ fromȱ anȱ evangelicalȱ backgroundȱ and,ȱ faithful toȱ theirȱ principles,ȱ theyȱ wereȱ constantlyȱ attemptingȱ toȱ convert theȱ youngȱ lawyerȱ toȱ Christianity.ȱ Gandhiȱ receivedȱ invitations forȱ prayerȱ meetings,ȱ churchȱ servicesȱ andȱ openȱ days,ȱ whichȱ he usuallyȱ accepted.ȱ Moreover,ȱ heȱ wasȱ generouslyȱ suppliedȱ with theologicalȱliterature,ȱwhichȱheȱstudiedȱwithȱinterest. BecauseȱhisȱChristianȱacquaintancesȱhadȱsuchȱaȱpositiveȱatȬ titudeȱtowardsȱhisȱpoliticalȱprotests,ȱGandhiȱfeltȱcalledȱtoȱexamȬ ineȱtheirȱfaithȱseriously.ȱButȱheȱcouldȱnotȱfeelȱatȱhomeȱinȱtheȱreȬ ligiousȱ experienceȱ ofȱ groupsȱ suchȱ asȱ theȱ Plymouthȱ Brethren (Darbists)ȱandȱtheȱMethodists.ȱAlthoughȱheȱmaintainedȱcontact withȱ them,ȱ heȱ wasȱ botheredȱ byȱ theȱ callȱ fromȱ theseȱ groupsȱ for

JESUSȱASȱGURU

138

himȱtoȱconvert.ȱAlreadyȱatȱtheȱfirstȱprayerȱmeetingȱtoȱwhichȱhe wasȱ invited,ȱ prayersȱ wereȱ saidȱ forȱ theȱ newȱ brotherȱ “thatȱ the LordȱJesusȱwhoȱhasȱredeemedȱusȱwillȱalsoȱredeemȱ him.”11ȱ The doctrineȱ ofȱ reconciliationȱ onȱ whichȱ thisȱ prayerȱ wasȱ basedȱ did notȱappealȱtoȱGandhiȱatȱallȱonȱtheȱwhole.ȱHeȱwritesȱthatȱhisȱreaȬ sonȱ heldȱ himȱ backȱ fromȱ believingȱ thatȱ Jesusȱ hadȱ paidȱ forȱ the sinsȱofȱtheȱworldȱthroughȱhisȱblood.ȱHeȱresists,ȱinȱparticular,ȱthe unicityȱofȱChristȱthatȱemergesȱfromȱsuchȱaȱdoctrineȱandȱrefuses toȱacceptȱthatȱJesusȱisȱtheȱonlyȱincarnationȱofȱGodȱandȱthatȱonly thoseȱ whoȱ believeȱ inȱ himȱ willȱ haveȱ eternalȱ life.ȱ Alreadyȱ inȱ the 1930sȱ Sevensterȱ concluded:ȱ “OrthodoxȬProtestantȱ Christianity andȱ Gandhiȱ areȱ diametricallyȱ opposedȱ toȱ oneȱ anotherȱ withȱ reȬ gardȱtoȱtheirȱnotionsȱofȱJesus.”12 Itȱ isȱ remarkableȱ thatȱ hisȱ contactȱ withȱ orthodoxȱ Christians didȱ influenceȱ Gandhiȱ toȱ someȱ extentȱ withȱ regardȱ toȱ hisȱ experiȬ enceȱofȱtheȱcrucifiedȱJesus.ȱCertainȱhymnsȱandȱimagesȱhaveȱbeȬ comeȱdearȱtoȱhimȱandȱmeantȱaȱgreatȱdealȱtoȱhimȱthroughoutȱhis life.ȱTheȱwellȬknownȱhymnȱbyȱIsaacȱWatts,ȱ“WhenȱIȱSurveyȱthe Wondrousȱ Cross,”ȱ becameȱ hisȱ favouriteȱ hymnȱ moreȱ orȱ less:ȱ it wasȱthisȱhymnȱaboutȱJesusȱonȱtheȱcross,ȱsoȱbelovedȱbyȱmanyȱorȬ thodoxȱProtestants,ȱthatȱinspiredȱhimȱinȱhisȱcampaignȱforȱaȱnew independentȱ Indianȱ society.ȱ Oneȱ ofȱ theȱ Mahatma’sȱ methods wasȱtoȱgoȱonȱaȱhungerȱstrikeȱtoȱfocusȱattentionȱonȱaȱproblemȱor toȱ emphasizeȱ theȱ importanceȱ ofȱ certainȱ demands,ȱ holdingȱ a totalȱ ofȱ thirtyȬtwoȱ suchȱ “fasts”ȱ inȱ hisȱ life.ȱ Withȱ theȱ mostȱ imȬ portantȱ hungerȱ strikes,ȱ whenȱ heȱ wasȱ evenȱ preparedȱ toȱ goȱ on evenȱthoughȱitȱwouldȱmeanȱhisȱlife,ȱaȱcertainȱidentificationȱwith theȱ sufferingȱ Christȱ playedȱ aȱ roleȱ moreȱ thanȱ once.ȱ Inȱ 1924ȱ he fastedȱforȱ21ȱdays,ȱonlyȱdrinkingȱsaltedȱwater,ȱwithȱtheȱgoalȱof breakingȱ theȱ enmityȱ betweenȱ theȱ Muslimsȱ andȱ theȱ Hindus. Whenȱ heȱ endedȱ hisȱ fastȱ afterȱ threeȱ weeks,ȱ completelyȱ weakȬ ened,ȱheȱheldȱaȱmodestȱinterreligiousȱcelebration.ȱAtȱtheȱstartȱan imamȱ wasȱ askedȱ toȱ reciteȱ theȱ openingȱ suraȱ ofȱ theȱ Qur’an,ȱ and theȱ conclusionȱ wasȱ aȱ Hinduȱ recitalȱ andȱ song.ȱ Butȱ inȱ between theȱȱMahatmaȱwantedȱhisȱfriend,ȱCharlesȱAndrews,ȱaȱChristian ȱGandhi,ȱAnȱAutobiography,ȱp.ȱ102.

11

ȱJ.N.ȱSevenster,ȱGandhiȱenȱhetȱChristendomȱ(Haarlem:ȱF.ȱBohn,ȱ1934), pp.ȱ139Ȭ40.ȱThereȱisȱsomeȱ“spiritualȱaffinity”ȱforȱliberalȱProtestantism,ȱacȬ cordingȱtoȱSevenster,ȱp.ȱ148. 12

THEȱSUFFERINGȱCHRISTȱASȱANȱEXAMPLE:ȱMAHATMAȱGANDHI

139

missionary,ȱtoȱsingȱtheȱhymnȱthatȱGandhiȱcalledȱhisȱ“favourite Christianȱsong.”ȱItȱwasȱWatts’ȱhymn,ȱ“WhenȱIȱSurveyȱtheȱWonȬ drousȱCross.”ȱTheȱlinesȱthatȱspokeȱinȱparticularȱtoȱGandhiȱwere: Loveȱsoȱamazing,ȱsoȱdivine, demandsȱmyȱsoul,ȱmyȱlife,ȱmyȱall.13

Aȱsimilarȱritualȱwasȱcelebratedȱatȱtheȱendȱofȱhisȱlastȱfast.14ȱThe connectionȱ betweenȱ thisȱ typeȱ ofȱ protestȱ andȱ theȱ orientationȱ to theȱ crossȱ ofȱ Christȱ wasȱ clarifiedȱ byȱ aȱ conversationȱ thatȱ the AmericanȱmissionȱworkerȱStanleyȱJonesȱonceȱhadȱwithȱGandhi duringȱhisȱdetentionȱinȱtheȱprisonȱofȱYeravda.ȱJonesȱaskedȱhim ifȱ fastingȱ wasȱ notȱ aȱ formȱ ofȱ coercion.ȱ Theȱ Mahatmaȱ answered thoughtfully:ȱ“Yes,ȱtheȱsameȱkindȱofȱcoercionȱwhichȱJesusȱexerȬ cisesȱuponȱyouȱfromȱtheȱcross.”15 Thus,ȱinȱtheȱsufferingȱofȱJesusȱChristȱGandhiȱsawȱanȱexamȬ pleȱtoȱfollow.ȱNotȱavoidingȱsufferingȱandȱevenȱplacingȱhisȱown lifeȱonȱtheȱlineȱforȱanȱidealȱisȱaȱpositionȱthatȱdoesȱnotȱgoȱunnotȬ iced.ȱButȱthenȱoneȱmust,ȱlikeȱJesus,ȱbeȱwillingȱtoȱpayȱanyȱprice— thisȱ entailsȱ totalȱ devotion.ȱ Whenȱ Gandhiȱ graduallyȱ developed hisȱmethodȱofȱnonȬviolentȱresistanceȱinȱSouthȱAfrica,ȱheȱwasȱinȬ spiredȱ notȱ onlyȱ byȱ theȱ preachingȱ ofȱ theȱ Sermonȱ onȱ theȱ Mount butȱ alsoȱ byȱ theȱ exampleȱ thatȱ Jesusȱ gaveȱ inȱ hisȱ suffering.ȱ The coreȱ conceptȱ forȱ Gandhiȱ wouldȱ ultimatelyȱ becomeȱ satyagraha, whichȱ means:ȱ clingingȱ toȱ theȱ Truth.ȱ Heȱ firstȱ usedȱ theȱ concept “passiveȱresistance”ȱbutȱslowlyȱabandonedȱthatȱterm.ȱItȱwasȱnot aȱweakȬwilled,ȱpassiveȱattitudeȱheȱwasȱafter—andȱtheȱexample ofȱ Jesusȱ madeȱ thatȱ clear.ȱ Lookingȱ backȱ onȱ hisȱ workȱ inȱ South Africa,ȱ heȱ wroteȱ inȱ 1928ȱ aboutȱ Jesusȱ asȱ theȱ “princeȱ ofȱ passive resisters”ȱ butȱaddsȱthatȱthisȱpassiveȱresistanceȱmustȱbeȱviewed

ȱSeeȱLouisȱFischer,ȱTheȱLifeȱofȱMahatmaȱGandhi,ȱ(London:ȱHarperȬ CollinsȱPublications,ȱ1997);ȱtheȱquoteȱconcerningȱtheseȱlinesȱisȱfoundȱon p.ȱ284. 13

ȱSeeȱFischer,ȱTheȱLifeȱofȱMahatmaȱGandhi,ȱp.ȱ621;ȱE.ȱStanleyȱJones, Mahatmaȱ Gandhi:ȱ Anȱ Interpretationȱ (London:ȱ Hodderȱ andȱ Stoughton, 1948),ȱp.ȱ52. 14

ȱJones,ȱMahatmaȱGandhi,ȱp.ȱ143.

15

JESUSȱASȱGURU

140

asȱ satyagraha.16ȱ Thisȱ isȱ whereȱ theȱ titleȱ forȱ Jesus,ȱ soȱ popularȱ in Gandhianȱcircles,ȱi.e.ȱtheȱ“princeȱofȱtheȱsatyagrahis”ȱcomesȱfrom. Almostȱtwentyȱyearsȱlaterȱheȱwrote: IȱshowedȱyearsȱagoȱinȱSouthȱAfricaȱthatȱtheȱadjectiveȱ“pasȬ sive”ȱ wasȱ aȱ misnomer,ȱ atȱ leastȱ asȱ appliedȱ toȱ Jesus.ȱ Heȱ was theȱ mostȱactiveȱresisterȱknownȱperhapsȱtoȱhistory.ȱHisȱ was nonȬviolenceȱparȱexcellence.17

But,ȱ forȱ Gandhi,ȱ theȱ sufferingȱ Christȱ hadȱ significanceȱ not onlyȱ asȱ theȱ prototypeȱ ofȱ nonȬviolentȱ struggleȱ againstȱ evilȱ and theȱsupremeȱexampleȱofȱtotalȱdevotion.ȱJesusȱisȱnotȱonlyȱtheȱone whoȱhasȱtheȱpowerȱtoȱlayȱdownȱhisȱlifeȱoutȱofȱhisȱownȱfreeȱwill (Johnȱ10:18).ȱIfȱheȱwere,ȱheȱcouldȱstillȱbeȱseenȱtooȱmuchȱasȱanȱexȬ alted,ȱ divineȱ figure.ȱ Andȱ althoughȱ thatȱ wouldȱ haveȱ beenȱ enȬ tirelyȱ inȱ agreementȱ withȱ hisȱ Hinduȱ background,ȱ Gandhiȱ rejecȬ tedȱthatȱimageȱofȱChrist.ȱRather,ȱGandhiȱsawȱJesus’ȱimportance inȱ hisȱ completeȱ identificationȱ withȱ theȱ leastȱ inȱ humanȱ society. TheȱMahatmaȱwasȱveryȱmuchȱtouchedȱbyȱaȱportrayalȱofȱtheȱcruȬ cifiedȱChristȱwearingȱonlyȱaȱloincloth.ȱHereȱheȱsawȱtheȱmeagre clothingȱofȱmillionsȱofȱpoorȱpeopleȱinȱIndianȱvillages:ȱChristȱas aȱcoolie.18ȱForȱGandhi,ȱthisȱimageȱexpressedȱtheȱtrueȱmeaningȱof substitutionaryȱ sufferingȱ andȱ inȱ thisȱ senseȱ heȱ referredȱ repeatȬ edlyȱtoȱtheȱvalueȱofȱChrist’s’ȱsufferingȱandȱdying. ThusȱforȱGandhiȱtheȱcrucifixionȱofȱChristȱbecameȱveryȱimȬ portant,ȱ evenȱ thoughȱ heȱ wasȱ neverȱ ableȱ toȱ shareȱ theȱ viewsȱ of hisȱorthodoxȱProtestantȱacquaintancesȱinȱSouthȱAfrica.ȱForȱthat matter,ȱ duringȱ hisȱ Southȱ Africanȱ period,ȱ heȱ alsoȱ becameȱ acȬ quaintedȱ withȱ theȱ viewsȱ ofȱ otherȱ Christiansȱ regardingȱ the meaningȱofȱJesus.ȱGandhiȱbecameȱaware—notȱsoȱmuchȱthrough personalȱ contactsȱ asȱ throughȱ reading—ofȱ approachesȱ inȱ ChrisȬ tologyȱ thatȱ couldȱ inspireȱ himȱ moreȱ thanȱ theȱ traditionalȱ docȬ ȱM.K.ȱGandhi,ȱSatyagrahaȱinȱSouthȱAfrica,ȱtransl.ȱfromȱGujaratiȱby ValjiȱGovindjiȱDesaiȱ(Madras:ȱGanesan,ȱ1928),ȱp.ȱ180. 16

ȱGandhi,ȱTheȱCollectedȱWorks,ȱvol.ȱLXXXIV,ȱp.ȱ372ȱ(Harijanȱ30Ȭ6Ȭ

17

1946). ȱSeeȱS.J.ȱSamartha,ȱTheȱHinduȱResponseȱtoȱtheȱUnboundȱChristȱ(MaȬ dras:ȱChristianȱLiteratureȱSociety,ȱ1974.)ȱp.ȱ92;ȱR.W.ȱTaylor,ȱJesusȱinȱIndian Paintings,ȱConfessingȱtheȱFaithȱinȱIndiaȱ11ȱ(Madras:ȱTheȱChristianȱLiteraȬ tureȱSociety,ȱ1975),ȱp.ȱ63. 18

THEȱSUFFERINGȱCHRISTȱASȱANȱEXAMPLE:ȱMAHATMAȱGANDHI

141

trinesȱ ofȱ incarnationȱ andȱ reconciliation.ȱ Theosophicalȱ writers suchȱ asȱ Annaȱ Kingsfordȱ andȱ Edwardȱ Maitlandȱ showedȱ him thatȱfaithȱinȱJesusȱcouldȱgoȱhandȬinȬhandȱwithȱanȱappreciation ofȱ Easternȱ religions.ȱ Butȱ aboveȱ all,ȱ Gandhiȱ wasȱ stronglyȱ influȬ encedȱbyȱreadingȱtheȱbooksȱbyȱLeoȱTolstoy.ȱFromȱthisȱRussian utopianistȱ Gandhiȱ learnedȱ howȱ Jesus’ȱ preachingȱ ofȱ theȱ KingȬ domȱofȱGodȱcouldȱbeȱappliedȱconcretelyȱtoȱtheȱpoliticalȱrealm. TheȱKingdomȱofȱGodȱwithinȱYou Inȱ 1894,ȱ whenȱ heȱ hadȱ beenȱ inȱ Southȱ Africaȱ forȱ onlyȱ aȱ short while,ȱGandhiȱwasȱgivenȱaȱbookȱbyȱLeoȱTolstoyȱ(1828Ȭ1910)ȱthat hadȱjustȱbeenȱpublishedȱinȱEnglish:ȱTheȱKingdomȱofȱGodȱisȱWithin You.ȱ Tolstoyȱ hadȱ finishedȱ theȱ bookȱ aȱ yearȱ earlier,ȱ butȱ theȱ RusȬ sianȱ governmentȱ hadȱ forbiddenȱ itsȱ publication.ȱ Itȱ wasȱ quickly publishedȱabroad:ȱtheȱRussianȱoriginalȱinȱBerlinȱandȱtwoȱdifferȬ entȱEnglishȱtranslationsȱinȱLondonȱandȱNewȱYork.ȱInȱhisȱautoȬ biographyȱGandhiȱwritesȱthatȱtheȱbookȱmadeȱanȱoverwhelming impressionȱ onȱ himȱ becauseȱ ofȱ Tolstoy’sȱ independentȱ thinking, hisȱprofoundȱethicsȱandȱtheȱauthenticityȱofȱhisȱwriting.ȱAndȱyet, inȱ thisȱ phaseȱ ofȱ hisȱ development,ȱ Gandhiȱ wasȱ notȱ inclinedȱ to followȱ Tolstoyȱ inȱ hisȱ radicalȱ rejectionȱ ofȱ theȱ government.ȱ For theȱ timeȱ being,ȱ theȱ youngȱ lawyerȱ stillȱ trustedȱ thatȱ theȱ British authoritiesȱ couldȱ beȱ broughtȱ toȱ reasonȱ throughȱ rationalȱ arguȬ ments.ȱNorȱdidȱheȱfollowȱTolstoy’sȱabsoluteȱpacifism.ȱAfterȱthe outbreakȱofȱtheȱBoerȱWarȱheȱofferedȱtheȱhelpȱofȱtheȱIndianȱcomȬ munityȱ inȱ theȱ formȱ ofȱ anȱ ambulanceȱ corpsȱ withoutȱ expressing anyȱ criticismȱ onȱ theȱ belligerentȱ Englishȱ government.ȱ Inȱ 1906, twelveȱ yearsȱ afterȱ readingȱ itȱ theȱ firstȱ time,ȱ Gandhiȱ rereadȱ TolȬ stoy’sȱ book.ȱ Heȱ thenȱ becameȱ radicalizedȱ andȱ feltȱ moreȱ comȬ pelledȱtoȱputȱtheȱideasȱofȱthisȱwriterȱintoȱpractice. FromȱtheȱbeginningȱGandhiȱwasȱequallyȱinfluencedȱbyȱTolȬ stoy’sȱ bookȱ withȱ respectȱ toȱ hisȱ viewȱ concerningȱ Jesus’ȱ preachȬ ingȱandȱtheȱpossibilitiesȱofȱlinkingȱtheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMountȱto sociopoliticalȱ protest.ȱ Whatȱ heȱ hadȱ instinctivelyȱ feltȱ upȱ toȱ that pointȱ toȱ beȱ theȱ meaningȱ ofȱ theȱ Sermonȱ onȱ theȱ Mountȱ heȱ now sawȱelaboratedȱasȱaȱuniversalȱethic.ȱNonȬviolenceȱseemedȱtoȱbe theȱ primaryȱ principleȱ inȱ allȱ areas.ȱ Andȱ theȱ preachingȱ ofȱ the KingdomȱofȱGodȱcouldȱapparentlyȱbeȱlinkedȱtoȱaȱhistoricalȱdeȬ velopment.ȱGandhiȱstatedȱmoreȱthanȱonceȱthatȱthereȱwereȱthree greatȱmastersȱinȱhisȱlife.ȱTheyȱwereȱtheȱJainȱpoetȱRaychandbhai,

JESUSȱASȱGURU

142

theȱ socialȱ reformerȱ Johnȱ Ruskinȱ withȱ hisȱ bookȱ Untoȱ Thisȱ Last, andȱ Tolstoy.ȱ Theȱ formerȱ acquaintedȱ Gandhiȱ withȱ theȱ worldȱ of Easternȱ religionȱ andȱ philosophy,ȱ theȱ latterȱ gaveȱ himȱ economic insightsȱ andȱ theȱ thirdȱ wasȱ hisȱ guideȱ withȱ regardȱ toȱ theȱ ChrisȬ tianȱ faith.ȱ Gandhiȱ correctlyȱ statedȱ thatȱ inȱ thatȱ areaȱ heȱ builtȱ on theȱfoundationsȱlaidȱbyȱTolstoy.19 TolstoyȱreinforcedȱGandhi’sȱconvictionȱthatȱJesus’ȱmessage canȱbestȱbeȱseenȱinȱtheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMount.ȱAnd,ȱunderȱTolȬ stoy’sȱinfluence,ȱGandhiȱalsoȱhighlightedȱtheȱtextȱinȱtheȱSermon onȱ theȱ Mount:ȱ “Iȱ tellȱ you,ȱ Doȱ notȱ resistȱ anȱ evilȱ person”ȱ (MatȬ thewȱ 5:39).ȱ Accordingȱ toȱ Tolstoy,ȱ thisȱ andȱ theȱ accompanying textsȱenjoinȱradicalȱnonȬviolence.ȱGandhiȱagreed,ȱalthoughȱwith himȱnonȬviolenceȱacquiredȱmoreȱtheȱnatureȱofȱactiveȱandȱbrave resistance,ȱ whereasȱ inȱ Tolstoyȱ resignationȱ wasȱ central.20ȱ But GandhiȱmainlyȱlearnedȱfromȱTolstoyȱtoȱregardȱtheȱKingdomȱof Godȱ notȱ asȱ aȱ spiritualȱ supratemporalȱ realityȱ butȱ asȱ aȱ concrete andȱ achievableȱ formȱ ofȱ humanȱ society.ȱ Aȱ goodȱ illustrationȱ of thisȱisȱtheȱspeechȱthatȱtheȱMahatmaȱheldȱinȱ1916ȱforȱaȱmeeting ofȱ economistsȱ inȱ whichȱ heȱ callsȱ themȱ toȱ beȱ moralȱ andȱ notȱ to pursueȱwealth.ȱHeȱendsȱhisȱspeechȱwithȱtheȱwords: LetȱusȱseekȱfirstȱtheȱKingdomȱofȱGodȱandȱHisȱrighteousness, andȱtheȱirrevocableȱpromiseȱisȱthatȱeverythingȱwillȱbeȱadded uponȱus.ȱTheseȱareȱrealȱeconomics.ȱMayȱyouȱandȱIȱtreasure themȱandȱenforceȱthemȱinȱourȱdailyȱlife.21

InȱstudyingȱGandhi’sȱuseȱofȱtheȱBible,ȱitȱisȱthusȱalsoȱimporȬ tantȱ toȱ haveȱ aȱ lookȱ atȱ Tolstoy’sȱ book.ȱ Andȱ yet,ȱ thisȱ doesȱ not seemȱtoȱhaveȱhappenedȱveryȱoften.ȱTheȱRussianȱwriter’sȱrather ȱOnȱTolstoy’sȱinfluenceȱonȱGandhiȱsee,ȱe.g.ȱSevenster,ȱGandhiȱenȱhet Christendom,ȱpp.ȱ196Ȭ204.ȱCf.ȱalsoȱPaulȱBirukoff,ȱ“MahatmaȱGandhiȱund derȱTolstoiismus,”ȱin:ȱF.ȱDiettrich,ȱDieȱGandhiȬRevolutionȱ(Dresden:ȱWolfȬ gangȱJess,ȱ1930),ȱpp.ȱ149Ȭ59. 19

20 ȱH.ȱRäisänenȱ(“MahatmaȱGandhiȱandȱtheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMount,” Temenosȱ27ȱ(1991):ȱ100Ȭ01)ȱrightlyȱpointsȱoutȱthisȱdifference.ȱButȱheȱexagȬ geratesȱwhenȱheȱsaysȱthatȱGandhiȱwasȱnotȱatȱallȱconcernedȱwithȱturning theȱotherȱcheekȱtoȱhisȱadversaries.ȱThisȱisȱclearlyȱseenȱinȱtheȱdemonstraȬ tionȱatȱtheȱsaltȱfactory. 21 ȱGandhi,ȱTheȱCollectedȱWorks,ȱvol.ȱXIII,ȱp.ȱ316ȱ(SpeechȱatȱtheȱMuir CentralȱCollegeȱEconomicȱSociety,ȱAllahabad,ȱ22Ȭ12Ȭ1916).

THEȱSUFFERINGȱCHRISTȱASȱANȱEXAMPLE:ȱMAHATMAȱGANDHI

143

verboseȱ argumentȱ isȱ notȱ veryȱ inviting.22ȱ Moreover,ȱ theȱ bookȱ is difficultȱ toȱ find—hardlyȱ anyȱ copiesȱ canȱ beȱ foundȱ inȱ libraries. OnȱtheȱbasisȱofȱhisȱgreatȱinfluenceȱonȱtheȱIndianȱindependence movementȱaloneȱTolstoyȱdeservesȱbetter! Butȱ whoeverȱ takesȱ theȱ troubleȱ toȱ readȱ Tolstoy’sȱ bookȱ will discoverȱmuchȱofȱwhatȱinspiredȱGandhi.ȱHowȱtheȱMahatmaȱhas understoodȱ theȱ Christianȱ faithȱ andȱ appliedȱ itȱ seemsȱ forȱ the mostȱpartȱtoȱharkȱbackȱnotȱtoȱtheȱBibleȱbutȱtoȱTolstoy.ȱItȱisȱgood toȱunderstandȱwhyȱtheȱRussianȱcountȱcouldȱhaveȱsuchȱanȱinfluȬ ence.ȱ Whoeverȱ readsȱ itȱ willȱ alsoȱ beȱ affectedȱ byȱ theȱ compelling rhetoricȱ thatȱ placesȱ Westernȱ civilizationȱ underȱ theȱ critiqueȱ of theȱGospel.ȱEveryȱformȱofȱexercisingȱpowerȱ(army,ȱpolice,ȱtaxȱor law)ȱisȱinȱprincipleȱrejected.ȱOverȱagainstȱthisȱTolstoyȱplacesȱthe lawȱ ofȱ loveȱ andȱ absoluteȱ freedomȱ thatȱ isȱ grantedȱ toȱ everyone whoȱbelieves.ȱInȱhisȱconfrontationȱwithȱaȱpowerȱinȱSouthȱAfrica continuallyȱengagedȱinȱdiscrimination,ȱthisȱmustȱhaveȱsounded likeȱmusicȱtoȱtheȱyoungȱGandhi’sȱears.ȱInȱaddition,ȱTolstoyȱdeȬ scribesȱ theȱ peacefulȱ moralityȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ inȱ anȱ allȬencompassing historicalȱ framework.ȱ Itȱ isȱ notȱ aȱ religiousȱ messageȱ thatȱ canȱ be acceptedȱ orȱ rejectedȱ asȱ oneȱ willsȱ butȱ anȱ irrepressibleȱ historical processȱfromȱwhichȱultimatelyȱnoȱoneȱcanȱwithdraw. LeoȱTolstoyȱwasȱcompletelyȱaȱpersonȱofȱtheȱnineteenthȱcenȬ tury,ȱ andȱ noȱ whereȱ elseȱ isȱ thisȱ soȱ apparentȱ asȱ inȱ thisȱ aspectȱ of hisȱ thinking.ȱ Hisȱ argumentȱ presupposesȱ anȱ optimisticȱ beliefȱ in progress:ȱ humanityȱ willȱ slowlyȱ developȱ aȱ continuallyȱ higher formȱofȱsocietyȱandȱtheȱintrinsicȱgoodnessȱofȱhumanityȱwillȱinȬ creasinglyȱpredominate.ȱTolstoyȱwritesȱconfidentlyȱofȱtheȱfactuȬ alityȱ ofȱ thisȱ development:ȱ “theȱ factȱ thatȱ allȱ menȱ areȱ constantly growingȱbetterȱandȱbetterȱofȱthemselves.”23ȱJesus’ȱmessageȱhasȱa certainȱ placeȱ inȱ thisȱ historicalȱ evolution.ȱ Tolstoyȱ distinguishes betweenȱthreeȱphasesȱinȱtheȱhistoryȱofȱhumanity,ȱeachȱofȱwhich ȱMartinȱGreen,ȱwhoȱwasȱeditorȱofȱtheȱlatestȱeditionȱofȱTheȱKingdom ofȱGodȱisȱWithinȱYou,ȱwarnsȱtheȱreadersȱinȱhisȱforewordȱthatȱtheyȱwillȱproȬ bablyȱ notȱ beȱ ableȱ toȱ readȱ theȱ bookȱ allȱ theȱ wayȱ throughȱ butȱ willȱ flick throughȱtheȱbook,ȱyawning. 22

ȱL.ȱTolstoy,ȱTheȱKingdomȱofȱGodȱIsȱWithinȱYou:ȱChristianityȱNotȱasȱa MysticȱReligionȱButȱasȱaȱNewȱTheoryȱofȱLife,ȱtransl.ȱfromȱRussianȱbyȱConȬ stanceȱGarnettȱȱ(Lincoln/London:ȱUniversityȱofȱNebraskaȱPress,1984),ȱp. 247.ȱȱOriginallyȱpublishedȱinȱ1894ȱinȱNewȱYork. 23

144

JESUSȱASȱGURU

isȱ characterizedȱ byȱ itsȱ ownȱ outlookȱ onȱ life,ȱ aȱ “theory”ȱ onȱ life. Firstȱofȱall,ȱthereȱwasȱpersonalȱorȱanimalȱlife,ȱinȱwhichȱeachȱinȬ dividualȱ lookedȱ outȱ onlyȱ forȱ his/herȱ ownȱ interestsȱ andȱ there wasȱnoȱsocialȱcontextȱatȱall.ȱAfterȱthisȱprehistoricȱageȱofȱ“every manȱ forȱ himself,”ȱ thereȱ wasȱ aȱ changeȱ inȱ theȱ wayȱ humans thought,ȱ aȱ changeȱ thatȱ Tolstoyȱ placesȱ atȱ aboutȱ 3000ȱ B.C.ȱ Then thereȱaroseȱtheȱawarenessȱthatȱhumansȱareȱbetterȱoffȱifȱtheyȱenȬ terȱintoȱobligationsȱwithinȱaȱfamily,ȱaȱtribeȱorȱaȱpeople.ȱItȱwasȱa newȱtheory,ȱtheȱsocializedȱorȱheathenȱoutlookȱonȱlife.ȱThisȱgave riseȱ toȱ aȱ powerȱ structureȱ thatȱ boundȱ theȱ individualȱ personȱ to theȱgeneralȱinterestȱandȱtheȱgreaterȱwhole.ȱTheȱexerciseȱofȱpowȬ er,ȱ alsoȱ inȱ theȱ formȱ ofȱ violence,ȱ wasȱ aȱ necessaryȱ partȱ ofȱ this theory.ȱItȱisȱtrueȱthatȱitȱtookȱcenturiesȱforȱthisȱnewȱviewȱofȱlifeȱto penetrateȱ theȱ mindsȱ ofȱ theȱ people,ȱ butȱ itȱ wasȱ thenȱ soȱ internalȬ izedȱ thatȱ anotherȱ wayȱ ofȱ lifeȱ wasȱ barelyȱ imaginable.ȱ Butȱ that otherȱ wayȱ wasȱ heraldedȱ inȱ theȱ secondȱ greatȱ changeȱ inȱ the thinkingȱ ofȱ humanity,ȱ whichȱ Tolstoyȱ placesȱ 1800ȱ yearsȱ before hisȱtime,ȱwithȱtheȱappearanceȱofȱJesusȱChrist. Aȱ newȱ phaseȱ inȱ historyȱ beginsȱ withȱ theȱ teachingȱ ofȱ Jesus. Theȱ groupsȱ thatȱ distinguishedȱ peopleȱ fromȱ oneȱ anotherȱ were brokenȱup,ȱandȱtheȱlawȱofȱloyaltyȱtoȱone’sȱownȱfamily,ȱtribeȱor nationȱwasȱsurpassedȱbyȱtheȱdoctrineȱofȱuniversalȱbrotherhood. Tolstoyȱ seesȱ theȱ mostȱ importantȱ aspectȱ ofȱ Jesus’ȱ preachingȱ in hisȱcallȱnotȱtoȱresistȱevilȱdoneȱtoȱone.ȱEveryȱformȱofȱviolenceȱand revengeȱ isȱ rejected.ȱ Forȱ thoseȱ whoȱ liveȱ underȱ theȱ influenceȱ of theȱheathenȱoutlookȱonȱlife,ȱthisȱisȱabsurd.ȱCanȱanyȱsocietyȱexist withoutȱ theȱ exerciseȱ ofȱ powerȱ toȱ keepȱ peopleȱ inȱ line?ȱ Butȱ TolȬ stoyȱpointsȱoutȱthatȱevenȱtheȱsavageȱpersonȱofȱprehistoricȱtimes couldȱ notȱ visualizeȱ theȱ heathenȱ socialȱ theoryȱ thatȱ wasȱ newȱ at thatȱ time.ȱ Thatȱ isȱ whyȱ Christ’sȱ preachingȱ isȱ notȱ immediately recognized;ȱslowlyȱbutȱsurelyȱitȱpushesȱaheadȱthroughȱeighteen centuries.ȱThisȱisȱthereforeȱanȱunstoppableȱhistoricalȱprocess: ChristianȱdoctrineȱisȱpresentedȱtoȱmenȱofȱtheȱsocialȱorȱheaȬ thenȱtheoryȱofȱlifeȱtoȬday,ȱinȱtheȱguiseȱofȱaȱsupernaturalȱreliȬ gion,ȱ thoughȱ thereȱ isȱ inȱ realityȱ nothingȱ mysterious,ȱ mystic, orȱsupernaturalȱaboutȱit.ȱItȱisȱsimplyȱtheȱtheoryȱofȱlifeȱwhich isȱ appropriateȱ toȱ theȱ presentȱ degreeȱ ofȱ materialȱ developȬ

THEȱSUFFERINGȱCHRISTȱASȱANȱEXAMPLE:ȱMAHATMAȱGANDHI

145

ment,ȱ theȱ presentȱ stageȱ ofȱ growthȱ ofȱ humanity,ȱ andȱ which mustȱthereforeȱinevitablyȱbeȱaccepted.24

Itȱ isȱ clear,ȱ therefore,ȱ whyȱ theȱ subtitleȱ toȱ Tolstoy’sȱ bookȱ reads: “ChristianityȱNotȱasȱaȱMysticȱReligionȱbutȱasȱaȱNewȱTheoryȱof Life.“25 Humanȱ beingsȱ doȱ notȱ understandȱ thisȱ newȱ theoryȱ ofȱ life veryȱwell.ȱBothȱchurchȱandȱstateȱareȱtoȱblameȱforȱthis,ȱbecause theyȱstubbornlyȱcontinueȱtoȱholdȱonȱtoȱtheȱoldȱvaluesȱofȱaȱpast historicalȱperiod.ȱTolstoyȱdirectsȱaȱfieryȱprotestȱagainstȱtheȱinstiȬ tutionalizingȱ andȱ sacralizingȱ ofȱ theȱ church,ȱ wherebyȱ hisȱ own Russianȱ Orthodoxȱ Churchȱ inȱ particularȱ comesȱ underȱ attack, whereȱrituals,ȱtheȱworshipȱofȱiconsȱandȱdogmaticsȱwereȱmoved toȱ theȱ foregroundȱ andȱ Jesus’ȱ preachingȱ wasȱ pushedȱ aside. Moreover,ȱ theȱ churchȱ gaveȱ herȱ blessingȱ toȱ theȱ stateȱ exercising itsȱ power—evenȱ inȱ itsȱ worstȱ form:ȱ compulsoryȱ serviceȱ inȱ the army.ȱTolstoyȱcallsȱeveryoneȱtoȱchooseȱforȱtheȱoriginalȱmeaning ofȱChristianȱfaith:ȱ“theȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMount,ȱorȱtheȱCreed.ȱOne cannotȱbelieveȱinȱboth.”26ȱButȱtheȱstateȱreceivesȱitsȱshareȱofȱcriȬ tiqueȱasȱwell.ȱOverȱandȱoverȱagain,ȱheȱportraysȱtheȱinjusticeȱthat theȱ poorȱ peasantsȱ mustȱ experienceȱ atȱ theȱ handsȱ ofȱ theȱ state: conscription,ȱ bloodyȱ punishmentȱ drillsȱ afterȱ revolts,ȱ being forcedȱ intoȱ theȱ army,ȱ taxes,ȱ justiceȱ inȱ theȱ interestsȱ ofȱ theȱ rich, etc.ȱNoȱopennessȱtoȱJesus’ȱdoctrineȱcanȱbeȱexpectedȱonȱtheȱpart ofȱtheȱrulers,ȱandȱthatȱisȱnotȱtoȱbeȱexpectedȱeither:ȱbyȱdefinition, thoseȱinȱpowerȱcannotȱbeȱChristian. Inȱthisȱsituationȱtheȱpeopleȱwhoȱseeȱtheȱsituationȱcorrectly canȱ doȱ nothingȱ moreȱ thanȱ distanceȱ themselvesȱ fromȱ theȱ state andȱ passivelyȱ allowȱ theȱ stateȱ violenceȱ toȱ continue.ȱ Thus,ȱ the bookȱ isȱ alsoȱ aȱ strongȱ argumentȱ forȱ completeȱ pacifism.ȱ When enoughȱpeopleȱassumeȱthisȱattitude,ȱtheȱgovernmentȱwillȱautoȬ maticallyȱcollapse.ȱHereȱTolstoyȱassumesȱaȱmodelȱofȱimmiserizȬ ationȱthatȱmakesȱoneȱthinkȱofȱwhatȱKarlȱMarxȱhadȱdescribedȱa quarterȱ ofȱ aȱ centuryȱ earlier.ȱ Andȱ whenȱ willȱ thisȱ eventȱ occur? Tolstoyȱ putsȱ thisȱ questionȱ onȱ theȱ sameȱ levelȱ ofȱ thatȱ ofȱ Jesus’ disciplesȱregardingȱtheȱendȱofȱtheȱworldȱ(Matthewȱ24).ȱ“Christ ȱTolstoy,ȱTheȱKingdomȱofȱGodȱIsȱWithinȱYou,ȱp.ȱ113.

24

ȱTheȱoriginalȱRussianȱeditionȱhadȱthisȱsubtitleȱasȱwell.

25

ȱTolstoy,ȱTheȱKingdomȱofȱGodȱIsȱWithinȱYou,ȱp.ȱ75.

26

JESUSȱASȱGURU

146

answeredȱthatȱtheȱendȱofȱtheȱworldȱ(thatȱis,ȱofȱtheȱpaganȱorganȬ izationȱofȱlife)ȱshallȱcomeȱwhenȱtheȱtribulationȱofȱmenȱisȱgreater thanȱ itȱ hasȱ everȱ been.”27ȱ Theȱ contributionȱ ofȱ humanȱ beingsȱ to thisȱ establishmentȱ ofȱ theȱ Kingdomȱ ofȱ Godȱ consistsȱ inȱ the recognitionȱofȱandȱwitnessȱtoȱtheȱtruth.ȱAndȱthisȱisȱpossibleȱbeȬ causeȱmodernȱhumansȱcarryȱtheȱtruthȱwithinȱthem:ȱ“TheȱKingȬ domȱofȱGodȱisȱwithinȱYou”ȱ(Lukeȱ17:21). Gandhiȱcertainlyȱviewedȱtheȱhumanȱcontributionȱtoȱhistory toȱbeȱgreaterȱthanȱTolstoyȱdid.ȱAndȱheȱneverȱfollowedȱhisȱRusȬ sianȱ teacherȱ inȱ hisȱ anarchisticȱ pleaȱ forȱ theȱ cessationȱ ofȱ governȬ mentalȱ institutionsȱ suchȱ asȱ theȱ courts,ȱ theȱ police,ȱ theȱ armed forcesȱandȱtaxes.ȱButȱtheȱmessageȱthatȱtheȱKingdomȱofȱGodȱwill comeȱ inevitablyȱ asȱ theȱ newȱ formȱ ofȱ humanȱ societyȱ touched Gandhiȱdeeply.ȱBecauseȱofȱTolstoy,ȱtheȱ“KingdomȱofȱGod”ȱbeȬ cameȱ anȱ inspiringȱ conceptȱ andȱ aȱ concreteȱ historicalȱ realityȱ in Gandhi’sȱmovement.ȱTheȱwordsȱinscribedȱonȱtheȱnationalȱmonȬ umentȱforȱtheȱMahatmaȱinȱNewȱDelhiȱareȱcharacteristic.ȱOnȱthe largeȱ stoneȱ plaqueȱ isȱ aȱ textȱ byȱ Gandhi,ȱ ofȱ whichȱ theȱ ending reads: IȱwantȱKhudaiȱRajȱ[aȱdivineȱstate],ȱwhichȱisȱtheȱsameȱthing asȱtheȱKingdomȱofȱGodȱonȱearth,ȱtheȱestablishmentȱofȱsuchȱa rajyaȱ [state]ȱ wouldȱ notȱ onlyȱ meanȱ welfareȱ ofȱ theȱ wholeȱ of theȱIndianȱpeopleȱbutȱofȱtheȱwholeȱworld.

TheȱUnityȱofȱtheȱReligions Justȱ beforeȱ hisȱ death,ȱ Tolstoyȱ wroteȱ aȱ longȱ letterȱ toȱ Gandhiȱ in whichȱheȱopinedȱthatȱtheȱnewȱlawȱofȱlifeȱwasȱalsoȱproclaimedȱin theȱ Indianȱ philosophiesȱ butȱ thatȱ itȱ hadȱ beenȱ mostȱ clearlyȱ proȬ claimedȱ byȱ Jesus.28ȱ Gandhiȱ sawȱ itȱ thisȱ wayȱ asȱ well.ȱ Theȱ two prongsȱ of,ȱ onȱ theȱ oneȱ hand,ȱ agreementȱ betweenȱ theȱ religions andȱ aȱ uniqueȱ preachingȱ byȱ Christȱ onȱ theȱ otherȱ canȱ alsoȱ be foundȱ inȱ whatȱ theȱ Mahatmaȱ wroteȱ andȱ said.ȱ Inȱ aȱ speechȱ on boardȱ aȱ seagoingȱ vesselȱ atȱ Christmasȱ 1931,ȱ Gandhiȱ said:ȱ “The teachingȱ ofȱ theȱ Sermonȱ onȱ theȱ Mountȱ echoedȱ somethingȱ Iȱ had ȱTolstoy,ȱTheȱKingdomȱofȱGodȱIsȱWithinȱYou,ȱp.ȱ277.

27

ȱL.ȱTolstoy,ȱ”GandhiȱLetters,”ȱin:ȱL.ȱTolstoy,ȱȱRecollectionsȱ&ȱEssays byȱLeoȱTolstoyȱ(London:ȱOxfordȱUniversityȱPress,ȱ1937),ȱpp.ȱ433Ȭ39ȱ(letter datedȱ7Ȭ9Ȭ1910). 28

THEȱSUFFERINGȱCHRISTȱASȱANȱEXAMPLE:ȱMAHATMAȱGANDHI

147

learntȱinȱchildhood,”ȱandȱshortlyȱthereafter:ȱ“OfȱallȱtheȱthingsȱI readȱ whatȱ remainedȱ withȱ meȱ forȱ everȱ wasȱ thatȱ Jesusȱ cameȱ alȬ mostȱtoȱgiveȱaȱnewȱlaw.”29 Itȱ isȱ clearȱ thatȱ Gandhiȱ easilyȱ includedȱ elementsȱ ofȱ the Christianȱ faithȱ intoȱ hisȱ ownȱ philosophy.ȱ Christianityȱ mayȱ beȱ a differentȱ religionȱ fromȱ Hinduism,ȱ butȱ theyȱ apparentlyȱ have muchȱinȱcommon,ȱorȱatȱleastȱmuchȱthatȱcanȱbeȱseenȱasȱmutually enriching.ȱ Thisȱ viewȱ isȱ notȱ veryȱ remarkableȱ atȱ present,ȱ butȱ in Gandhi’sȱ dayȱ andȱ situationȱ itȱ was.ȱ Christiansȱ oftenȱ clearlyȱ acȬ centuatedȱ theȱ differencesȱ betweenȱ theȱ religions—something whichȱGandhiȱhadȱexperiencedȱextensivelyȱandȱinsistentlyȱasȱa youngȱ manȱ inȱ Africa.ȱ Butȱ Hindusȱ generallyȱ alsoȱ rejectedȱ the Christianȱreligion.ȱInȱaddition,ȱforȱtheȱindependenceȱmovement, everythingȱ thatȱ wasȱ partȱ ofȱ theȱ cultureȱ ofȱ theȱ colonialȱ powers wasȱsuspect—andȱmostȱcertainlyȱtheirȱchurchȱandȱfaith. Inȱ thisȱ respectȱ Gandhiȱ demonstratedȱ aȱ remarkableȱ openȬ ness.ȱ Manyȱ timesȱ heȱ appearedȱ toȱ showȱ aȱ genuineȱ interestȱ in thatȱwhichȱinspiredȱothers.ȱTheȱunderlyingȱideaȱhereȱisȱthatȱall religionsȱareȱinȱaȱcertainȱsenseȱtrue,ȱalthoughȱtheyȱalsoȱallȱconȬ tainȱ errors.ȱ Religionsȱ mustȱ thereforeȱ esteemȱ oneȱ another.ȱ HinȬ duismȱ wasȱ dearȱ toȱ him,ȱ moreȱ soȱ thanȱ otherȱ religions,ȱ butȱ he claimedȱ toȱ haveȱ anȱ equalȱ respectȱ forȱ allȱ otherȱ religions.ȱ UltiȬ mately,ȱheȱwasȱconcernedȱwithȱtheȱreligionȱthatȱlayȱatȱtheȱbasis ofȱ allȱ religions.ȱ Thisȱ wasȱ aȱ regularȱ elementȱ inȱ theȱ Mahatma’s speechesȱandȱarticles. Forȱ Gandhi,ȱ theȱ ultimateȱ unityȱ ofȱ religionsȱ wasȱ notȱ primȬ arilyȱaȱtheoreticalȱconstructionȱbutȱanȱexperiencedȱreality.ȱThis isȱ obviousȱ fromȱ howȱ heȱ dealtȱ withȱ religiousȱ praxisȱ inȱ hisȱ ashȬ rams.30ȱForȱmanyȱyearsȱheȱheldȱaȱdailyȱprayerȱmeetingȱforȱallȱinȬ habitantsȱ ofȱ theȱ ashram,ȱ regardlessȱ ofȱ theirȱ religiousȱ backȬ ground.ȱTheseȱgatherings,ȱalthoughȱstronglyȱinfluencedȱbyȱHinȬ duȱ forms,ȱ oftenȱ witnessedȱ hisȱ convictionȱ thatȱ religionsȱ doȱ not representȱexclusiveȱtruths.ȱTheȱparableȱofȱtheȱtreeȱandȱitsȱmany branchesȱ wasȱ aȱ favouriteȱ ofȱ his:ȱ “Justȱ asȱ aȱ treeȱ hasȱ many ȱGandhi,ȱTheȱCollectedȱWorks,ȱvol.ȱXLVIII,ȱp.ȱ438ȱ(speechȱonȱboard theȱS.S.ȱPilsna,ȱ25Ȭ12Ȭ1931). 29

ȱ Seeȱ T.ȱ Mohanadoss,ȱ “Theȱ Gandhianȱ Understandingȱ ofȱ Prayer: Sensitivityȱ toȱ Godȱ andȱ toȱ Others,”ȱ Studiesȱ inȱ Interreligiousȱ Dialogueȱ 6 (1996):ȱ129Ȭ44. 30

JESUSȱASȱGURU

148

branchesȱ butȱ oneȱ root,ȱ similarlyȱ theȱ variousȱ religionsȱ areȱ the leavesȱandȱbranchesȱofȱtheȱsameȱtree.”31 Onȱ manyȱ occasionsȱ Gandhiȱ gaveȱ accountȱ ofȱ hisȱ wayȱ of thinkingȱ andȱ hisȱ accompanyingȱ religiousȱ practice,ȱ enteringȱ the lion’sȱdenȱfearlesslyȱatȱtimes.ȱWithoutȱaȱdoubt,ȱthatȱwasȱhowȱhe experiencedȱ theȱ conferenceȱ ofȱ Christianȱ missionariesȱ toȱ which heȱhadȱbeenȱinvitedȱinȱ1927.ȱPeopleȱfromȱtheȱaudienceȱengaged himȱ inȱ discussionȱ onȱ theȱ forgivenessȱ ofȱ sins,ȱ whichȱ madeȱ him thinkȱ ofȱ hisȱ experiencesȱ withȱ evangelicalȱ Christiansȱ inȱ South Africa.ȱHeȱwasȱultimatelyȱableȱtoȱdevelopȱhisȱownȱviewȱonȱthe pluralityȱofȱreligions.ȱAȱsomewhatȱlongerȱquoteȱfromȱhisȱspeech givesȱaȱgoodȱideaȱasȱtoȱtheȱbroadȱviewȱofȱreligionsȱheȱhadȱadopȬ ted:ȱ Inȱ spiteȱ ofȱ myȱ beingȱ aȱ staunchȱ Hinduȱ Iȱ findȱ roomȱ inȱ my faithȱ forȱ Christianȱ andȱ Islamicȱ andȱ Zoroastrianȱ teaching, and,ȱ therefore,ȱ myȱ Hinduismȱ seemsȱ toȱ someȱ toȱ beȱ aȱ conȬ glomerationȱ andȱ someȱ haveȱ evenȱ dubbedȱ meȱ anȱ eclectic. Well,ȱtoȱcallȱaȱmanȱeclecticȱisȱtoȱsayȱthatȱheȱhasȱnoȱfaith,ȱbut mineȱ isȱ aȱ broadȱ faithȱ whichȱ doesȱ notȱ opposeȱ Christians— notȱ evenȱ aȱ Plymouthȱ Brother—notȱ evenȱ theȱ mostȱ fanatical Mussalman.ȱItȱisȱaȱfaithȱbasedȱonȱtheȱbroadestȱpossibleȱtolerȬ ation.ȱ Iȱ refuseȱ toȱ abuseȱ aȱ manȱ forȱ hisȱ fanaticalȱ deeds,ȱ beȬ causeȱ Iȱ tryȱ toȱ seeȱ themȱ fromȱ hisȱ pointȱ ofȱ view.ȱ Itȱ isȱ that broadȱfaithȱthatȱsustainsȱme.ȱItȱisȱaȱsomewhatȱembarrassing positionȱIȱknow,—butȱtoȱothers,ȱnotȱtoȱme!32

Thisȱisȱaȱbeautifulȱexampleȱofȱtheȱtolerantȱattitudeȱbyȱwhichȱthe Mahatmaȱmadeȱaȱdeepȱimpressionȱonȱmany,ȱChristiansȱasȱwell. ItȱexudesȱaȱwellȬconsideredȱchoiceȱforȱthisȱ“broadȱfaith.”ȱItȱhas nothingȱtoȱdoȱwithȱlazyȱeclecticism;ȱitȱevenȱwantsȱtoȱdoȱjustice toȱfundamentalistȱbelievers,ȱwhoȱthemselvesȱwouldȱnotȱdoȱsuch justiceȱ toȱ others.ȱ Gandhiȱ knewȱ itȱ wasȱ aȱ controversialȱ pointȱ of view,ȱ butȱ heȱ experiencedȱ itȱ asȱ givingȱ himȱ supportȱ andȱ had madeȱitȱcompletelyȱhisȱown.

ȱGandhi,ȱTheȱCollectedȱWorks,ȱvol.ȱLXXXV,ȱp.ȱ31ȱ(Excerptsȱfrom SpeechesȱatȱPrayerȱMeetings,ȱJulyȱ1946). 31

32 ȱGandhi,ȱTheȱCollectedȱWorks,ȱvol.ȱXXXV,ȱpp.ȱ254Ȭ55ȱ(speechȱatȱthe MissionaryȱConference,ȱColombo,ȱCeylon,ȱ16Ȭ11Ȭ1927).

THEȱSUFFERINGȱCHRISTȱASȱANȱEXAMPLE:ȱMAHATMAȱGANDHI

149

Theȱ questionȱ arisesȱ asȱ toȱ whereȱ theȱ basisȱ canȱ beȱ foundȱ in hisȱreligiousȱbackgroundȱthatȱenabledȱhimȱtoȱassimilateȱthisȱtolȬ erantȱposition.ȱGandhiȱresearchersȱhaveȱgivenȱveryȱdifferentȱanȬ swersȱ toȱ thisȱ question,ȱ asȱ canȱ beȱ seenȱ immediatelyȱ inȱ certain publications.ȱ Gandhi’sȱ positionȱ isȱ oftenȱ linkedȱ withȱ theȱ advaita tradition,ȱtheȱmonisticȱsystemȱthatȱwasȱdevelopedȱbyȱShankara andȱ experiencedȱ aȱ revivalȱ inȱ theȱ nineteenthȱ centuryȱ inȱ India, sinceȱ theȱ oneȱ divineȱ truthȱ thatȱ hidesȱ behindȱ allȱ religionsȱ apȬ pearsȱtoȱbeȱmonistic.33ȱOthersȱseeȱmoreȱaffinityȱwithȱtheȱRamanȬ ujaȱ schoolȱ withȱ itsȱ vishishtadvaita,ȱ becauseȱ Gandhiȱ isȱ notȱ conȬ cernedȱ withȱ aȱ nonȬdualȱ realizationȱ ofȱ theȱ truthȱ butȱ withȱ indiȬ vidualȱ peopleȱ whoȱ areȱ sparksȱ ofȱ theȱ truth.34ȱ Thereȱ isȱ alsoȱ reȬ peatedȱreferenceȱtoȱtheȱinfluenceȱofȱtheȱJainȱmonksȱinȱhisȱenvirȬ onmentȱonȱGandhiȱinȱhisȱyouth.ȱGandhiȱsupposedlyȱborrowed fromȱJainismȱtheȱideaȱofȱtheȱmultifacetedȱnatureȱofȱtheȱtruth,ȱthe anekantavada,ȱofȱwhichȱeveryoneȱhasȱbutȱaȱpart.35 Thereȱisȱsomethingȱtoȱbeȱsaidȱforȱallȱtheseȱdifferentȱwaysȱof thinking.ȱ Gandhiȱ neverȱ gaveȱ aȱ systematicȱ explanationȱ ofȱ the conceptȱofȱreligion.ȱInȱlineȱwithȱtheȱsituationȱinȱquestion,ȱheȱreȬ spondedȱ toȱ whateverȱ movedȱ peopleȱ aroundȱ him.ȱ Withȱ thatȱ he continuallyȱ madeȱ roomȱ inȱ aȱ flexibleȱ wayȱ forȱ elementsȱ ofȱ reliȬ giousȱexperiencesȱandȱthoughts.ȱHeȱcouldȱmakeȱcreativeȱuseȱof theȱvarietyȱofȱtheȱreligiousȱandȱphilosophicalȱschoolsȱofȱIndia.ȱIt simplyȱisȱnotȱpossibleȱtoȱplaceȱhimȱdefinitivelyȱinȱoneȱschoolȱor another. Itȱ isȱ clarifyingȱ toȱ discoverȱ howȱ heȱ learnedȱ inȱ hisȱ youthȱ to dealȱ withȱ theȱ varietyȱ ofȱ religions.ȱ Mohandasȱ Gandhi’sȱ mother belongedȱtoȱtheȱPranamiȱsampradaya.ȱTheȱadherentsȱofȱthisȱlittleȬ knownȱ bhaktiȱ movementȱ areȱ concentratedȱ mainlyȱ inȱ Gujarat. TheȱmoreȱremarkableȱthingȱaboutȱthisȱschoolȱinȱVaishnavismȱis itsȱ extensiveȱ opennessȱ towardsȱ otherȱ religiousȱ traditions,ȱ both ȱAccordingȱtoȱG.ȱRichards,ȱTheȱPhilosophyȱofȱGandhi:ȱAȱStudyȱofȱHis BasicȱIdeasȱ(London:ȱCurzonȱPress,ȱ1982),ȱpp.ȱ1Ȭ4. 33

ȱAccordingȱtoȱH.M.ȱVroom,ȱReligionsȱandȱtheȱTruth:ȱPhilosophicalȱReȬ flectionsȱ andȱ Perspectives,ȱ transl.ȱ J.W.ȱ Rebel,ȱ Currentsȱ ofȱ Encounterȱ 2 (GrandȱRapids/Amsterdam:ȱEerdmans/Rodopi,ȱ1989),ȱp.ȱ137. 34

ȱAccordingȱtoȱD.L.ȱEck,ȱ“GandhianȱGuidelinesȱforȱaȱWorldȱofȱReliȬ giousȱ Difference,”ȱ in:ȱ R.ȱ Ellsberg,ȱ Gandhiȱ onȱ Christianityȱ (Maryknoll: OrbisȱBooks,ȱ1991),ȱp.ȱ79. 35

JESUSȱASȱGURU

150

withinȱ andȱ outsideȱ ofȱ Hinduism.ȱ Althoughȱ theȱ importanceȱ of thisȱforȱtheȱdevelopmentȱofȱGandhi’sȱreligiousȱexperienceȱisȱeviȬ dent,ȱ thisȱ aspectȱ ofȱ hisȱ lifeȱ historyȱ has,ȱ strangelyȱ enough,ȱ reȬ ceivedȱlittleȱattention.36 Inȱ Richardȱ Attenborough’sȱ movieȱ Gandhi,ȱ thisȱ elementȱ of hisȱ biographyȱ isȱ portrayedȱ inȱ aȱ uniqueȱ penetratingȱ way.ȱ Just beforeȱtheȱhugeȱprotestȱagainstȱtheȱsaltȱmonopoly,ȱweȱseeȱGanȬ dhiȱ inȱ conversationȱ withȱ aȱ foreigner;ȱ theyȱ areȱ onȱ theȱ coast,ȱ in Gandhi’sȱbirthplaceȱofȱPorbandar.ȱGlancingȱatȱtheȱharbourȱcity, Gandhiȱsays: Asȱyouȱcanȱsee,ȱmyȱcityȱisȱaȱseaȱcity,ȱalwaysȱfullȱofȱHindus, Muslims,ȱSikhs,ȱJews,ȱPersians.ȱMyȱfamilyȱsectȱwasȱtheȱPraȬ nami,ȱHinduȱofȱcourse;ȱbutȱinȱourȱtempleȱtheȱpriestȱusedȱto readȱ fromȱ theȱ Muslimȱ Koranȱ andȱ theȱ Hinduȱ Gita,ȱ moving fromȱoneȱtoȱtheȱotherȱasȱifȱitȱmatteredȱnotȱwhichȱbookȱwas beingȱread,ȱasȱlongȱasȱGodȱwasȱbeingȱworshipped.

Theȱwordsȱ“familyȱsect”ȱneedȱtoȱbeȱrelativizedȱsomewhatȱȱhere. ItȱwasȱGandhi’sȱpiousȱmotherȱwhoȱbelongedȱtoȱthisȱmovement. Hisȱ father,ȱ inȱ contrast,ȱ appearsȱ toȱ haveȱ hadȱ noȱ tiesȱ atȱ allȱ with thisȱgroup.ȱYearsȱafterȱGandhiȱleftȱhisȱfamilialȱhome,ȱheȱhinted inȱ aȱ conversationȱ withȱ aȱ visitorȱ atȱ theȱ differencesȱ betweenȱ his parentsȱ withȱ regardȱ toȱ religion.ȱ Heȱ relatedȱ howȱ hisȱ father,ȱ a widowerȱforȱtheȱthirdȱtime,ȱhadȱtroubleȱfindingȱaȱnewȱbride. ItȱwasȱnotȱeasyȱevenȱforȱStateȱministerȱtoȱgetȱaȱfourthȱwife. Theȱ searchȱ discoveredȱ herȱ inȱ someȱ villageȱ nearȱ Junagadh. Sheȱ belongedȱ toȱ thisȱ “Pranami”ȱ sect.ȱ Iȱ remember,ȱ during ourȱ roundȱ forȱ God’sȱ darshans,ȱ we,ȱ theȱ newlyȱ weds,ȱ were takenȱnotȱonlyȱtoȱtheȱtemplesȱofȱtheȱVaishnavaȱsectȱbutȱalso toȱthatȱofȱtheȱPranamis.ȱHowȱcouldȱmyȱfatherȱhaveȱanyȱidea

ȱOneȱofȱtheȱfewȱexceptionsȱisȱMarkȱThomson’sȱGandhiȱandȱhisȱAshȬ ramsȱ(Bombay:ȱPopularȱPrakashan,ȱ1995),ȱinȱwhichȱThomsonȱcautiously concludesȱ(p.ȱ5):ȱ“ThoughȱbroughtȱupȱinȱtheȱlapȱofȱHinduȱorthodoxy,ȱthe reformismȱ ofȱ theȱ pranamiȱ doubtlessȱ exercisedȱ someȱ influenceȱ upon him.” 36

THEȱSUFFERINGȱCHRISTȱASȱANȱEXAMPLE:ȱMAHATMAȱGANDHI

151

thenȱ (whenȱ heȱ married)ȱ ofȱ whatȱ theȱ Pranamiȱ dharma meant?37

ThisȱdoesȱnotȱdetractȱfromȱtheȱfactȱthatȱtheȱgreatȱreligiousȱinfluȬ enceȱ ofȱ youngȱ Gandhi’sȱ motherȱ certainlyȱ playedȱ aȱ partȱ inȱ his becomingȱ acquaintedȱ withȱ theȱ syncreticȱ praxisȱ ofȱ theȱ pranami movement.ȱThisȱincludedȱtheȱremarkableȱhabitȱofȱplacingȱvariȬ ousȱsacredȱtextsȱnextȱtoȱoneȱanotherȱtoȱreadȱandȱworship. Thisȱunusualȱritualȱharksȱbackȱtoȱtheȱseventeenthȱcentury. HindusȱrebelledȱinȱvariousȱpartsȱofȱIndiaȱduringȱtheȱruleȱofȱthe fanaticȱ Muslimȱ emperorȱ Aurangzeb.ȱ Asȱ couldȱ beȱ expected, thereȱ wereȱ manyȱ Hindusȱ whoȱ wantedȱ toȱ seeȱ theȱ Muslimȱ govȬ ernmentȱ replacedȱ byȱ aȱ Hinduȱ governmentȱ thatȱ wasȱ justȱ asȱ exȬ clusive.ȱ Thisȱ heldȱ forȱ the,ȱ forȱ example,ȱ largeȱ resistanceȱ moveȬ mentȱ inȱ Maharashtraȱ underȱ Shivaji.ȱ Butȱ itȱ isȱ remarkableȱ that thereȱ wereȱ alsoȱ Hindusȱ whoȱ resistedȱ theȱ Muslimȱ dominance, strivingȱ inȱ thatȱ resistanceȱ forȱ theȱ idealȱ ofȱ theȱ peacefulȱ coexistȬ enceȱ ofȱ religions.ȱ Theȱ finestȱ exampleȱ ofȱ thisȱ canȱ beȱ foundȱ in Bundelkhand,ȱ anȱ areaȱ inȱ theȱ northwestȱ ofȱ India.ȱ Theȱ comȬ manderȬinȬchiefȱ Chhatrasalȱ mobilizedȱ aȱ largeȱ troopȱ thatȱ was finallyȱableȱtoȱdriveȱtheȱsoldiersȱofȱtheȱGreatȱMoghulȱoutȱofȱthe area.ȱ Theȱ spiritualȱ leaderȱ ofȱ theȱ movementȱ wasȱ Swamiȱ PranȬ nathȱofȱtheȱPranamiȱsampradaya.38 Atȱ theȱ beginningȱ ofȱ theȱ seventeenthȱ century,ȱ theȱ pranamis wereȱ separatedȱ fromȱ theȱ Radhavallabhaiȱ sampradaya.ȱ Thisȱ isȱ a movementȱ withinȱ Vaishnavismȱ toȱ whomȱ emotionalȱ devotion forȱ theȱ youngȱ Krishnaȱ isȱ central.ȱ Swamiȱ Prannathȱ wasȱ the 37 ȱM.H.ȱDesai,ȱDayȬtoȬDayȱwithȱGandhi:ȱSecretary’sȱDiary,ȱvol.ȱ5ȱ(VaraȬ nasi:ȱSarvaȱSevaȱSanghȱPrakashan,ȱ1970),ȱpp.ȱ118Ȭ19ȱ(conversationȱȱGanȬ dhiȱhadȱwithȱaȱvisitorȱwhoȱtoldȱhimȱheȱwasȱpranami,ȱJanuaryȱ1925).

ȱOnȱthisȱmovementȱ(alsoȱcalledȱNijanandaȱsampradayaȱorȱKrishna Pranamiȱ sampradaya):ȱ B.ȱ Gupta,ȱ “Swamiȱ Pranȱ Nathȱ andȱ theȱ Pranami Religiousȱ Movementȱ inȱ theȱ 17thȱ Centuryȱ Bundelkhand,”ȱ in:ȱ S.P.ȱ Sen, SocialȱContentsȱofȱIndianȱReligiousȱReformȱMovementsȱ(Calcutta:ȱInstituteȱof HistoricalȱStudies,ȱ1978),ȱpp.ȱ183Ȭ95;ȱP.S.ȱMukharya,ȱ“SantȱPrannathȱand theȱPranamiȱSect,”ȱin:ȱN.N.ȱBhattacharyya,ȱMedievalȱBhaktiȱMovementsȱin India,ȱSriȱCaitanyaȱQuincentenaryȱCommemorationȱVolumeȱ(NewȱDelhi: MunshiramȱManoharlal,ȱ1989),ȱpp.ȱ113Ȭ26;ȱB.D.ȱGupta,ȱ“PranamiȱSamȬ pradayaȱinȱBundelkhand,”ȱin:ȱBhattacharyya,ȱMedievalȱBhaktiȱMovements inȱIndia,ȱpp.ȱ127Ȭ35. 38

JESUSȱASȱGURU

152

leaderȱ ofȱ theȱ pranamisȱ inȱ theȱ secondȱ halfȱ ofȱ theȱ century.ȱ Itȱ was heȱ whoȱ gaveȱ theȱ movementȱ itsȱ ownȱ character,ȱ whichȱ distingȬ uishedȱitȱsharplyȱfromȱotherȱgroups.ȱTheȱgreatestȱdifferenceȱlay inȱ theirȱ viewȱ ofȱ theȱ relationshipȱ betweenȱ theȱ religions.ȱ The movementȱhasȱneverȱabandonedȱtheȱworshipȱofȱKrishna,ȱbutȱa greatȱdealȱhasȱbeenȱaddedȱtoȱit.ȱSwamiȱPrannathȱwasȱgradually convincedȱ thatȱ allȱ religionsȱ ultimatelyȱ cameȱ downȱ toȱ theȱ same thingȱandȱthatȱtheȱdifferencesȱbetweenȱreligiousȱgroupsȱshould thereforeȱbeȱtranscended. Thisȱ wasȱ notȱ aȱ theoreticalȱ insight,ȱ arrivedȱ atȱ withinȱ the safetyȱ ofȱ hisȱ ownȱ group.ȱ Atȱ theȱ basisȱ ofȱ Prannath’sȱ conviction layȱ aȱ broadȱ knowledgeȱ ofȱ allȱ possibleȱ religions.ȱ Theȱ guruȱ had studiedȱ theȱ holyȱ scripturesȱ ofȱ allȱ theȱ schoolsȱ heȱ encountered aroundȱ him.ȱ Heȱ didȱ notȱ limitȱ himselfȱ toȱ theȱ Hindusȱ butȱ also readȱ theȱ sacredȱ textsȱ ofȱ theȱ Jains,ȱ Buddhistsȱ andȱ Muslims.ȱ To enlargeȱhisȱknowledgeȱofȱIslam,ȱheȱmadeȱvariousȱtripsȱtoȱArabic countriesȱ whereȱ heȱ builtȱ upȱ contactsȱ withȱ Islamicȱ theologians. Norȱ didȱ theȱ Christianȱ faithȱ lieȱ outsideȱ ofȱ hisȱ interest.ȱ Through theȱ Portugueseȱ andȱ Britishȱ peopleȱ heȱ encounteredȱ inȱ theȱ harȬ bourȱ cityȱ ofȱ Gujarat,ȱ heȱ acquiredȱ someȱ knowledgeȱ ofȱ theȱ Bible andȱchurchȱdoctrine. Thisȱ religiousȱ explorationȱ convincedȱ himȱ thatȱ theȱ content ofȱtheȱdifferentȱreligionsȱwasȱessentiallyȱtheȱsame.ȱInȱhisȱview, theȱdifferencesȱwereȱtheȱresultȱofȱtheȱvariousȱculturesȱinȱwhich theȱ religionsȱ flourished.ȱ Thisȱ positionȱ hadȱ beenȱ advancedȱ earȬ lierȱinȱaȱmoderateȱformȱinȱSufiȱandȱSantȱcircles,ȱnamelyȱbyȱKaȬ bir.39ȱPrannathȱwasȱcertainlyȱinfluencedȱbyȱhim,ȱbutȱheȱpushed theȱ syntheticȱ approachȱ ofȱ religionsȱ toȱ theȱ extreme.40ȱ Forȱ him, theȱ issueȱ wasȱ theȱ purestȱ formȱ ofȱ sarvadharmaȱ samanatva,ȱ orȱ the equalityȱ ofȱ allȱ teachings.ȱ Theȱ statementsȱ byȱ Swamiȱ Prannath, collectedȱinȱtheȱsacredȱtextȱofȱKuljam,ȱattestȱtoȱthisȱregularly.ȱA characteristicȱtext,ȱstillȱpopularȱwithȱtheȱmovement,ȱreads: TheyȱallȱgaveȱdifferentȱnamesȱtoȱGod andȱallȱadoptedȱdifferentȱrituals.

ȱOnȱKabirȱseeȱSchouten,ȱGoddelijkeȱvergezichten,ȱpp.ȱ96Ȭ114.

39

ȱOnȱtheȱinfluenceȱofȱSufismȱonȱPrannathȱseeȱH.M.T.ȱAli,ȱ“Influence ofȱ Islamȱ andȱ Sufismȱ onȱ Prannath’sȱ Religiousȱ Movement,”ȱ in:ȱ BhattaȬ charyya,ȱMedievalȱBhaktiȱMovementsȱinȱIndia,ȱpp.ȱ136Ȭ48. 40

THEȱSUFFERINGȱCHRISTȱASȱANȱEXAMPLE:ȱMAHATMAȱGANDHI

153

ButȱeverythingȱconsistsȱofȱSoulȱandȱUniverse “Allah”ȱandȱ“Brahman”ȱareȱone.41

Therefore,ȱitȱisȱnotȱsurprisingȱthatȱelementsȱfromȱdifferentȱreliȬ gionsȱareȱgivenȱaȱplaceȱinȱtheȱmovement’sȱcultus.ȱAlreadyȱearly on,ȱnextȱtoȱtheȱHinduȱsacredȱtexts,ȱaȱcopyȱofȱtheȱQur’anȱwasȱreȬ veredȱandȱrecited. Butȱ itȱ wasȱ notȱ onlyȱ theȱ cultusȱ ofȱ theȱ Pranamiȱ movement thatȱinfluencedȱMahatmaȱGandhi.ȱSwamiȱPrannathȱalsoȱfought forȱ independence,ȱ althoughȱ heȱ didȱ notȱ shunȱ violenceȱ inȱ this fight.ȱGandhiȱprobablyȱfeltȱsomeȱaffinityȱforȱthisȱgreatȱleaderȱof hisȱ mother’sȱ religiousȱ communityȱ becauseȱ ofȱ hisȱ politicalȱ inȬ volvement.ȱInȱparticular,ȱPrannath’sȱcontinuousȱcallȱtoȱstopȱthe fightingȱ betweenȱ theȱ differentȱ religiousȱ communitiesȱ fitsȱ comȬ pletelyȱ intoȱ Gandhi’sȱ world.ȱ Prannathȱ urgedȱ allȱ religious groupsȱ toȱ transcendȱ theirȱ differencesȱ andȱ toȱ liveȱ withȱ oneȱ anȬ otherȱ inȱ harmony.ȱ Heȱ listedȱ theȱ communitiesȱ inȱ hisȱ area:ȱ HinȬ dus,ȱ Muslims,ȱ Christians,ȱ Jews,ȱ Buddhists,ȱ Jains,ȱ etc.42ȱ Heȱ was toughȱ inȱ hisȱ critiqueȱ ofȱ them,ȱ becauseȱ theyȱ wereȱ allȱ concerned onlyȱwithȱtheirȱownȱinterestsȱandȱcouldȱseeȱtheȱothersȱmerelyȱas adversaries.ȱPrannathȱintroducedȱhisȱnewȱcommunityȱasȱanȱalȬ ternativeȱ inȱ whichȱ religionȱ isȱ experiencedȱ inȱ itsȱ essence,ȱ direcȬ tedȱatȱtheȱoneȱGodȱwhoȱcanȱbeȱdiscoveredȱbehindȱallȱreligions. Oneȱ ofȱ theȱ mostȱ wellȬknownȱ textsȱ ofȱ theȱ Pranamiȱ movements statesȱitȱasȱfollows: Heȱisȱpraisedȱbyȱdifferentȱnames andȱtheȱvariousȱcostumesȱ[ofȱhisȱdevotees]ȱareȱnotȱtheȱsame. Butȱnoȱoneȱshouldȱquarrelȱwithȱtheȱothers, forȱtheȱLordȱofȱallȱtheȱpeoplesȱisȱOne.43

Itȱ isȱ fromȱ thisȱ backgroundȱ thatȱ Mahatmaȱ Gandhiȱ apȬ proachedȱ theȱ otherȱ religiousȱ communitiesȱ ofȱ hisȱ time.ȱ Itȱ isȱ not surprisingȱ thatȱ he,ȱ likeȱ Prannath,ȱ feltȱ compelledȱ toȱ studyȱ the doctrineȱ andȱ experiencesȱ ofȱ theȱ otherȱ religionsȱ intensely.ȱ For Gandhi,ȱthatȱstudyȱofȱtheȱvariousȱreligionsȱresultedȱinȱaȱsyntheȬ ȱKuljam,ȱKhulasaȱ12:38.

41

ȱKuljam,ȱKirantanȱ53:2.ȱPrannathȱusedȱtheȱwordȱfirangiȱ(foreigner) forȱChristians. 42

ȱKuljam,ȱSanandhȱ41:72.ȱ

43

JESUSȱASȱGURU

154

sisȱthatȱheȱhimselfȱreferredȱtoȱbyȱtheȱclassicalȱtermȱsarvadharma samanatva,ȱtheȱequalityȱofȱallȱdoctrine.44ȱGandhiȱdidȱtakeȱtheȱdifȬ ferencesȱamongȱtheȱreligiousȱschoolsȱmoreȱseriouslyȱthanȱPranȬ nath,ȱ butȱ heȱ alsoȱ assumedȱ aȱ commonȱ basis.ȱ Theȱ resultȱ ofȱ this convictionȱisȱthatȱheȱdefinitelyȱrejectedȱaȱtransitionȱfromȱtheȱone religionȱtoȱanother.ȱThereȱisȱnoȱpointȱinȱ“converting”ȱtoȱanother religion,ȱ forȱ theyȱ allȱ worshipȱ theȱ sameȱ God.ȱ Thusȱ Gandhiȱ was alsoȱveryȱcriticalȱofȱmissionȱwork.ȱThisȱwasȱdirectedȱnotȱonlyȱat Westernȱ missionariesȱ inȱ hisȱ countryȱ butȱ alsoȱ atȱ nativeȱ ChrisȬ tiansȱ whoȱ wantedȱ toȱ convertȱ othersȱ toȱ theȱ Christianȱ faith.ȱ Itȱ is significantȱthatȱGandhiansȱ calledȱV.S.ȱ Azariah,ȱ aȱ nativeȱ bishop inȱtheȱAnglicanȱchurch,ȱ“Gandhi’sȱEnemyȱNumberȱOne.”ȱAzaȬ riahȱwas,ȱlikeȱGandhi,ȱcloselyȱinvolvedȱwithȱtheȱfateȱofȱtheȱsoȬ calledȱ untouchablesȱ whoȱ formȱ theȱ lowestȱ categoryȱ inȱ theȱ caste hierarchy.45ȱButȱtheȱbishopȱwantedȱtoȱincludeȱallȱofȱthemȱinȱhis churchȱcommunity,ȱwhereasȱforȱGandhiȱtheȱonlyȱcorrectȱwayȱto viewȱ thisȱ partȱ ofȱ theȱ populationȱ wasȱ theirȱ recognitionȱ within Hinduismȱasȱharijanȱ(childrenȱofȱGod). Evenȱ thoughȱ theȱ Mahatmaȱ radicallyȱ rejectedȱ conversion, heȱrejoicedȱwhenȱpeopleȱwereȱaffectedȱbyȱaspectsȱofȱanotherȱreȬ ligionȱandȱwantedȱtoȱadoptȱthemȱintoȱtheirȱownȱreligiousȱexperȬ ience.ȱHeȱhimselfȱintegratedȱmanyȱelements—fromȱChristianity inȱparticular—intoȱhisȱownȱreligion. GandhiȱandȱChristianity Withȱ theȱ passageȱ ofȱ time,ȱ theȱ imageȱ ofȱ Gandhi’sȱ attitudeȱ toȬ wardsȱ Christianityȱ hasȱ altered.ȱ Duringȱ hisȱ life,ȱ manyȱ sawȱ the MahatmaȱasȱanȱexemplaryȱChristian.ȱThatȱheȱhimselfȱemphaticȬ allyȱ declaredȱ thatȱ heȱ wasȱ Hinduȱ andȱ notȱ Christianȱ barelyȱ deȬ tractedȱ fromȱ this.ȱ Inȱ aȱ certainȱ sense,ȱ thisȱ evenȱ reinforcedȱ the holinessȱ that,ȱ inȱ theȱ eyesȱ ofȱ many,ȱ markedȱ himȱ asȱ Christian.

ȱCf.ȱSamartha,ȱTheȱHinduȱResponseȱtoȱtheȱUnboundȱChrist,ȱpp.ȱ80Ȭ81; Eck,ȱ“GandhianȱGuidelinesȱforȱaȱWorldȱofȱReligiousȱDifference,”ȱpp.ȱ80Ȭ 81. 44

ȱS.B.ȱHarper,ȱInȱtheȱShadowȱofȱtheȱMahatma:ȱBishopȱV.S.ȱAzariahȱand theȱTravailsȱofȱChristianityȱinȱBritishȱIndiaȱ(GrandȱRapids/Richmond:ȱEerdȬ mans/CurzonȱPress,ȱ2000), pp. 291-351. 45

THEȱSUFFERINGȱCHRISTȱASȱANȱEXAMPLE:ȱMAHATMAȱGANDHI

155

Christiansȱ calledȱ himȱ “anȱ unbaptizedȱ Christian”46ȱ orȱ “aȱ Hindu whoȱwasȱdeeplyȱchristianized.”47ȱHisȱnonȬviolentȱprotests,ȱsuch asȱ theȱ demonstrationȱ atȱ theȱ saltȱ factory,ȱ wereȱ seenȱ asȱ the concretizationȱofȱevangelicalȱpreaching.ȱAndȱwhoeverȱsawȱhow farȱtheȱMahatmaȱwentȱinȱselfȬsacrificeȱalsoȱtendedȱtoȱseeȱhimȱas anȱ exampleȱ forȱ churchȱ andȱ Christianity.ȱ Heȱ wasȱ “theȱ most ChristianȱChristian.”48 ThoseȱwhoȱdidȱnoteȱGandhi’sȱcommitmentȱtoȱhisȱownȱHinȬ duȱreligionȱstillȱwantedȱtoȱseeȱhimȱinȱtheȱlightȱofȱtheȱbiblicalȱcoȬ venant.ȱ Toȱ thatȱ circleȱ itȱ wasȱ obviousȱ toȱ compareȱ himȱ withȱ the Romanȱ centurionȱ ofȱ whomȱ Christȱ says:ȱ “Iȱ tellȱ youȱ theȱ truth,ȱ I haveȱ notȱ foundȱ anyoneȱ inȱ Israelȱ withȱ suchȱ greatȱ faith”ȱ (MatȬ thewȱ8:10).49ȱInȱanyȱcase,ȱthereȱwasȱtheȱconvictionȱthatȱtheȱMaȬ hatmaȱwasȱaȱperfectȱexampleȱofȱputtingȱintoȱpracticeȱwhatȱJesus hadȱintended. Hindusȱalsoȱconnectedȱtheȱappearanceȱofȱtheirȱgreatȱleader withȱ biblicalȱ values.ȱ Aȱ goodȱ exampleȱ ofȱ thisȱ canȱ beȱ foundȱ in howȱtheȱprotestȱatȱtheȱsaltȱfactoryȱinȱ1930ȱwasȱpresented.ȱGanȬ dhiȱ mobilizedȱ aȱ largeȱ crowdȱ ofȱ followersȱ forȱ aȱ marchȱ ofȱ three hundredȱ kilometresȱ toȱ theȱ coast.ȱ Thereȱ theyȱ would,ȱ inȱ protest, extractȱsaltȱfromȱseawater,ȱaȱpunishableȱactȱaccordingȱtoȱtheȱcoȬ lonialȱgovernment.ȱThisȱveryȱobviousȱmarchȱwasȱquicklyȱcomȬ paredȱtoȱJesus’ȱentryȱintoȱJerusalemȱasȱdescribedȱinȱtheȱgospels. Thisȱ comparisonȱ wasȱ probablyȱ begunȱ byȱ hisȱ Christianȱ followȬ ers,ȱbutȱHindusȱwereȱalsoȱmovedȱbyȱit—manyȱHindusȱboughtȱa Bibleȱsoȱtheyȱcouldȱreadȱaboutȱthisȱepisode.50

ȱTermȱusedȱbyȱFriedrichȱHeiler,ȱtheȱGermanȱreligiousȱphenomenoȬ logy:ȱcf.ȱF.ȱHeiler,ȱChristlicherȱGlaubeȱundȱindischesȱGeisteslebenȱ(Munich: ErnstȱReinhardt,ȱ1926),ȱp.ȱ37. 46

ȱTermȱusedȱbyȱtheȱAmericanȱmissionaryȱE.ȱStanleyȱJones;ȱcf.ȱJones, MahatmaȱGandhi,ȱp.ȱ79. 47

ȱSoȱformulatedȱbyȱtheȱAustrianȱphilosopherȱOskarȱEwaldȱ(FriedȬ länder):ȱO.ȱEwald,ȱ“Gandhi,ȱderȱPolitikerȱdesȱGeistes,”ȱin:ȱDiettrich,ȱDie GandhiȬRevolution,ȱp.ȱ49. 48

ȱAccordingȱtoȱSevenster,ȱGandhiȱenȱhetȱChristendom,ȱp.ȱ231.

49

50 ȱ V.ȱ Mehta,ȱ Mahatmaȱ Gandhiȱ andȱ Hisȱ Apostlesȱ (Harmondsworth: PenguinȱBooks,ȱ1977),ȱp.ȱ147.

JESUSȱASȱGURU

156

AfterȱGandhiȱwasȱkilled,ȱheȱwasȱlinkedȱevenȱmoreȱclosely toȱJesusȱandȱtheȱGospel,ȱhisȱfateȱbeingȱoftenȱcomparedȱbyȱChrisȬ tianȱ sympathizersȱ toȱ Christ’sȱ crucifixion.ȱ Theȱ Americanȱ misȬ sionaryȱ Stanleyȱ Jonesȱ wroteȱ ofȱ “theȱ greatestȱ tragedyȱ sinceȱ the SonȱofȱGodȱdiedȱonȱtheȱcross.”51ȱOneȱChristianȱGandhianȱcalled himȱ “theȱ realȱ Christȱ ofȱ India.”52ȱ Butȱ manyȱ Hindusȱ wentȱ quite farȱ inȱ identifyingȱ theȱ Mahatmaȱ withȱ Christ.ȱ Gandhiȱ wasȱ often portrayedȱ asȱ aȱ Christusȱ redivivus;ȱ heȱ wasȱ calledȱ “theȱ second Saviour”ȱorȱ“aȱbrotherȱofȱJesusȱChristȱinȱmartyrdom,”ȱandȱeven “Christȱreturnedȱtoȱearth.”53 Butȱ thisȱ imageȱ alteredȱ drasticallyȱ fromȱ theȱ 1960sȱ on.ȱ In general,ȱ peopleȱ becameȱ muchȱ moreȱ awareȱ ofȱ Gandhi’sȱ Hindu roots.ȱ Nowȱ itȱ wasȱ pointedȱ outȱ especiallyȱ thatȱ theȱ traditionȱ of nonȬviolenceȱ (ahimsa)ȱ hadȱ alreadyȱ existedȱ inȱ Jainismȱ and,ȱ less explicitly,ȱinȱHinduism.ȱGandhiȱmayȱhaveȱreadȱtheȱSermonȱon theȱMountȱveryȱattentively,ȱbutȱheȱdidȱnotȱneedȱitȱtoȱimplement whatȱwasȱalreadyȱpresentȱinȱtheȱtreasuryȱofȱIndianȱreligionsȱfor centuries.ȱ Inȱ aȱ renewedȱ selfȬconsciousnessȱ inȱ independentȱ InȬ dia,ȱ researchersȱ lookedȱ firstȱ toȱ sourcesȱ inȱ itsȱ ownȱ history.ȱ A supplementȱ andȱ reinforcementȱ fromȱ Christianityȱ wasȱ acceptaȬ ble,ȱ butȱ theȱ ideaȱ thatȱ theȱ “fatherȱ ofȱ theȱ nation”ȱ wasȱ aȱ cryptoȬ Christianȱcanȱscarcelyȱbeȱtoleratedȱanyȱmore. Theȱ hundredthȱ birthdayȱ ofȱ theȱ Mahatmaȱ wasȱ celebrated lavishlyȱinȱ1969,ȱandȱwithȱthisȱinȱmind,ȱaȱcommemorativeȱbook wasȱ publishedȱ inȱ theȱ yearȱ prior,54ȱ toȱ whichȱ manyȱ famousȱ peoȬ pleȱfromȱhomeȱandȱabroadȱcontributed.ȱItȱisȱremarkableȱthatȱin thisȱ bookȱ thereȱ areȱ scarcelyȱ anyȱ referencesȱ toȱ theȱ Christianȱ inȬ fluenceȱonȱGandhi’sȱideas,ȱespeciallyȱnotȱbyȱIndians.55ȱTheȱeditȬ orȱofȱtheȱbookȱwasȱSarvepalliȱRadhakrishnan,ȱtheȱfamousȱHinȬ ȱJones,ȱMahatmaȱGandhi,ȱp.ȱ17.

51

ȱS.K.ȱGeorge,ȱcitedȱbyȱM.M.ȱThomas,ȱTheȱAcknowledgedȱChristȱofȱthe IndianȱRenaissanceȱ(London:ȱSCM,ȱ1969),ȱp.ȱ215. 52

ȱSeeȱtheȱvariousȱquotesȱbyȱE.S.ȱJonesȱinȱMahatmaȱGandhi,ȱp.ȱ101.

53

ȱS.ȱRadhakrishnan,ȱMahatmaȱGandhiȱ100ȱYearsȱ(NewȱDelhi:ȱGandhi PeaceȱFoundation,ȱ1968). 54

55 ȱStanleyȱJones,ȱbyȱthatȱtimeȱwellȱadvancedȱinȱyears,ȱdidȱdoȱso,ȱas wasȱtoȱbeȱexpected.ȱSoȱdidȱCardinalȱValerianȱGracias,ȱwhoȱwroteȱonȱbeȬ halfȱofȱtheȱRomanȱCatholicȱChurch.

THEȱSUFFERINGȱCHRISTȱASȱANȱEXAMPLE:ȱMAHATMAȱGANDHI

157

duȱ philosopherȱ whoȱ hadȱ beenȱ presidentȱ ofȱ Indiaȱ forȱ some years.ȱInȱhisȱintroductionȱheȱwroteȱaboutȱtheȱcentralȱplaceȱthat religionȱoccupiedȱinȱGandhi’sȱlife,ȱbutȱheȱalsoȱrefersȱexclusively toȱ Hinduism:ȱ “Inȱ theȱ spiritȱ ofȱ Hinduȱ religionȱ heȱ lookedȱ upon theȱ Divineȱ notȱ onlyȱ asȱ aȱ transcendentalȱ Absoluteȱ butȱ asȱ aȱ perȬ sonalȱGod.”56ȱJ.B.ȱKripalani,ȱprimeȱministerȱofȱtheȱstateȱofȱUttar Pradeshȱ andȱ formerlyȱ involvedȱ inȱ theȱ struggleȱ forȱ independȬ ence,ȱ wroteȱ similarlyȱ aboutȱ Gandhi’sȱ spiritualȱ ideas.ȱ Heȱ does writeȱthatȱGandhiȱstudiedȱtheȱBibleȱduringȱhisȱstayȱasȱaȱstudent inȱ Englandȱ andȱ thatȱ heȱ hadȱ Christianȱ friendsȱ inȱ Southȱ Africa butȱ concludes:ȱ “Allȱ theseȱ contactsȱ confirmedȱ himȱ inȱ hisȱ own faith,ȱHinduism.”57ȱForȱtheȱrest,ȱhisȱarticleȱexclusivelyȱdiscusses theȱ Hinduȱ contextȱ ofȱ Gandhi’sȱ spiritualȱ development,ȱ paying particularȱ attentionȱ toȱ hisȱ resistanceȱ toȱ missionȱ workȱ andȱ atȬ temptsȱ atȱ conversion.ȱ Theȱ Sermonȱ onȱ theȱ Mountȱ andȱ Christ’s disciplesȱareȱnotȱmentioned. Christianȱtheologiansȱhaveȱalsoȱdistancedȱthemselvesȱfrom theȱ allȱ tooȱ facileȱ incorporationȱ ofȱ Gandhiȱ intoȱ theirȱ ownȱ reliȬ giousȱtradition.ȱPreciselyȱinȱtheȱIndianȱchurches,ȱpeopleȱwantȱto examineȱGandhi’sȱHinduȱsourcesȱcarefully.ȱThisȱeasilyȱleadsȱto aȱ viewȱ inȱ whichȱ theȱ Christianȱ influenceȱ onȱ theȱ greatȱ leaderȱ of theȱindependenceȱmovementȱisȱminimalized.ȱStanleyȱSamartha, oneȱofȱIndia’sȱmostȱprominentȱtheologians,ȱwrote: [I]tȱremainsȱtrueȱthatȱtheȱbasicȱinspirationȱinȱGandhiji’sȱlife andȱworkȱcameȱnotȱfromȱChristianityȱbutȱfromȱhisȱownȱreliȬ gion,ȱ viz.ȱ Hinduism,ȱ selectivelyȱ usedȱ andȱ reinterpretedȱ by himȱ….ȱItȱisȱpossible,ȱofȱcourse,ȱtoȱseeȱcertainȱsimilaritiesȱin theȱ lifeȱ andȱ workȱ ofȱ Christ,ȱ butȱ fundamentallyȱ Christȱ and hisȱexampleȱconstitutedȱaȱsupportingȱplankȱratherȱthanȱthe mainȱpillarȱofȱhisȱlife.58

Nevertheless,ȱsuchȱanȱassessmentȱdoesȱnotȱdoȱjusticeȱtoȱthe fascinationȱ forȱ Jesusȱ andȱ hisȱ ethicalȱ teachingsȱ thatȱ Gandhiȱ alȬ waysȱ showed.ȱ Itȱ canȱ certainlyȱ beȱ appreciatedȱ thatȱ theȱ Hindu ȱS.ȱRadhakrishnan,ȱMahatmaȱGandhiȱ100ȱYears,ȱp.ȱ3.

56

ȱJ.B.ȱKripalani,ȱ“Gandhiji’sȱSpiritualȱIdeas,”ȱin:ȱRadhakrishnan, MahatmaȱGandhiȱ100ȱYears,ȱpp.ȱ200Ȭ10;ȱtheȱquoteȱisȱfoundȱonȱp.ȱ201. 57

ȱSamartha,ȱTheȱHinduȱResponseȱtoȱtheȱUnboundȱChrist,ȱpp.ȱ94Ȭ95.ȱSee chapterȱ9ȱofȱthisȱvolumeȱforȱaȱdiscussionȱofȱSamartha. 58

JESUSȱASȱGURU

158

backgroundȱ ofȱ Gandhi’sȱ thinkingȱ isȱ alsoȱ acknowledgedȱ now. Butȱ whoeverȱ readsȱ Gandhi’sȱ writingsȱ andȱ thinksȱ aboutȱ his workȱ cannotȱ avoidȱ theȱ conclusionȱ thatȱ theȱ acquaintanceȱ with theȱ Christianȱ faithȱ meantȱ somethingȱ fundamentalȱ toȱ him.ȱ His backgroundȱ inȱaȱHinduȱ schoolȱthatȱwasȱmoreȱ openȱthanȱ usual toȱ otherȱ religionsȱ madeȱ itȱ possibleȱ forȱ himȱ toȱ borrowȱ someȱ esȬ sentialȱelementsȱfromȱtheȱChristianȱtradition. Forȱ Gandhi,ȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ hasȱ alwaysȱ beenȱ theȱ exemplary modelȱforȱnonȬviolence:ȱheȱwasȱtheȱ“PrinceȱofȱallȱpassiveȱresistȬ ers.”59ȱ Howeverȱ muchȱ theȱ Mahatmaȱ borrowedȱ fromȱ Indian sourcesȱ toȱ developȱ hisȱ conceptȱ ofȱ ahimsa,ȱ whichȱ byȱ theȱ wayȱ is moreȱJainȱthanȱHindu,ȱitȱisȱtheȱtextȱofȱtheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMount thatȱputȱhimȱonȱtheȱtrackȱofȱthisȱprinciple.ȱTheȱnonȬviolentȱproȬ testȱ atȱ theȱ saltȱ factoryȱ withȱ suchȱ aȱ radicalȱ selfȬsacrificeȱ would notȱ haveȱ beenȱ imaginableȱ ifȱ Gandhiȱ hadȱ notȱ beenȱ acquainted withȱtheȱGospel. Itȱ isȱ theȱ personȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ whoȱ embodiedȱ theȱ Truthȱ inȱ the wholeȱofȱhisȱwayȱofȱlifeȱandȱhisȱpathȱofȱsufferingȱthatȱcontinued toȱ inspireȱ Gandhiȱ asȱ theȱ princeȱ ofȱ theȱ satyagrahis.ȱ Forȱ Gandhi, Christ’sȱcrucifixionȱhadȱaȱcrucialȱmeaningȱinȱhisȱconceptȱofȱsubȬ stitutionaryȱ suffering.ȱ Andȱ theȱ imageȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ onȱ theȱ crossȱ has alwaysȱ remainedȱ withȱ himȱ asȱ anȱ expressionȱ ofȱ God’sȱ compasȬ sionȱtowardȱtheȱleastȱinȱhumanȱsociety. DueȱtoȱTolstoy’sȱinspiration,ȱGandhiȱwasȱableȱtoȱapplyȱthe Gospel’sȱ conceptȱ ofȱ theȱ Kingdomȱ ofȱ Godȱ inȱ thoughtȱ andȱ deed asȱ aȱ concreteȱ possibilityȱ forȱ humanȱ society,ȱ andȱ India’sȱ indeȬ pendenceȱ movementȱ receivedȱ aȱ specialȱ impulseȱ becauseȱ ofȱ it. Theȱidealȱofȱtheȱnewȱstateȱofȱtheirȱownȱreceivedȱsuchȱaȱpositive interpretation:ȱnotȱsoȱmuchȱliberationȱfromȱtheȱcolonialȱyokeȱas anȱexemplaryȱsocietyȱthatȱwouldȱbenefitȱtheȱentireȱworld. TheȱMahatmaȱdidȱnotȱbecomeȱaȱChristian,ȱbutȱheȱwasȱmore thanȱ marginallyȱ influencedȱ byȱ theȱ Gospel.ȱ Ifȱ heȱ hadȱ notȱ enȬ counteredȱtheȱChristianȱfaith,ȱheȱwouldȱnotȱhaveȱinspiredȱpeoȬ pleȱinȱthisȱway. ȱGandhiȱcalledȱJesus,ȱalreadyȱinȱaȱ1920ȱarticle,ȱtheȱ“Princeȱamong passiveȱ resisters”ȱ (Youngȱ Indiaȱ (4Ȭ8Ȭ1920));ȱ laterȱ heȱ usedȱ mostlyȱ “the Princeȱofȱallȱpassiveȱresisters”ȱorȱ“theȱPrinceȱofȱtheȱsatyagrahis.” 59

INTERMEZZO

NandalalȱBose Gandhiȱisȱnotȱknownȱparticularlyȱforȱhisȱloveȱofȱtheȱvisualȱarts, butȱ thereȱ wasȱ aȱ painterȱ withȱ whomȱ heȱ hadȱ intensiveȱ contact andȱwhoseȱworkȱheȱappreciatedȱveryȱmuch.ȱThatȱwasȱNandalal Boseȱ (1883Ȭ1966),ȱ whoȱ wasȱ alsoȱ aȱ ferventȱ adherentȱ ofȱ theȱ GanȬ dhianȱmovement,ȱaȱfactȱtoȱwhichȱmanyȱofȱhisȱpaintingsȱtestify. Inȱ 1945ȱ Gandhiȱ stayedȱ forȱ someȱ timeȱ atȱ theȱ academyȱ where Boseȱ taught,ȱ andȱ hadȱ longȱ conversationsȱ withȱ theȱ artistȱ inȱ his studio.ȱ Duringȱ Gandhi’sȱ stay,ȱ Boseȱ didȱ someȱ paintings,ȱ inȬ cludingȱtwoȱofȱJesusȱChristȱcarryingȱtheȱcross.ȱThisȱwasȱtheȱimȬ ageȱofȱChristȱthatȱaffectedȱGandhiȱinȱparticular. NandalalȱBoseȱwasȱaȱfamousȱartistȱofȱtheȱBengalȱSchoolȱof Art.ȱ Thisȱ artȱ schoolȱ wasȱ partȱ ofȱ aȱ broaderȱ culturalȱ movement thatȱ wasȱ usuallyȱ calledȱ theȱ Bengalȱ Renaissance.ȱ Aȱ rediscovery ofȱ theȱ oldȱ Indianȱ culturalȱ valuesȱ beganȱ atȱ theȱ endȱ ofȱ theȱ nineȬ teenthȱcenturyȱinȱBengal.ȱInȱprotestȱagainstȱtheȱcolonialȱdominȬ ation,ȱaȱnumberȱofȱintellectualsȱmadeȱaȱradicalȱbreakȱwithȱBritȬ ishȱ cultureȱ andȱ focusedȱ completelyȱ onȱ theirȱ ownȱ culturalȱ hisȬ tory.ȱ Theirȱ leaderȱ wasȱ theȱ poet,ȱ writer,ȱ philosopherȱ andȱ eduȬ catorȱRabindranathȱTagoreȱ(1861Ȭ1941).ȱTheȱcentreȱofȱtheȱmoveȬ mentȱ wasȱ theȱ educationalȱ institutionȱ heȱ founded,ȱ Shanti Niketan,ȱ130ȱkilometresȱnorthwestȱofȱCalcutta. AtȱShantiȱNiketan,ȱtheȱmethodsȱofȱteachingȱwereȱthoseȱthat theyȱthoughtȱhadȱbeenȱemployedȱinȱancientȱIndia.ȱThatȱmeant, firstȱ ofȱ all,ȱ educationȱ inȱ theȱ openȱ air,ȱ withȱ studentsȱ sitting aroundȱaȱguru.ȱAboveȱall,ȱthisȱentailedȱaȱcomprehensiveȱeducaȬ tion,ȱwithȱintellectual,ȱreligiousȱandȱartisticȱsubjectsȱinȱbalance. Thus,ȱ artistsȱ wereȱ alsoȱ linkedȱ toȱ ȱ Shantiȱ Niketan.ȱ Itȱ isȱ chiefly Abanindranathȱ Tagoreȱ (1871Ȭ1951),ȱ Rabindranath’sȱ nephew, whoȱ didȱ importantȱ pioneeringȱ workȱ inȱ theȱ visualȱ arts.ȱ Heȱ atȬ temptedȱ toȱ freeȱ hisȱ studentsȱ fromȱ Europeanȱ influencesȱ andȱ to developȱtogetherȱwithȱthemȱanȱactualȱIndianȱart,ȱbasedȱonȱtheir ownȱ culturalȱ history.ȱ Nandalalȱ Boseȱ wasȱ Abanindranathȱ TaȬ gore’sȱmostȱimportantȱstudent. InȱtheȱdozensȱofȱyearsȱthatȱNandalalȱBoseȱworkedȱatȱShanti Niketan,ȱ heȱ portrayedȱ aȱ numberȱ ofȱ themesȱ inȱ hisȱ painting. 159

JESUSȱASȱGURU

160

TheseȱincludedȱclassicalȱscenesȱfromȱHinduȱmythologyȱasȱwell asȱ landscapes,ȱ villageȱ scenesȱ andȱ episodesȱ fromȱ theȱ Gandhian movement.ȱBoseȱdidȱnotȱcutȱhimselfȱoffȱfromȱEuropeanȱcultural historyȱtoȱsuchȱanȱextentȱthatȱheȱrefusedȱentirelyȱtoȱuseȱWestern motifsȱinȱhisȱpaintings.ȱThus,ȱheȱmadeȱaȱnumberȱofȱpaintingsȱof JesusȱChrist.ȱItȱisȱstrikingȱthatȱtheȱmajority—possiblyȱevenȱall— ofȱhisȱpaintingsȱofȱChristȱdepictȱtheȱcrucifixion.1ȱApparently,ȱfor Bose,ȱtheȱimportanceȱofȱChristȱisȱprimarilyȱthatȱpeopleȱseeȱhim asȱtheȱsufferingȱone.ȱItȱisȱpreciselyȱthisȱthatȱaffectedȱGandhiȱso strongly.ȱ Itȱ wasȱ notȱ forȱ nothingȱ thatȱ hisȱ favouriteȱ hymnȱ was: “Whenȱ Iȱ surveyȱ theȱ wondrousȱ cross,/ȱ Onȱ whichȱ theȱ Princeȱ of gloryȱdied.”ȱ WhenȱMahatmaȱGandhiȱstayedȱatȱShantiȱNiketanȱforȱsome timeȱ inȱ 1945,ȱ Nandalalȱ Boseȱ didȱ twoȱ paintingsȱ thatȱ portray Christȱ carryingȱ theȱ cross. Thisȱ wouldȱ certainlyȱ have beenȱ theȱ subjectȱ ofȱ converȬ sationȱ betweenȱ theȱ artist andȱ hisȱ guest.ȱ Inȱ anyȱ case, weȱ knowȱ thatȱ Gandhiȱ was veryȱmuchȱtakenȱwithȱthese paintings.ȱAndȱthatȱwasȱbeȬ causeȱ ofȱ aȱ veryȱ specialȱ reaȬ son.ȱ Inȱ itself,ȱ theȱ portrayal ofȱ thisȱ Christianȱ themeȱ is notȱ surprising:ȱ Jesusȱ isȱ deȬ pictedȱ inȱ aȱ classicalȱ way withȱaȱcrownȱofȱthornsȱand evenȱ aȱ halo.ȱ Theȱ episode depictedȱhereȱisȱwhenȱJesus stumblesȱ underȱ theȱ burden ofȱtheȱcrossȱ(ChristȱCarrying theȱ Cross).ȱ Itȱ isȱ oneȱ ofȱ the scenesȱinȱtheȱtraditionalȱRoȬ manȱCatholicȱstationsȱofȱtheȱcross.ȱTheȱwomanȱwhoȱhelpsȱJesus isȱ anȱ originalȱ additionȱ butȱ notȱ trulyȱ remarkable.ȱ Thereȱ were womenȱ presentȱ duringȱ Jesus’ȱ journeyȱ toȱ theȱ cross:ȱ Veronica, ȱRichardȱW.ȱTaylor,ȱJesusȱinȱIndianȱPaintings,ȱConfessingȱtheȱFaith inȱIndiaȱ11ȱ(Madras:ȱTheȱChristianȱLiteratureȱSociety,ȱ1975),ȱp.ȱ58. 1

NANDALALȱBOSE

161

MaryȱMagdaleneȱorȱmoreȱanonymousȱ“daughtersȱofȱZion.”ȱBut whatȱ madeȱ thisȱ paintingȱ byȱ Boseȱ soȱ remarkableȱ wasȱ Jesus’ clothes:ȱheȱisȱwearingȱaȱlungi,ȱtheȱcustomaryȱloinclothȱwornȱby theȱ poorestȱ Indians,ȱ theȱ cooliesȱ orȱ agriculturalȱ labourers.ȱ Thus Christȱ becomesȱ theȱ oneȱ who,ȱ inȱ God’sȱ name,ȱ takesȱ theȱ partȱ of thoseȱwhoȱdoȱnotȱcountȱinȱsociety.ȱInȱtheȱsufferingȱthatȱheȱtakes uponȱhimself,ȱheȱhimselfȱbecomesȱoneȱofȱtheȱpoor.ȱGod’sȱmercy forȱ preciselyȱ theȱ leastȱ inȱ societyȱ becomesȱ visibleȱ inȱ thisȱ sufferȬ ing.ȱ Andȱ thatȱ wasȱ whatȱ wasȱ importantȱ aboutȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ for MahatmaȱGandhi.

CHAPTERȱ8

TheȱEternalȱChrist inȱtheȱAshramȱMovement Indianȱ Christologyȱ hasȱ receivedȱ aȱ veryȱ specialȱ impulseȱ viaȱ the soȬcalledȱ ashramȱ movement.ȱ Fromȱ theȱ beginningȱ ofȱ theȱ 1920s on,ȱaȱfewȱsmallȱcommunitiesȱofȱProtestantȱChristiansȱdeveloped thatȱ wantedȱ toȱ experienceȱ theȱ Christianȱ faithȱ inȱ aȱ trulyȱ Indian way.ȱ Theyȱ calledȱ theirȱ centresȱ ashrams,ȱ followingȱ theȱ example ofȱ Mahatmaȱ Gandhiȱ whoȱ wasȱ attractingȱ aȱ greatȱ dealȱ ofȱ attenȬ tionȱatȱthatȱtimeȱwithȱhisȱidealisticȱashramȱcommunity.ȱAfterȱInȬ diaȱ becameȱ independent,ȱ variousȱ Romanȱ Catholicȱ ashrams wereȱ alsoȱ establishedȱ byȱ monasticȱ ordersȱ orȱ byȱ congregations. Theȱ ashramȱ movementȱ wasȱ atȱ itsȱ peakȱ inȱ theȱ 1970sȱ andȱ 1980s, withȱaboutȱoneȱhundredȱashramsȱspreadȱthroughoutȱtheȱentire Indianȱsubcontinent. Ashrams,ȱAncientȱandȱModern Theȱ wordȱashramaȱmeansȱ“placeȱofȱreligiousȱexertion”ȱandȱ isȱa termȱthatȱtakesȱusȱfarȱbackȱintoȱtheȱhistoryȱofȱHinduism.ȱThere wereȱ manyȱ sagesȱ inȱ theȱ oldȱ Vedicȱ timesȱ whoȱ wouldȱ retreat deepȱintoȱtheȱforestȱorȱhighȱintoȱtheȱmountains.ȱUsually,ȱsuchȱa seerȱ(rishi)ȱwouldȱattractȱaȱcircleȱofȱstudentsȱwhoȱcouldȱlearnȱthe wisdomȱ ofȱ theirȱ teacherȱ throughȱ livingȱ together.ȱ Theȱ ashram wasȱ thereforeȱ aȱ placeȱ ofȱ ascetismȱ andȱ teaching.ȱ Whoeverȱ went thereȱtoȱlive,ȱeitherȱforȱaȱshortȱstayȱorȱaȱlongȱone,ȱbrokeȱwithȱthe wayȱofȱlifeȱinȱordinaryȱsociety.ȱThisȱwasȱaccentuatedȱbyȱtheȱloȬ cationȱ ofȱ theȱ ashrams,ȱ whichȱ wereȱ farȱ awayȱ fromȱ villagesȱ and cities.ȱButȱitȱwasȱnotȱonlyȱtheȱdistanceȱfromȱtheȱinhabitedȱworld thatȱdeterminedȱtheȱlocationȱofȱtheȱashram.ȱSuchȱaȱcommunity was,ȱasȱaȱrule,ȱestablishedȱonȱaȱsacredȱspot.ȱThereȱwereȱusually mythsȱaboutȱtheȱgodsȱlinkedȱtoȱaȱmountain,ȱbutȱtheȱbanksȱofȱa holyȱriverȱwasȱalsoȱaȱplaceȱwithȱextraȱreligiousȱsignificance.ȱIn anyȱ case,ȱ theȱ siteȱ whereȱ anȱ ashramȱ wasȱ establishedȱ wasȱ holy becauseȱofȱtheȱpresenceȱofȱtheȱseerȱandȱhisȱsadhana,ȱi.e.ȱtheȱmedȬ itationȱandȱascetismȱheȱpractised. Anȱashramȱisȱnotȱaȱmonastery,ȱalthoughȱtheyȱdoȱhaveȱsimiȬ larȱcharacteristics.ȱAȱmonasteryȱ(matha)ȱisȱalsoȱobviouslyȱaȱplace 163

JESUSȱASȱGURU

164

toȱ meditateȱ andȱ toȱ renounceȱ theȱ world.ȱ Nonetheless,ȱ unlikeȱ a monastery,ȱanȱashramȱisȱnotȱpartȱofȱaȱreligiousȱorganization;ȱraȬ ther,ȱitȱisȱcompletelyȱdisconnectedȱfromȱlargerȱassociations.ȱItȱis theȱ personȱ ofȱ theȱ teacherȱ whoȱ determinesȱ theȱ existenceȱ ofȱ the ashram.ȱWhenȱtheȱteacherȱleavesȱorȱdies,ȱtheȱashramȱessentially ceasesȱtoȱexist.ȱInȱcontrast,ȱaȱmonastery—noȱmatterȱhowȱimporȬ tantȱaȱreligiousȱteacherȱmayȱbe—displaysȱaȱcontinuityȱthatȱisȱinȬ dependentȱofȱindividuals:ȱwhenȱtheȱguruȱdies,ȱheȱisȱsucceeded byȱoneȱofȱhisȱstudents. Theȱ ancientȱ conceptȱ ofȱ theȱ ashramȱ wasȱ givenȱ newȱ lifeȱ at theȱbeginningȱofȱtheȱtwentiethȱcentury.ȱTheȱtwoȱgreatȱreformers ofȱHinduismȱinȱthatȱperiodȱbothȱusedȱthisȱancientȱinstitutionȱas anȱexampleȱforȱaȱnewȱwayȱofȱlivingȱtogetherȱonȱaȱreligiousȬethȬ icalȱ basis.ȱ Mahatmaȱ Gandhiȱ establishedȱ hisȱ firstȱ ashramȱ in 1917,1ȱ gatheringȱ aȱ numberȱ ofȱ studentsȱ inȱ aȱ communityȱ called SatyagrahaȱAshram.ȱForȱmanyȱyearsȱitȱwasȱlocatedȱcloseȱtoȱthe villageȱ ofȱ Sabarmati,ȱ notȱ farȱ fromȱ theȱ cityȱ ofȱ Ahmedabad.ȱ The principlesȱofȱGandhianȱlifeȱwereȱpractisedȱinȱthisȱashram:ȱgreat emphasisȱ wasȱ placedȱ onȱ aȱ simpleȱ andȱ soberȱ lifeȱ inȱ harmony withȱ nature.ȱ Classicȱ villageȱ industriousness,ȱ suchȱ asȱ spinning cottonȱ byȱ hand,ȱ wasȱ stronglyȱ encouraged.ȱ Still,ȱ variousȱ activiȬ tiesȱaimedȱtowardȱanȱindependentȱIndiaȱwereȱbegunȱwithinȱthe ashramȱ asȱ well.ȱ Thereȱ wasȱ aȱ continualȱ streamȱ ofȱ visitorsȱ who wereȱ inspiredȱ byȱ Gandhiȱ toȱ opposeȱ Europeanȱ cultureȱ andȱ the colonialȱgovernment.ȱThisȱwasȱcertainlyȱnotȱtheȱtraditionalȱideal ofȱshunningȱtheȱworld—theȱashramȱbecameȱaȱplaceȱfromȱwhich oneȱ couldȱ changeȱ theȱ world.ȱ Thus,ȱ theȱ establishmentȱ ofȱ the communityȱ closeȱ toȱ aȱ largeȱ cityȱ wasȱ notȱ withoutȱ reason,ȱ and thisȱwasȱanȱimportantȱdeviationȱfromȱtheȱclassicȱashramȱideal. Rabindranathȱ Tagoreȱ (1861Ȭ1941)ȱ alsoȱ harkedȱ backȱ toȱ the oldȱinstitutionȱofȱtheȱashramȱwhenȱlookingȱforȱaȱmodelȱforȱeduȬ cationȱ thatȱ wasȱ inȱ keepingȱ withȱ theȱ Indianȱ culture.ȱ Hisȱ ideal wasȱ aȱ “forestȱ university,”ȱ whereȱ teachersȱ andȱ studentsȱ would liveȱ togetherȱ inȱ seclusion,ȱ awayȱ fromȱ modernȱ society.ȱ InstrucȬ tionȱ wouldȱ notȱ onlyȱ beȱ aȱ matterȱ ofȱ theȱ intellectualȱ transferȱ of knowledgeȱbutȱinȱparticularȱaȱsharedȱexperienceȱofȱlife.ȱTagore setȱupȱhisȱprojectȱinȱShantiȱNiketanȱ(WestȱBengal),ȱwhereȱitȱȱbeȬ cameȱaȱcommunityȱwhoseȱgoalȱwasȱtheȱmeetingȱofȱEasternȱand ȱForȱMahatmaȱGandhi,ȱseeȱchapterȱ7ȱofȱthisȱbook.

1

THEȱETERNALȱCHRISTȱINȱTHEȱASHRAMȱMOVEMENT

165

Westernȱknowledge.ȱInȱanȱinformalȱatmosphere,ȱmostȱoftenȱout inȱtheȱopen,ȱtheȱstudentȱlearnedȱfromȱtheȱteachersȱandȱfromȱone another. InȱthisȱoldȱashramȱconceptȱChristianȱmissionariesȱsawȱnew possibilitiesȱforȱtheȱinculturationȱofȱtheȱChristianȱfaithȱinȱIndia. Theyȱ deliberatelyȱ joinedȱ bothȱ theȱ classicȱ institutionȱ ofȱ theȱ ashȬ ramȱ asȱ wellȱ asȱ theȱ modernȱ formȱ thatȱ Gandhiȱ andȱ Tagoreȱ had developed.ȱS.ȱJesudasonȱ establishedȱ theȱ firstȱ Christianȱ ashram, aȱ communityȱ basedȱ onȱ theȱ oldȱ andȱ newȱ models,ȱ andȱ wroteȱ a bookȱ aboutȱ itȱ calledȱ Ashrams,ȱ Ancientȱ andȱ Modern.2ȱ Jesudason appropriatedȱaȱnumberȱofȱcharacteristicsȱofȱtheȱancientȱashram, ofȱwhichȱtheȱpresenceȱofȱtheȱseerȱasȱaȱcentralȱfigureȱwasȱtheȱpriȬ maryȱ characteristic.ȱ Otherȱ characteristicsȱ wereȱ thatȱ theȱ goalȱ of theȱ ashramȱ shouldȱ alwaysȱ beȱ toȱ attainȱ anȱ idealȱ (sadhana);ȱ the communityȱ shouldȱbeȱestablishedȱ inȱ naturalȱsurroundingsȱand beȱ characterizedȱ byȱ aȱ lifestyleȱ ofȱ simplicity;ȱ theȱ inhabitantsȱ of theȱashramȱshouldȱfollowȱtheȱexampleȱofȱtheȱguruȱinȱlivingȱceliȬ bateȱlives.ȱInȱcontrastȱtoȱclassicȱashrams,ȱhowever,ȱitȱwasȱimporȬ tantȱforȱaȱChristianȱashramȱnotȱtoȱbeȱtooȱfarȱremovedȱfromȱsoȬ ciety.ȱ Jesudasonȱ deliberatelyȱ followedȱ Gandhi’sȱ wayȱ ofȱ thinkȬ ing.ȱTheȱashramȱmustȱbeȱlinkedȱwithȱtheȱlivesȱofȱpeopleȱoutside itsȱ ownȱ circleȱ andȱ beȱ ableȱ toȱ makeȱ aȱ contributionȱ toȱ society. Thusȱtheȱoldȱinstituteȱofȱtheȱashramȱacquiredȱaȱnewȱfunctionȱof whichȱtheȱChristianȱchurchȱcouldȱtakeȱadvantage. AȱProtestantȱBeginning Inȱ 1921ȱ theȱ Christukulaȱ Ashramȱ wasȱ establishedȱ inȱ Tirupattur (Northȱ Arcotȱ Dt.,ȱ Tamilnadu).3ȱ Itsȱ nameȱ meansȱ “Familyȱ of Christ,”ȱ therebyȱ stressingȱ twoȱ aspectsȱ ofȱ theȱ ashram.ȱ First,ȱ it wasȱaȱcommunityȱofȱmenȱwhoȱwantedȱtoȱliveȱtogetherȱasȱaȱfamȬ ily.ȱ Otherȱ relationshipsȱ couldȱ notȱ beȱ accepted—theyȱ wereȱ celiȬ bate.ȱTheȱcommunityȱwasȱconcernedȱwithȱcompleteȱdevotionȱto Christ;ȱallȱofȱlifeȱwasȱinȱserviceȱtoȱChrist.ȱTheȱnameȱChristukula ȱSavarirayanȱJesudason,ȱAshrams,ȱAncientȱandȱModern:ȱTheirȱAims andȱIdealsȱ(Vellore:ȱSriȱRamachandraȱPress,ȱ1937). 2

ȱForȱitsȱhistory,ȱseeȱinȱparticularȱJesudason’sȱautobiography,ȱReminȬ iscencesȱofȱaȱPilgrimȱofȱLife:ȱAnȱAutobiography,ȱrev.ȱ2ndȱed.ȱ(Vellore:ȱSriȱRaȬ machandraȱPress,ȱ1959),ȱandȱErnestȱForresterȬPaton’sȱarticle,ȱ“DieȱAshȬ rams,”ȱQuatemberȱ17ȱ(1953):ȱ170Ȭ74. 3

166

JESUSȱASȱGURU

reflectedȱtheȱoldȱeducativeȱidealȱofȱtheȱgurukula:ȱtheȱcommunal lifeȱ ofȱ aȱ guruȱ withȱ hisȱ followers.ȱ Thus,ȱ inȱ thisȱ ashramȱ Christ wasȱseenȱasȱaȱguru:ȱeverythingȱwasȱsubjectȱtoȱhisȱauthority.ȱAs aȱrule,ȱChristianȱashramsȱinitiallyȱgaveȱcontentȱtoȱtheȱconceptȱof theȱ guruȱ inȱ thisȱ way.ȱ Butȱ itȱ usuallyȱ becameȱ quicklyȱ apparent thatȱtheȱcentralȱauthoritarianȱfigureȱinȱtheȱashramȱwasȱactually aȱhumanȱguru.ȱAndȱthatȱisȱwhatȱhappenedȱinȱthisȱfirstȱChristian ashramȱasȱwell. Theȱ foundersȱ wereȱ twoȱ doctorsȱ whoȱ hadȱ metȱ inȱ England. SavarirayanȱJesudasonȱ(1882Ȭ1962)ȱcameȱfromȱaȱfamilyȱthatȱhad beenȱChristianȱforȱaȱnumberȱofȱcenturies.ȱInȱ1690ȱaȱJesuitȱpriest whoȱ followedȱ theȱ exampleȱ ofȱ Robertoȱ deȱ Nobiliȱ andȱ woreȱ the clothesȱofȱaȱHinduȱsannyasiȱspokeȱcomfortinglyȱtoȱoneȱofȱhisȱanȬ cestorsȱatȱtheȱcremationȱofȱhisȱchild.ȱItȱwasȱbecauseȱofȱhisȱconȬ tactȱwithȱthisȱholyȱmanȱwhoȱpreachedȱaȱnewȱreligionȱthatȱheȱbeȬ cameȱconvertedȱtoȱChristianity.ȱJesudasonȱlikedȱtoȱtellȱaboutȱhis familyȱhistory.ȱAsȱaȱchildȱheȱhimselfȱhadȱdreamedȱofȱbecoming anȱ itinerantȱ preacherȱ inȱ Indianȱ fashion,ȱ dressedȱ inȱ theȱ ochre clothingȱofȱtheȱsannyasi,ȱbutȱinȱtheȱendȱheȱchoseȱtoȱstudyȱmedȬ icine.ȱWhenȱheȱwasȱinȱScotlandȱtoȱstudyȱforȱhisȱspecializationȱin surgery,ȱheȱbecameȱfriendsȱwithȱaȱmedicalȱstudent,ȱErnestȱForȬ resterȬPatonȱ (1891Ȭ1970).ȱ Togetherȱ theyȱ decidedȱ toȱ enterȱ misȬ sionȱworkȱandȱwereȱsentȱbyȱtheȱUnitedȱFreeȱChurchȱMissionȱof ScotlandȱtoȱIndiaȱinȱ1915. Theyȱworkedȱforȱaȱnumberȱofȱyearsȱinȱaȱmissionȱhospitalȱin Puneȱbutȱwereȱnotȱsatisfied:ȱtheȱhierarchyȱinȱtheȱmedicalȱworld andȱ theȱ Westernȱ atmosphereȱ wereȱ notȱ toȱ theirȱ liking.ȱ Slowly, theyȱ beganȱ toȱ formulateȱ aȱ planȱ toȱ developȱ aȱ formȱ ofȱ Christian presenceȱandȱexertionȱthatȱwouldȱbeȱmoreȱsuitedȱtoȱtheȱHindu culture.ȱSuchȱideasȱwereȱbeingȱdevelopedȱbyȱotherȱChristiansȱat thatȱtime.ȱTheȱfamousȱMarathiȱpoetȱN.V.ȱTilakȱ(1862Ȭ1919)ȱhad alreadyȱattemptedȱtoȱestablishȱanȱexperimentalȱcommunityȱonȱa Christianȱ basisȱ andȱ enthusiasticallyȱ toldȱ bothȱ missionȱ doctors aboutȱ it.ȱ Theȱ wanderingȱ Christianȱ mysticȱ Sadhuȱ Sundarȱ Singh (1889Ȭ1929)ȱstimulatedȱthemȱinȱtheirȱplansȱasȱwell. SundarȱSinghȱwasȱoneȱofȱtheȱfirstȱtoȱseeȱtheȱsignificanceȱof aȱradicalȱinculturationȱofȱtheȱGospelȱinȱIndia.ȱHeȱwasȱtheȱfigureȬ headȱatȱtheȱbeginningȱofȱtheȱtwentiethȱcenturyȱofȱaȱnewȱIndian formȱ ofȱ Christianity.ȱ Afterȱ heȱ hadȱ beenȱ baptizedȱ inȱ 1905ȱ (acȬ cordingȱ toȱ tradition,ȱ onȱ hisȱ sixteenthȱ birthday),ȱ heȱ putȱ onȱ the

THEȱETERNALȱCHRISTȱINȱTHEȱASHRAMȱMOVEMENT

167

clothingȱofȱaȱsannyasiȱandȱtravelledȱaroundȱpreachingȱtheȱChrisȬ tianȱfaith.ȱHisȱwanderingsȱofȱmanyȱyearsȱbroughtȱhimȱtoȱmany differentȱpartsȱofȱtheȱIndianȱsubcontinent,ȱincludingȱfarȱintoȱthe Himalayas.ȱ Theȱ Sadhuȱ neverȱ foundedȱ anȱ ashramȱ himselfȱ but hisȱ wayȱ ofȱ lifeȱ andȱ hisȱ preachingȱ certainlyȱ hadȱ greatȱ influence onȱtheȱashramȱmovement.ȱOneȱofȱhisȱmostȱwellȬknownȱsayings is:ȱ“IndiansȱdesperatelyȱneedȱtheȱWaterȱofȱLife,ȱbutȱtheyȱdoȱnot wantȱitȱinȱEuropeanȱvessels.”4ȱThatȱisȱexactlyȱwhatȱtheȱfounders ofȱChristianȱashramsȱtookȱadvantageȱof. Whenȱ Jesudasonȱ andȱ hisȱ friendȱ returnedȱ toȱ Indiaȱ inȱ 1920 afterȱaȱfurlough,ȱȱtheyȱdecidedȱtoȱcarryȱoutȱtheirȱplan.ȱForresterȬ Patonȱ cameȱ fromȱ aȱ wealthyȱ industrialȱ familyȱ ofȱ substanceȱ and hadȱtheȱnecessaryȱmoneyȱatȱhisȱdisposal.ȱNonetheless,ȱitȱwasȱJeȬ sudasonȱ who,ȱ asȱ theȱ “elderȱ brother,”ȱ wasȱ givenȱ chargeȱ ofȱ the newȱashram.ȱBritishȱcirclesȱwereȱcertainlyȱshockedȱthatȱaȱEuroȬ peanȱ doctorȱ wasȱ toȱ beȱ subordinateȱ toȱ anȱ Indian.ȱ Butȱ bothȱ had consciouslyȱchosenȱforȱthisȱdivisionȱofȱroles. Inȱ 1921ȱ Jesudasonȱ andȱ ForresterȬPatonȱ foundedȱ their ChristukulaȱAshram.ȱWithȱaȱnumberȱofȱcoȬworkers,ȱtheyȱbegan withȱaȱhospitalȱinȱaȱrentedȱbuilding.ȱTheȱfirstȱgoalȱofȱtheȱashram wasȱ formulatedȱ asȱ such:ȱ “Aȱ lifeȱ ofȱ prayerȱ andȱ selflessȱ service wasȱ moreȱ importantȱ thanȱ mereȱ preachingȱ asȱ aȱ witnessȱ toȱ the powerȱofȱtheȱ redeemingȱ loveȱ ofȱChristȱ andȱasȱ aȱvitalȱinfluence inȱ attractingȱ othersȱ toȱ Him.”5ȱ Theȱ nextȱ yearȱ theyȱ wereȱ ableȱ to useȱtheȱnewȱbuildingsȱonȱtheirȱownȱproperty.ȱTheȱmainȱactivity continuedȱ toȱ beȱ theȱ workȱ inȱ theȱ hospital,ȱ butȱ inȱ timeȱ aȱ school andȱ aȱ farmȱ wereȱ alsoȱ established.ȱ Theȱ communityȱ wasȱ never large.ȱ Thereȱ wereȱ usuallyȱ betweenȱ twentyȱ andȱ thirtyȱ volunȬ teers,ȱbutȱonlyȱaȱfewȱofȱthemȱfeltȱcalledȱtoȱmakeȱaȱlifetimeȱcomȬ mitmentȱtoȱtheȱashram.

4 ȱSadhuȱSundarȱSingh,ȱWisdomȱofȱtheȱSadhu,ȱed.ȱKimȱComerȱ(FarmȬ ington:ȱPloughȱPublishingȱHouse,ȱ2000),ȱp.ȱ174.ȱOnȱSadhuȱSinghȱseeȱalso: A.J.ȱAppasamy,ȱSundarȱSingh:ȱAȱBiographyȱ(Madras:ȱTheȱChristianȱLiteraȬ tureȱ Society,ȱ 1966),ȱ Michaelȱ Biehl,ȱ Derȱ Fallȱ Sundarȱ Singh:ȱ Theologie zwischenȱdenȱKulturen,ȱStudienȱzurȱinterkulturellenȱGeschichteȱdesȱChrisȬ tentumsȱ66ȱ(Frankfurt:ȱPeterȱLang,ȱ1990).

ȱJesudason,ȱReminiscencesȱofȱaȱPilgrimȱofȱLife,ȱp.ȱ117.

5

JESUSȱASȱGURU

168

Fromȱ theȱ veryȱ beginning,ȱ theȱ reliȬ giousȱ praxisȱ ofȱ theȱ ashramȱ was basedȱ onȱ Indianȱ patterns.ȱ FollowȬ ingȱ Hinduism,ȱ prayerȱ services wereȱ scheduledȱ atȱ sunriseȱ and sunset.ȱ Forȱ Hindus,ȱ theseȱ areȱ the sacredȱ transitionȱ momentsȱ beȬ tweenȱlightȱandȱdark,ȱtheȱsandhya. Aȱhymnalȱandȱaȱprayerȱbookȱwere producedȱ inȱ theȱ Tamilȱ language forȱ theseȱ celebrations.ȱ Personal meditationȱ andȱ Bibleȱ reading formedȱ anȱ importantȱ partȱ ofȱ the hours.ȱ Theȱ ashramȱ hadȱ madeȱ an interestingȱ contributionȱ toȱ ChrisȬ tianȱ architectureȱ inȱ Indiaȱ already inȱ1932ȱbyȱconstructingȱaȱsanctuaryȱthatȱwasȱbuiltȱentirelyȱinȱthe southernȱIndianȱHinduȱstyle.ȱThisȱisȱcalledȱjebalayam,ȱtheȱusual Tamilȱwordȱforȱaȱprayerȱhouseȱofȱwhateverȱpersuasion.ȱTheȱenȬ tranceȱ(gopuram)ȱinȱparticularȱisȱaȱbeautifulȱexampleȱofȱadaptaȬ tionȱtoȱtheȱreligiousȱarchitectureȱofȱtheȱarea.6 ShortlyȱafterȱtheȱestablishmentȱofȱtheȱChristukulaȱAshram, aȱ Christianȱ ashramȱ thatȱ wouldȱ eventuallyȱ becomeȱ prominent wasȱestablishedȱinȱtheȱwestȱofȱIndia:ȱtheȱChristaȱSevaȱSanghaȱor “Communityȱ ofȱ theȱ Servantsȱ ofȱ Christ.”7ȱ Thisȱ wasȱ alsoȱ aȱ comȬ munityȱofȱIndianȱandȱEuropeanȱChristians,ȱbutȱtheȱaccentȱhere layȱ moreȱ onȱ meditationȱ andȱ studyȱ thanȱ onȱ socialȱ work.ȱ The founderȱ wasȱ Jackȱ Copleyȱ Winslowȱ (1882Ȭ1974),ȱ whoȱ had workedȱ inȱ missionsȱ asȱ anȱ Anglicanȱ priest,ȱ sentȱ byȱ theȱ Society forȱtheȱPropagationȱofȱtheȱGospel.ȱForȱaȱnumberȱofȱyearsȱheȱwas ȱTheȱsketchȱhereȱisȱbyȱK.G.ȱMathew,ȱtakenȱfrom:ȱK.G.ȱMathewȱand CecilȱHargreaves,ȱ25ȱIndianȱChurchesȱ(Calcutta:ȱBishopȱCollege,ȱ1975),ȱp. 42. 6

ȱForȱitsȱhistoryȱseeȱBarbaraȱNoreen,ȱCrossroadsȱofȱTheȱSpiritȱ(Delhi: ISPCK,ȱ1994);ȱȱtheȱmemoirsȱofȱtheȱfounder,ȱJackȱC.ȱWinslow,ȱTheȱEyelids ofȱ theȱ Dawn:ȱ Memories,ȱ Reflectionsȱ andȱ Hopesȱ (London:ȱ Hodderȱ and Stoughton,ȱ1954),ȱandȱaȱfewȱarticlesȱinȱaȱpublicationȱbyȱtheȱashram:ȱChrist PremȱSevaȱAshram:ȱIndianȱSpiritualityȱinȱActionȱ(Mumbai:ȱAsianȱTrading Corporation,ȱ1973). 7

THEȱETERNALȱCHRISTȱINȱTHEȱASHRAMȱMOVEMENT

169

theȱ headmasterȱ ofȱ aȱ highȱ schoolȱ whereȱ theȱ studentsȱ were mainlyȱ fromȱ theȱ untouchableȱ castes.ȱ Duringȱ thisȱ time,ȱ heȱ and threeȱfriendsȱdevelopedȱanȱIndianȱliturgyȱforȱtheȱLord’sȱSupper basedȱlargelyȱonȱtheȱliturgyȱofȱtheȱoldȱSyrianȱOrthodoxȱchurch inȱ Kerala.ȱ Theirȱ workȱ hereȱ evenȱ obtainedȱ officialȱ recognition fromȱtheȱAnglicanȱChurchȱandȱwouldȱproveȱtoȱbeȱsignificantȱfor laterȱ liturgicalȱ developmentȱ inȱ India.ȱ Itȱ isȱ characteristicȱ of Winslow’sȱeffortsȱinȱtheȱinculturationȱofȱtheȱGospelȱinȱIndia. Heȱ didȱ someȱ thinkingȱ whileȱ onȱ furloughȱ inȱ England.ȱ He regrettedȱtheȱfactȱthatȱhisȱwayȱofȱlifeȱseparatedȱhimȱcompletely fromȱIndianȱChristians.ȱAndȱheȱincreasinglyȱsawȱtheȱlimitations ofȱtheȱWesternȱpresentationȱofȱfaithȱbyȱtheȱmissionaryȱagencies. Readingȱ aboutȱ theȱ oldȱ ashramsȱ ofȱ theȱ Vedicȱ period,ȱ heȱ underȬ wentȱ aȱ mysticȱ experience—heȱ becameȱ convincedȱ thatȱ thisȱ was whatȱ theȱ churchȱ inȱ Indiaȱ neededȱ andȱ heȱ sawȱ thisȱ asȱ hisȱ task. BackȱinȱIndia,ȱheȱgatheredȱsomeȱIndianȱChristiansȱtogetherȱand startedȱaȱsmallȱcommunity.ȱInȱadditionȱtoȱWinslow,ȱthereȱwere sevenȱaltogether:ȱthreeȱteenageȱboysȱwhomȱWinslowȱviewedȱas hisȱstudents,ȱandȱtwoȱcouples.ȱWinslow’sȱviewsȱofȱrelationships wereȱ differentȱ fromȱ Jesudason’s.ȱ Althoughȱ heȱ himselfȱ wasȱ not married,ȱheȱdidȱnotȱobjectȱtoȱmarriedȱcouplesȱinȱhisȱashram.ȱFor him,ȱitȱwasȱaȱmatterȱnotȱofȱlivingȱinȱcelibacyȱbutȱratherȱofȱliving inȱpovertyȱandȱdevotion.ȱHeȱexpresslyȱdidȱnotȱwantȱtoȱfoundȱa monasteryȱandȱhadȱnoȱinterestȱinȱrequestingȱtheȱmembersȱofȱthe communityȱtoȱtakeȱvows. Althoughȱ theseȱ ashramsȱ stressȱ differentȱ things,ȱ theyȱ were bothȱinspiredȱinitiallyȱbyȱtheȱsameȱpeople.ȱWinslowȱalsoȱrefers explicitlyȱtoȱGandhiȱandȱTagore:ȱtheȱinfluenceȱofȱtheȱGandhian movementȱ inȱ theȱ foundingȱ ofȱ theȱ oldestȱ Christianȱ ashrams mustȱ notȱ beȱ underestimated.8ȱ Forȱ aȱ numberȱ ofȱ decadesȱ Jack WinslowȱwasȱveryȱgoodȱfriendsȱwithȱC.F.ȱAndrewsȱ(1871Ȭ1940), theȱfaithfulȱChristianȱcompanionȱofȱtheȱMahatma,ȱwhoȱwasȱalso inȱ contactȱ withȱ Jesudason.ȱ Winslowȱ regularlyȱ referredȱ toȱ AnȬ drewsȱ asȱ “myȱ guru.”ȱ Heȱ alsoȱ knewȱ ForresterȬPatonȱ well,ȱ and

ȱ Seeȱ alsoȱ V.K.ȱ Bawa,ȱ “Mahatmaȱ Gandhi,ȱ C.F.ȱ Andrews,ȱ Sundar SinghȱandȱtheȱOriginȱofȱChristianȱAshramsȱinȱIndia,ȱcircaȱ1900ȱtoȱ1935,” in:ȱR.E.ȱHedlund,ȱChristianityȱisȱIndian:ȱ TheȱEmergenceȱofȱanȱIndigenous Communityȱ(Delhi:ȱISPCK,ȱ2000),ȱpp.ȱ127Ȭ38. 8

JESUSȱASȱGURU

170

theyȱ exchangedȱ plansȱ forȱ theirȱ ashrams.ȱ Otherȱ commonȱ acȬ quaintancesȱwereȱtheȱpoetȱN.V.ȱTilakȱandȱSadhuȱSundarȱSingh. Afterȱaȱnumberȱofȱyears,ȱtheȱChristaȱSevaȱSanghaȱacquired permanentȱaccommodationsȱinȱtheȱsuburbsȱofȱtheȱcityȱofȱPune. Hereȱ theȱ oldȱ ashramȱ idealȱ ofȱ aȱ remoteȱ placeȱ inȱ theȱ forestȱ had beenȱ abandonedȱ completely.ȱ Afterȱ all,ȱ theȱ presenceȱ ofȱ theȱ city madeȱcertainȱactivitiesȱpossible.ȱTheȱSanghaȱestablishedȱaȱhostel whereȱstudentsȱofȱallȱbackgroundsȱwereȱreceivedȱinȱaȱChristian atmosphere.ȱ Theȱ ashramȱ alsoȱ attractedȱ manyȱ visitorsȱ fromȱ the cityȱ whoȱ attendedȱ readingsȱ orȱ wantedȱ toȱ goȱ onȱ aȱ personalȱ reȬ treat.ȱTheȱcommunityȱwasȱmuchȱmoreȱdirectedȱatȱreflectionȱand studyȱthanȱinȱTirupattur.ȱTheȱreligiousȱpraxisȱdidȱhaveȱaȱsimilar pattern,ȱ withȱ celebrationsȱ atȱ sunriseȱ andȱ sunsetȱ inȱ theȱ Indian style.ȱ Butȱ Winslowȱ tendedȱ toȱ borrowȱ moreȱ directlyȱ fromȱ HinȬ duism.ȱTheȱcommunityȱwouldȱrespondȱtoȱtheȱworshipȱleader’s callȱtoȱliftȱupȱone’sȱheartȱtoȱChristȱ(followingȱtheȱclassicȱsursum corda)ȱ byȱ recitingȱ theȱ Gayatriȱ mantra.ȱ Winslowȱ translatedȱ this textȱ as:ȱ “Letȱ usȱ meditateȱ onȱ theȱ excellentȱ gloryȱ ofȱ theȱ Divine Illuminer!ȱMayȱHeȱinspireȱourȱunderstanding!”9ȱItȱshould,ȱhowȬ ever,ȱ beȱ takenȱ intoȱ considerationȱ thatȱ thisȱ veryȱ sacredȱ text, whichȱeveryȱbrahmanȱusedȱinȱhisȱmorningȱandȱeveningȱrituals, wasȱbeingȱusedȱtoȱinvokeȱtheȱVedicȱdivinityȱSavitar.ȱTheȱprayȬ ersȱ endedȱ withȱ aȱ textȱ thatȱ exudedȱ theȱ Vedanta,ȱ adoptedȱ from oneȱofȱtheȱUpanishads: Fromȱfalsehoodȱleadȱmeȱtoȱtruth; Fromȱdarknessȱleadȱmeȱtoȱlight; Fromȱdeathȱleadȱmeȱtoȱimmortality. (BrihadȬAranyakaȱUpanishadȱI.3.28),

followedȱ byȱ theȱ usual:ȱ “Shantih,ȱ shantih,ȱ shantih!”ȱ (“Peace, peace,ȱpeace”). Theȱ chiefȱ purposeȱ ofȱ theȱ ashramȱ wasȱ theȱ celebrationȱ of Christȱinȱprayerȱandȱmeditation,ȱinȱconnectionȱwithȱwhichȱWinȬ slowȱ consciouslyȱ usedȱ theȱ wordȱ bhakti.10ȱ Fromȱ theȱ veryȱ beginȬ ȱWinslow,ȱTheȱEyelidsȱofȱtheȱDawn,ȱp.ȱ81.ȱTheȱmantraȱcanȱbeȱfound inȱRigȬVedaȱIII.ȱ62.10.ȱAȱmoreȱliteralȱtranslationȱwouldȱread:ȱ“MayȱweȱreȬ ceiveȱ theȱ desirableȱ lightȱ ofȱ theȱ godȱ Savitar,ȱ whoȱ willȱ inspireȱ our thoughts.” 9

ȱWinslow,ȱTheȱEyelidsȱofȱtheȱDawn,ȱp.ȱ79.

10

THEȱETERNALȱCHRISTȱINȱTHEȱASHRAMȱMOVEMENT

171

ningȱofȱhisȱstayȱinȱIndiaȱheȱwasȱveryȱimpressedȱbyȱtheȱspiritualȬ ityȱofȱtheȱbhaktiȱmovement.ȱHeȱfeltȱtheȱversesȱbyȱTukaramȱwere “wonderfulȱ Hinduȱ worship”ȱ andȱ thatȱ theyȱ deservedȱ anȱ object ofȱworshipȱmoreȱworthyȱthanȱShivaȱorȱKrishna:ȱ“Thinkȱwhatȱit mayȱbecomeȱwhenȱitȱisȱlavishedȱuponȱChrist,ȱtheȱperfectȱandȱsaȬ tisfyingȱIncarnationȱofȱtheȱInvisibleȱGod.”11ȱItȱisȱclearȱthatȱWinȬ slow’sȱ startingȱ pointȱ wasȱ theȱ fulfillmentȱ theologyȱ thatȱ wasȱ so popularȱ amongȱ Protestantȱ theologiansȱ inȱ hisȱ time.ȱ J.N.ȱ FarquȬ harȱ(1861Ȭ1929)ȱhadȱlinkedȱfaithȱinȱChristȱwithȱreligionȱinȱIndia asȱ “theȱ crownȱ ofȱ Hinduism.”ȱ Winslow,ȱ stronglyȱ influencedȱ by Farquhar’sȱ work,ȱ alsoȱ regardedȱ Hinduismȱ asȱ aȱ religionȱ that couldȱtrulyȱcomeȱintoȱitsȱownȱonlyȱthroughȱdevotionȱtoȱChrist. Inȱ theȱ communityȱ inȱ Puneȱ Winslowȱ wasȱ theȱ undisputed leader.ȱ Althoughȱ itȱ hadȱ beenȱ stipulatedȱ whenȱ theȱ community wasȱestablishedȱthatȱthereȱwouldȱbeȱnoȱguruȱorȱheadȱofȱtheȱashȬ ramȱ otherȱ thanȱ Jesusȱ Christ,ȱ inȱ practiceȱ Winslowȱ quickly becameȱtheȱguru.ȱTheȱfactȱthatȱheȱwasȱtheȱonlyȱWesternerȱinȱthe ashramȱ andȱ wasȱ theȱ onlyȱ oneȱ whoȱ hadȱ beenȱ ordainedȱ asȱ a priestȱ wouldȱ certainlyȱ haveȱ strengthenedȱ hisȱ position.ȱ Heȱ also emphasizedȱhisȱpositionȱhimselfȱbyȱtakingȱonȱaȱreligiousȱname: Swamiȱ Devadatta,ȱ i.e.ȱ “theȱ Oneȱ Givenȱ byȱ God.”ȱ Butȱ theȱ relaȬ tionshipȱalteredȱwhenȱheȱincreasedȱtheȱmembershipȱofȱtheȱashȬ ramȱcommunityȱwithȱeightȱWesternersȱheȱhimselfȱhadȱrecruited inȱ England.ȱ Inȱ doingȱ so,ȱ heȱ broughtȱ inȱ aȱ Trojanȱ horseȱ intoȱ the community.ȱTheȱnewcomersȱhadȱbeenȱveryȱstronglyȱinfluenced byȱ theȱ Franciscanȱ movementȱ inȱ theȱ Anglicanȱ churchȱ andȱ had littleȱ affinityȱ withȱ Hinduismȱ andȱ Indianȱ society.ȱ Theyȱ wanted toȱ formȱ aȱ Franciscanȱ monasticȱ communityȱ veryȱ muchȱ inȱ line withȱ theȱ Europeanȱ model.ȱ Celibacyȱ playedȱ aȱ largeȱ roleȱ inȱ this; theyȱdidȱnotȱwantȱtoȱadmitȱtheȱmarriedȱmembersȱofȱtheȱashram intoȱitsȱinnerȱcircleȱbutȱtoȱorganizeȱthemȱintoȱaȱ“ThirdȱOrder.” Thisȱfundamentalȱdifferenceȱinȱinsightȱledȱtoȱaȱsplitȱinȱ1934,ȱby whichȱtheȱoriginalȱinhabitantsȱcontinuedȱtheirȱworkȱinȱanother placeȱandȱtheȱnewȱbrothersȱestablishedȱaȱstricterȱregimeȱunderȱa newȱname:ȱtheȱChristaȱPremaȱSevaȱSangha,ȱtheȱ“Communityȱof theȱ Serviceȱ ofȱ theȱ Loveȱ ofȱ Christ.”ȱ Disappointed,ȱ Winslowȱ reȬ ȱWinslow,ȱTheȱEyelidsȱofȱtheȱDawn,ȱp.ȱ54.ȱForȱTukaramȱseeȱJanȱPeter Schouten,ȱ Goddelijkeȱ vergezichten:ȱ Mystiekȱ uitȱ Indiaȱ voorȱ westerseȱ lezers (Baarn:ȱTenȱHave,ȱ1996),ȱpp.ȱ78Ȭ95. 11

JESUSȱASȱGURU

172

turnedȱ toȱ Englandȱ toȱ devoteȱ hisȱ energyȱ toȱ theȱ Oxfordȱ Group andȱtheȱMoralȱReȬArmamentȱthatȱhadȱemergedȱfromȱit. TheȱashramȱinȱPuneȱslowlyȱdeclinedȱafterȱtheȱwarȱandȱwas closedȱinȱ1963.ȱButȱinȱ1972ȱitȱgainedȱaȱnewȱleaseȱonȱlifeȱfromȱa completelyȱ differentȱ organization.ȱ Theȱ Anglicanȱ Sistersȱ ofȱ St. MaryȱtheȱVirginȱ(CSMV),ȱtogetherȱwithȱRomanȱCatholicȱnunsȱof theȱ Societyȱ ofȱ theȱ Sacredȱ Heartȱ (RSCJ),ȱ turnedȱ itȱ intoȱ anȱ ecuȬ menicalȱwomen’sȱcommunity.ȱTheȱfirstȱacharyaȱofȱtheȱnewȱinstiȬ tuteȱwasȱSisterȱVandanaȱ(GoolȱMaryȱDhalla).ȱSheȱwasȱoriginally aȱParsiȱbutȱconvertedȱtoȱRomanȱCatholicismȱasȱaȱyoungȱwoman. AfterȱaȱfewȱyearsȱinȱtheȱashramȱsheȱretreatedȱtoȱtheȱHimalayas andȱwasȱsucceededȱbyȱtheȱEnglishȱSisterȱSaraȱGrantȱ(1992Ȭ2000), alsoȱofȱtheȱ“SacredȱHeart.”ȱAsȱtheȱchoiceȱofȱtheȱacharyasȱalready demonstrates,ȱ theȱ newȱ ashramȱ wasȱ largelyȱ dominatedȱ byȱ RoȬ manȱ Catholics.ȱ Theȱ ideasȱ ofȱ Swamiȱ Abhishiktananda,ȱ largely orientedȱ toȱ theȱ monisticȱ traditionȱ inȱ Hinduism,ȱ gaveȱ direction toȱbothȱfemaleȱacharyas. Butȱ theȱ Protestantȱ traditionȱ wasȱ notȱ limitedȱ toȱ Tirupattur andȱtheȱoldȱashramȱinȱPune:ȱProtestants,ȱWesternȱmissionȱstaff orȱIndianȱbelieversȱsetȱ upȱashramsȱinȱnumerousȱ otherȱplaces.12 Socialȱ engagementȱ isȱ alwaysȱ aȱ characteristicȱ ofȱ theseȱ ashrams, usuallyȱ withȱ greatȱ affinityȱ forȱ theȱ Gandhianȱ movement.ȱ Two ChristiansȱinȱtheȱcircleȱofȱGandhi’sȱcoȬworkersȱbothȱsetȱupȱtheir ownȱcentres,ȱ oneȱ inȱ theȱ extremeȱnorthȱandȱtheȱ otherȱinȱtheȱ exȬ tremeȱ southȱ ofȱ India.ȱ E.ȱ Stanleyȱ Jonesȱ (1884Ȭ1973)ȱ established hisȱashramȱatȱtheȱfootȱofȱtheȱHimalayanȱmountainsȱinȱ1930ȱ(Sat Tal,ȱ Nainitalȱ Dt.).ȱ Andȱ Richardȱ Keithahnȱ (1898Ȭ1984)ȱ retreated toȱhisȱashram,ȱtheȱ“RockȱofȱVision,”ȱinȱtheȱhillsȱofȱTamilnadu,ȱin Kodaikanalȱ (Dindigulȱ Dt.)ȱ afterȱ aȱ lifetimeȱ ofȱ workingȱ forȱ the Gandhianȱmovement.

ȱAnȱoverviewȱisȱfoundȱinȱMichaelȱO’Toole,ȱChristianȱAshramȱComȬ munitiesȱinȱIndiaȱ(Pune/Indore:ȱIshvani/Satprakashan,ȱ1983).ȱSeeȱalsoȱHelȬ enȱRalston,ȱChristianȱAshrams:ȱAȱNewȱReligiousȱMovementȱinȱContemporary India,ȱStudiesȱinȱReligionȱandȱSocietyȱ20ȱ(Lewiston:ȱEdwinȱMellenȱPress, 1987). . 12

THEȱETERNALȱCHRISTȱINȱTHEȱASHRAMȱMOVEMENT

173

RomanȱCatholicȱContinuation Theȱ historyȱ ofȱ theȱ Romanȱ Catholicȱ ashramsȱ beginsȱ laterȱ and endsȱ differently.ȱ Afterȱ Indiaȱ becameȱ independent,ȱ severalȱ ashȬ ramsȱwereȱestablishedȱbyȱEuropeanȱCatholicsȱinȱIndia,ȱsomeȱof whichȱexertedȱaȱgreatȱdealȱofȱinfluenceȱonȱtheȱchurchȱandȱtheoȬ logyȱ inȱ Indiaȱ andȱ farȱ beyond.ȱ Theȱ foundersȱ wereȱ inȱ allȱ cases monasticȱ peopleȱ searchingȱ forȱ aȱ differentȱ fulfilmentȱ forȱ their monasticȱ calling.ȱ Indiaȱ attractedȱ themȱ becauseȱ ofȱ theȱ spiritual traditionȱofȱHinduism.ȱButȱmostȱwereȱfascinatedȱnotȱbyȱtheȱdeȬ votionalȱbhaktiȱbutȱbyȱtheȱwisdomȱofȱtheȱphilosophicalȱsystems. TheȱmonisticȱthoughtȱofȱtheȱVedantaȱinȱparticularȱwasȱanȱirreȬ sistibleȱ attractionȱ forȱ manyȱ Romanȱ Catholicȱ theologians.ȱ Their ashramsȱ had,ȱ ofȱ course,ȱ aȱ missionaryȱ purposeȱ asȱ well.ȱ Butȱ the accentȱonȱsocialȱinvolvement,ȱsoȱcharacteristicȱofȱtheȱProtestant ashrams,ȱwasȱlessȱstrong. TheȱfirstȱtoȱbeȱimmenselyȱfascinatedȱbyȱIndiaȱandȱtoȱwant toȱleadȱaȱmonasticȱlifeȱthere,ȱwasȱtheȱFrenchmanȱJulesȱMonchaȬ ninȱ (1895Ȭ1957).13ȱ Heȱ wasȱ aȱ priestȱ inȱ theȱ dioceseȱ ofȱ Lyonȱ and workedȱ forȱ severalȱ yearsȱ inȱ basicȱ pastoralȱ care.ȱ Butȱ heȱ became moreȱandȱmoreȱinterestedȱinȱEasternȱphilosophyȱandȱgradually theȱ desireȱ toȱ beȱ aȱ witnessȱ toȱ Christȱ inȱ suchȱ aȱ cultureȱ arose. Whenȱheȱwasȱstruckȱbyȱdoubleȱpneumonia,ȱheȱvowedȱthatȱifȱhe recoveredȱheȱwouldȱdevoteȱhisȱlifeȱtoȱtheȱpresenceȱofȱtheȱchurch inȱIndia.ȱHeȱdidȱindeedȱrecover,ȱandȱdidȱeverythingȱheȱcouldȱto fulfilȱhisȱvow.ȱHeȱjoinedȱaȱcongregationȱthatȱwasȱstronglyȱdediȬ catedȱtoȱmissionȱwork,ȱtheȱSociétéȱ desȱauxiliairesȱdesȱMissions (S.A.M.ȱ=ȱSocietyȱofȱAssistantsȱtoȱMissions).ȱHeȱstudiedȱSanskrit andȱIndia’sȱreligion,ȱandȱcontactedȱtheȱbishopȱofȱTiruchirapalli. Inȱ1939ȱheȱarrivedȱinȱIndiaȱandȱbeganȱtheȱtaskȱassignedȱtoȱhim: theȱpastoralȱcareȱofȱaȱfewȱlowȬclassȱcommunities. Julesȱ Monchaninȱ hadȱ notȱ comeȱ toȱ Indiaȱ forȱ pastoralȱ work andȱ hisȱ activitiesȱ didȱ notȱ exactlyȱ fulfilȱ hisȱ dream.ȱ Heȱ actually wantedȱtoȱliveȱasȱanȱIndianȱmonkȱandȱwitnessȱtoȱChristȱinȱthat ȱForȱMonchaninȱseeȱSwamiȱParamaȱArubiȱAnandamȱ(Fr.ȱJ.ȱMonchaȬ nin),ȱ1895Ȭ1957:ȱAȱMemorialȱ(Tiruchirapalli:ȱSaccidanandaȱAshram,ȱ1959). SeeȱalsoȱJ.ȱMonchaninȱandȱHenriȱleȱSaux,ȱErmitesȱduȱSaccidânanda:ȱUnȱesȬ saiȱ d’intégrationȱ chrétienneȱ deȱ laȱ traditionȱ monastiqueȱ deȱ l’Inde,ȱ (Égliseȱ viȬ vante),ȱ2ndȱed.ȱ(Tournai/Paris:ȱCasterman,ȱ1957). 13

JESUSȱASȱGURU

174

way.ȱHereȱheȱreliedȱonȱtheȱideasȱdevelopedȱbyȱBrahmabhandav Upadhyayȱ(1861Ȭ1907),ȱoneȱofȱtheȱfirstȱgreatȱtheologiansȱamong theȱ Romanȱ Catholicȱ Indians.ȱ Monchaninȱ didȱ callȱ hisȱ modest parsonageȱBhaktiȱAshram,ȱbutȱthisȱdidȱnotȱgiveȱhisȱlifeȱtheȱfulȬ filmentȱheȱdesired.ȱThisȱchangedȱwhenȱanȱenergeticȱcompatriot withȱ theȱ sameȱ plansȱ turnedȱ toȱ theȱ bishopȱ inȱ Tiruchirapalli.ȱ It wasȱ theȱ Benedictineȱ monkȱ Henriȱ leȱ Sauxȱ (1910Ȭ1973),ȱ who wantedȱ toȱ pursueȱ hisȱ monasticȱ lifeȱ inȱ aȱ newȱ wayȱ inȱ India.14ȱ In 1950ȱbothȱmenȱreceivedȱpermissionȱfromȱtheȱbishopȱtoȱmoveȱto theȱ banksȱ ofȱ theȱ holyȱ riverȱ Kavery.ȱ Thereȱ theyȱ establishedȱ a smallȱhermitageȱwhereȱtheyȱwantedȱtoȱexperienceȱtheȱBenedicȬ tineȱcontemplativeȱtraditionȱadaptedȱtoȱitsȱIndianȱcontext.15 Theȱ firstȱ adjustmentȱ wasȱ theȱ consistentȱ useȱ ofȱ Hinduȱ voȬ cabulary.ȱ Theȱ placeȱ whereȱ theȱ ashramȱ wasȱ locatedȱ wasȱ called Shantivanamȱ orȱ “Woodsȱ ofȱ Peace.”ȱ Theȱ hermitageȱ itselfȱ reȬ ceivedȱ aȱ doubleȱ nameȱ inȱ Sanskritȱ andȱ English:ȱ Saccidananda ashramaȱ andȱ Ashramȱ ofȱ theȱ Holyȱ Trinity.ȱ Theȱ combinationȱ of theseȱ twoȱ namesȱ isȱ significantȱ andȱ odd.ȱ Saccidanandaȱ means “being,ȱconsciousness,ȱbliss,”ȱandȱisȱtheȱusualȱreferenceȱforȱthe highestȱRealityȱinȱmonisticȱthinkingȱbasedȱonȱtheȱVedanta.ȱItȱis notȱ reallyȱ anȱ imageȱ ofȱ God,ȱ andȱ certainlyȱ notȱ aȱ personal conceptionȱ ofȱ God.ȱ Bothȱ monksȱ alsoȱ adoptedȱ Indianȱ names. Julesȱ Monchaninȱ becameȱ Swamiȱ Paramaȱ Arubiȱ Anandam —Tamilȱforȱ“theȱBlessingȱofȱtheȱHighestȱFormlessȱOne,”ȱwhich referredȱtoȱtheȱHolyȱSpirit.ȱDomȱleȱSauxȱtookȱtheȱnameȱSwami Abhishikteshvarananda—Sanskritȱ forȱ “theȱ Blessingȱ ofȱ the Anointedȱ Lord”ȱ (Christ),ȱ laterȱ shortenedȱ toȱ Abhishiktananda, “theȱBlessingȱofȱtheȱAnointed.” Bothȱhermitsȱadaptedȱtheirȱwayȱofȱlifeȱandȱreligiousȱpraxis toȱ theirȱ surroundingsȱ asȱ well.ȱ Theyȱ dressedȱ inȱ kavi,ȱ theȱ yellow ochreȱ garmentȱ ofȱ theȱ Hinduȱ sannyasiȱ andȱ woreȱ aȱ Benedictine crossȱaroundȱtheirȱneck,ȱwithȱtheȱholyȱHinduȱOMȱsignȱ(pranava) onȱit.ȱTheyȱwereȱconcernedȱwithȱ“aȱcompleteȱfidelityȱtoȱtheȱcusȬ ȱForȱLeȱSaux,ȱseeȱVandana,ȱSwamiȱAbhishikt¬nanda:ȱTheȱManȱand HisȱTeaching,ȱByȱSomeȱofȱhisȱFriendsȱandȱDisciplesȱ(Delhi:ȱI.S.P.C.K.,ȱ1986); G.ȱGispertȬSauch,ȱ“ChristȱandȱtheȱIndianȱMysticalȱTradition:ȱSwamiȱAbȬ hishiktananda,”ȱJeevadharaȱXXVIIIȱ(1998):ȱ193Ȭ206. 14

15 ȱTheyȱcoȬwroteȱaȱtheologicalȱjustificationȱofȱtheirȱproject,ȱErmites duȱSaccidânanda.

THEȱETERNALȱCHRISTȱINȱTHEȱASHRAMȱMOVEMENT

175

tomsȱandȱtraditionsȱofȱIndia”ȱandȱwithȱ“aȱChristianȱincorporaȬ tionȱasȱcompleteȱasȱpossibleȱofȱtheȱmonasticȱandȱspiritualȱtradiȬ tionȱ ofȱ India.”16ȱ Norȱ didȱ theirȱ monasteryȱ haveȱ anythingȱ ofȱ the characterȱ ofȱ aȱ Westernȱ monastery.ȱ Theyȱ wereȱ notȱ concerned withȱworshipȱinȱaȱbrotherlyȱcommunityȱandȱcertainlyȱnotȱwith activitiesȱforȱtheȱbenefitȱofȱsociety.ȱItȱwasȱaȱplaceȱofȱtotalȱrenunȬ ciationȱ ofȱ theȱ world,ȱ whereȱ wisdomȱ andȱ meditationȱ wereȱ cenȬ tral.ȱ Thus,ȱ theȱ desertȱ fathers—toȱ whichȱ bothȱ hermitsȱ regularly referred—who,ȱ inȱ theȱ firstȱ centuriesȱ afterȱ Christ,ȱ individually retreatedȱ toȱ theȱ desolatenessȱ ofȱ Syriaȱ andȱ Egyptȱ areȱ theirȱ priȬ maryȱexamplesȱfromȱtheȱhistoryȱofȱChristianity. Monchaninȱwasȱalwaysȱfascinatedȱbyȱtheȱspiritualityȱofȱthe earlyȱchurchȱfathers,ȱparticularlyȱbyȱtheȱschoolȱthatȱheȱpreferred toȱreferȱtoȱasȱtheȱ“apophatic”ȱschool.ȱThisȱschoolȱinvolvesȱmysȬ ticismȱ thatȱ hasȱ goneȱ beyondȱ namingȱ theȱ deityȱ andȱ approaches theȱmysteryȱofȱGodȱexclusivelyȱinȱnegativeȱterms.ȱThisȱnegative theology,ȱsuchȱasȱthatȱofȱpseudoȬDionysiusȱtheȱAreopagite,ȱwas anȱimportantȱsourceȱofȱinspirationȱforȱhim.ȱTheȱhighestȱformȱof mysticismȱisȱthatȱinȱwhichȱoneȱconcentratesȱonȱtheȱdeityȱinstead ofȱonȱGod.ȱByȱthisȱheȱmeansȱlookingȱatȱtheȱdivineȱBeingȱasȱitȱis inȱ itselfȱ andȱ notȱ asȱ itȱ revealsȱ itselfȱ toȱ us.ȱ Theȱ centralȱ term “deity”ȱorȱ“godhead”ȱisȱtakenȱfromȱPaulȱwhoȱspeaksȱinȱColosȬ siansȱ2:9ȱofȱtheȱ“fullnessȱofȱtheȱgodheadȱ(theotes)”ȱthatȱisȱpresent inȱChrist.ȱStartingȱwithȱthisȱtext,ȱMonchaninȱseesȱaȱlineȱofȱapoȬ phaticȱ mysticismȱ inȱ historyȱ thatȱ isȱ directedȱ towardȱ theȱ reality behindȱtheȱtheologicalȱconceptsȱofȱGod.17ȱInȱthisȱconnectionȱthe hymnȱwrittenȱbyȱGregoryȱofȱNazianzusȱ(c.ȱ330Ȭ390)ȱheldȱspecial meaningȱforȱhimȱandȱforȱLeȱSaux: OȱGod,ȱbeyondȱallȱthings, Howȱelseȱisȱitȱfittingȱtoȱsingȱyourȱpraises? Howȱshallȱaȱwordȱhonourȱyou? Youȱcannotȱbeȱexpressedȱthroughȱanyȱsingleȱword. Howȱshallȱtheȱunderstandingȱapproachȱyou? Youȱcannotȱbeȱunderstoodȱbyȱanyȱmind. Youȱaloneȱareȱinexpressible, ȱMonchaninȱandȱLeȱSaux,ȱErmitesȱduȱSaccidânanda,ȱp.ȱ55.

16

17 ȱJ.ȱMonchanin,ȱ“Inȱquoȱhabitatȱomnisȱplenitudoȱdivinitatis,”ȱ(outȬ lineȱforȱaȱlecture),ȱin:ȱSwamiȱParamaȱArubiȱAnandam,ȱpp.ȱ177Ȭ81.

JESUSȱASȱGURU

176

forȱyouȱhaveȱcreatedȱallȱthingsȱthatȱareȱsaid. Youȱaloneȱareȱunknowable, forȱyouȱhaveȱcreatedȱallȱthingsȱthatȱareȱthought.18

MonachaninȱandȱLeȱSauxȱhaveȱdifferentȱapproaches,ȱcertainlyȱif weȱ takeȱ intoȱ accountȱ theȱ greatȱ developmentȱ theȱ latterȱ underȬ went.ȱ Fromȱ theȱ beginning,ȱ Monchaninȱ wasȱ moreȱ reservedȱ toȬ wardȱ Hinduȱ mysticism.ȱ Whileȱ heȱ appreciatedȱ it,ȱ heȱ nevertheȬ lessȱ wantedȱ toȱ retainȱ theȱ centralȱ Christianȱ doctrines.ȱ Heȱ conȬ tinuedȱ toȱ thinkȱ strictlyȱ inȱ Trinitarianȱ termsȱ andȱ couldȱ notȱ imȬ agineȱ relativizingȱ theȱ importanceȱ ofȱ theȱ incarnationȱ ofȱ Christ alongȱtheȱlinesȱofȱmonisticȱthought.ȱHeȱsawȱtheȱworldȱofȱIndia asȱpraeparatioȱevangelica,ȱaȱkindȱofȱcontinuationȱofȱtheȱOldȱTestaȬ ment.19ȱ Andȱ heȱ explicitlyȱ wroteȱ that,ȱ byȱ usingȱ theȱ nameȱ SacȬ cidananda,ȱ theȱ Christianȱ monkȱ attachesȱ aȱ newȱ meaningȱ that wasȱ yetȱ unknownȱ andȱ couldȱ onlyȱ beȱ understoodȱ throughȱ the revelationȱ inȱChrist.20ȱLeȱSaux’sȱ startingȱ pointȱ wasȱinȱtheȱ same worldȱ ofȱ belief,ȱ butȱ heȱ eventuallyȱ becameȱ convincedȱ thatȱ the Vedantaȱrepresentedȱtheȱabsoluteȱtruth.ȱForȱhim,ȱofȱcourse,ȱthe questionȱbecameȱwhatȱChristianȱdoctrineȱcouldȱstillȱaddȱtoȱthis. Finally,ȱ throughȱ Johannineȱ theology,ȱ heȱ foundȱ theȱ specific meaningȱ inȱ theȱ mysticalȱ experienceȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ himself. Whoeverȱ appropriatesȱ theȱ mysteryȱ ofȱ theȱ wordsȱ “Iȱ am”ȱ from theȱgospelȱofȱJohnȱachievesȱtheȱsameȱinsightȱasȱthatȱofferedȱby theȱadvaitaȱdoctrine.21ȱButȱwhatȱwasȱespeciallyȱdeterminativeȱfor Henriȱ leȱ Sauxȱ wasȱ theȱ experienceȱ ofȱ mysticalȱ unityȱ thatȱ overȬ cameȱhimȱatȱoneȱtimeȱonȱtheȱholyȱmountainȱArunachalaȱinȱthe ashramȱ ofȱ theȱ extremelyȱ monisticȱ teacherȱ Ramanaȱ Maharshi ȱGregoryȱofȱNazianzus,ȱ“CarminumȱliberȱI,”ȱin:ȱJ.ȬP.ȱMigneȱ(ed.), Patrologiaeȱ cursusȱ completus,ȱ Seriesȱ Graecaȱ prior,ȱ Vol.ȱ XXXVIȱ (Paris: Garnier,ȱ1862),ȱ1:29;ȱcf.ȱMonchaninȱandȱLeȱSaux,ȱErmitesȱduȱSaccidânanda, p.ȱ86;ȱAbhishiktananda,ȱSaccidananda:ȱAȱChristianȱApproachȱtoȱAdvaiticȱExȬ perience,ȱrev.ȱed.ȱ(Delhi:ȱI.S.P.C.K.,ȱ1984),ȱp.ȱ1. 18

ȱMonchaninȱandȱLeȱSaux,ȱErmitesȱduȱSaccidânanda,ȱp.ȱ35.

19

ȱMonchaninȱandȱLeȱSaux,ȱErmitesȱduȱSaccidânanda,ȱp.ȱ176;ȱthisȱpasȬ sageȱwasȱwrittenȱbyȱMonchaninȱandȱnotȱbyȱLeȱSaux,ȱcf.ȱSwamiȱParama ArubiȱAnandam,ȱp.ȱ18. 20

21 ȱAbhishiktananda,ȱSaccidananda;ȱseeȱalsoȱGispertȬSauch,ȱ“Christ andȱtheȱIndianȱMysticalȱTradition.”

THEȱETERNALȱCHRISTȱINȱTHEȱASHRAMȱMOVEMENT

177

(1879Ȭ1950).ȱUltimately,ȱallȱtheologyȱhadȱtoȱadaptȱtoȱthatȱexperȬ ience. Monchaninȱdiedȱalreadyȱinȱ1957,ȱafterȱsevenȱyearsȱofȱliving inȱtheȱChristianȱashram.ȱHenriȱleȱSauxȱcontinuedȱtheȱprojectȱon hisȱ own.ȱ Shantivanamȱ graduallyȱ becameȱ aȱ conceptȱ notȱ only amongȱ Christiansȱ inȱ Indiaȱ butȱ alsoȱ amongȱ theȱ Hindus.ȱ Le Saux’sȱintensiveȱstudyȱofȱtheȱHinduȱtraditionȱledȱtoȱaȱnumberȱof publicationsȱthatȱattractedȱaȱgreatȱdealȱofȱattention.ȱManyȱpeoȬ ple,ȱ includingȱ foreigners,ȱ visitedȱ thisȱ specialȱ placeȱ ofȱ spiritualȬ ity.ȱ TheȱashramȱhadȱnotȱbeenȱsetȱupȱwithȱtheȱintentionȱofȱproȬ vidingȱ pastoralȱ careȱ orȱ aȱ placeȱ toȱ retreat,ȱ butȱ visitorsȱ wereȱ not turnedȱ away.ȱ Nevertheless,ȱ Leȱ Sauxȱ wasȱ increasinglyȱ attracted byȱtheȱtrueȱsannyasaȱidealȱandȱinȱtheȱendȱchoseȱtoȱleaveȱtheȱashȬ ramȱ andȱ retreatȱ fromȱ thisȱ worldȱ asȱ wellȱ toȱ theȱ placeȱ ofȱ choice forȱ Hinduȱ hermits:ȱ theȱ Himalayaȱ mountains.ȱ Inȱ 1968ȱ theȱ ashȬ ramȱ acquiredȱ aȱ worthyȱ successorȱ toȱ Leȱ Sauxȱ inȱ theȱ personȱ of BedeȱGriffiths. Bedeȱ Griffithsȱ (1906Ȭ1993)ȱ wasȱ anȱ Englishȱ Benedictine monkȱwhoȱhadȱfoundȱhisȱwayȱtoȱIndiaȱinȱaȱwayȱsimilarȱtoȱboth hermitsȱ ofȱ Shantivanam.22ȱ Heȱ cameȱ fromȱ anȱ Anglicanȱ family butȱwasȱnotȱveryȱreligiousȱasȱaȱyoungȱboy.ȱDuringȱhisȱstudiesȱat Oxford,ȱ underȱ theȱ influenceȱ ofȱ C.S.ȱ Lewisȱ (1898Ȭ1963),ȱ heȱ beȬ cameȱmoreȱandȱmoreȱengrossedȱbyȱfaith.ȱHeȱalsoȱdevelopedȱan interestȱinȱtheȱwisdomȱliteratureȱofȱotherȱreligions,ȱ suchȱasȱthe BhagavadȬGita.ȱ Hisȱ leaningȱ towardsȱ becomingȱ aȱ hermitȱ was alsoȱevidentȱearlyȱinȱhisȱlife.ȱAfterȱhisȱstudiesȱheȱlivedȱwithȱtwo friendsȱ inȱ aȱ veryȱ soberȱ houseȱ inȱ theȱ country.ȱ Withȱ aȱ romantic yetȱ veryȱ rigidȱ attitude,ȱ theyȱ bannedȱ allȱ modernȱ conveniences andȱ establishedȱ anȱ existenceȱ inȱ harmonyȱ withȱ nature.ȱ The communeȱalsoȱhadȱanȱincreasinglyȱstrongerȱreligiousȱslant,ȱwith ȱGriffithsȱwroteȱtwoȱautobiographies:ȱTheȱGoldenȱStringȱ(London: TheȱHarvillȱPress,ȱ1954)ȱandȱinȱ1976ȱTheȱMarriageȱofȱEastȱandȱWest.ȱHere weȱwillȱbeȱusingȱtheȱeditionȱpublishedȱinȱ2003ȱbyȱMedioȱMediaȱPublishȬ ingȱ(Tucson).ȱVariousȱstudiesȱonȱhimȱhaveȱappeared.ȱTheȱimportantȱones are:ȱLourduȱAnandam,ȱTheȱWesternȱLoverȱofȱtheȱEast:ȱAȱTheologicalȱEnquiry intoȱBedeȱGriffiths’ȱContributionȱtoȱChristologyȱ(Kodaikanal:ȱLaȱSaletteȱPubȬ lications,ȱ1998);ȱWayneȱRobertȱTeasdale,ȱTowardȱaȱChristianȱVedanta:ȱThe EncounterȱofȱHinduismȱandȱChristianityȱaccordingȱtoȱBedeȱGriffithsȱ(BangaȬ lore:ȱAsianȱTradingȱCorporation,ȱ1987);ȱJesuȱRajan,ȱBedeȱGriffithsȱandȱSanȬ nyasaȱ2ndȱed.ȱ(Bangalore:ȱAsianȱTradingȱCorporation,ȱ1997). 22

JESUSȱASȱGURU

178

communalȱritualsȱandȱsevereȱasceticism.ȱAfterȱaȱyear,ȱwhenȱthe otherȱtwoȱchoseȱtoȱmarryȱafterȱall,ȱBedeȱGriffithsȱsearchedȱforȱa wayȱ toȱ continueȱ hisȱ religiousȬcommunalȱ existence.ȱ Heȱ hadȱ alȬ readyȱ developedȱ someȱ feelingȱ forȱ Romanȱ Catholicismȱ and,ȱ at theȱageȱofȱ25,ȱheȱconvertedȱtoȱtheȱRomanȱCatholicȱChurchȱand enteredȱaȱmonasteryȱalmostȱimmediately. Asȱaȱmonk,ȱheȱstudiedȱThomismȱbutȱalsoȱtookȱupȱEastern philosophy.ȱHeȱwasȱquicklyȱableȱtoȱlinkȱbothȱtraditionsȱclosely: “TheȱideaȱofȱGodȱwhichȱisȱfoundȱinȱSankara,ȱtheȱgreatȱdoctorȱof theȱVedanta,ȱisȱalmostȱidenticalȱwithȱthatȱofȱStȱThomas.ȱAccordȬ ingȱ toȱ himȱ Godȱ isȱ sacchidanandaȱ ....”23ȱ Gradually,ȱ ȱ Griffiths’ greatȱ idealȱ alsoȱ becameȱ thatȱ ofȱ givingȱ shapeȱ toȱ monasticȱ existȬ enceȱinȱIndiaȱinȱanȱIndianȱway.ȱInȱ1955ȱheȱwasȱgivenȱtheȱopporȬ tunityȱtoȱgoȱtoȱIndia,ȱwhereȱheȱjoinedȱaȱmonasticȱcommunityȱof hisȱ orderȱ inȱ Bangalore.ȱ Butȱ theȱ relativeȱ luxuryȱ thereȱ didȱ not agreeȱ withȱ him:ȱ heȱ wasȱ seekingȱ theȱ trueȱ austerityȱ that,ȱ inȱ his opinion,ȱ wasȱ muchȱ moreȱ appropriateȱ toȱ theȱ wayȱ ofȱ lifeȱ ofȱ the largeȱ majorityȱ ofȱ theȱ Indians.ȱ Inȱ 1958,ȱ togetherȱ withȱ aȱ Belgian Cistercianȱmonk,ȱFrancisȱMahieuȱ(1911Ȭ2002),ȱheȱestablishedȱhis ownȱ ashramȱ atȱ Vagamonȱ (Kottayamȱ Dt.,ȱ Kerala).ȱ Theȱ small communityȱwasȱfoundedȱonȱaȱhill,ȱwhichȱhadȱlongȱbeforeȱbeen consecratedȱ asȱ aȱ Christianȱ holyȱ placeȱ withȱ theȱ stationsȱ ofȱ the crossȱandȱaȱcrossȱatȱtheȱtop.ȱThus,ȱtheȱashramȱisȱcalledȱKurishuȬ mala,ȱ “Hillȱ ofȱ theȱ Cross.”ȱ Itȱ isȱ remarkableȱ that,ȱ fromȱ theȱ start, bothȱ foundersȱ orientedȱ themselvesȱ towardȱ theȱ SyroȬMalankar Church,ȱ oneȱ ofȱ theȱ churchesȱ unitedȱ withȱ Romeȱ thatȱ followȱ the Easternȱrite.ȱThatȱtheȱashramȱprosperedȱisȱalsoȱcertainlyȱdueȱto itsȱpositionȱasȱmonasteryȱwithinȱthisȱchurch.ȱYoungȱmembersȱof theȱchurchȱwhoȱhadȱaȱmonasticȱvocationȱsoonȱfoundȱthemselves atȱthisȱashram.ȱAȱnumerusȱfixusȱevenȱhadȱtoȱbeȱinvokedȱtoȱavoid aȱ tooȱ largeȱ increaseȱ inȱ theȱ numberȱ ofȱ sannyasis:ȱ theȱ ashram couldȱnotȱhandleȱmoreȱthanȱtwentyȱpeople.ȱGriffithsȱespecially pushedȱforȱtheȱpromotionȱofȱtheȱoldȱWestȱSyrianȱliturgy,ȱwhich determinesȱ theȱ riteȱ inȱ thisȱ church.ȱ Oneȱ ofȱ hisȱ firstȱ publications wasȱaȱtranslationȱintoȱEnglishȱofȱtheȱdivineȱofficeȱheldȱonȱweekȬ

ȱGriffiths,ȱTheȱGoldenȱString,ȱp.ȱ152

23

THEȱETERNALȱCHRISTȱINȱTHEȱASHRAMȱMOVEMENT

179

daysȱinȱthisȱchurchȱandȱthusȱalsoȱinȱtheȱashram.24ȱTheȱKeralites whoȱ joinedȱ Romeȱ tookȱ thisȱ liturgyȱ withȱ themȱ whenȱ theyȱ left theirȱ oldȱ Jacobiteȱ Church.ȱ Theȱ Christologyȱ inȱ thisȱ churchȱ was monophysist,ȱ whichȱ thisȱ liturgyȱ obviouslyȱ reflects.ȱ Thereȱ isȱ a heavyȱstressȱonȱtheȱdivinityȱofȱChrist,ȱwhichȱȱmeansȱthatȱmany prayersȱ areȱ directedȱ towardȱ Christȱ asȱ “ourȱ God”ȱ andȱ notȱ toȬ wardȱ Godȱ “throughȱ Jesusȱ Christ,ȱ ourȱ Lord,”ȱ asȱ isȱ usualȱ inȱ the Latinȱ liturgy.ȱ Thisȱ highlyȱ exaltedȱ imageȱ ofȱ Christȱ fitsȱ inȱ well withȱtheȱHinduȱenvironment! ButȱKurishumalaȱAshramȱwasȱandȱis—muchȱmoreȱsoȱthan theȱ otherȱ ashrams—aȱ Christianȱ monastery.ȱ Thisȱ wasȱ lessȱ satisȬ fyingȱ forȱ Griffithsȱ inȱ theȱ longȱ run,ȱ whichȱ isȱ whyȱ heȱ gladlyȱ asȬ sumedȱleadershipȱofȱShantivanamȱwhenȱSwamiȱAbhishiktananȬ daȱleft.ȱInȱtheȱexperimentalȱashramȱonȱtheȱbanksȱofȱtheȱKavery Griffithsȱcouldȱfinallyȱgiveȱformȱtoȱthatȱwhatȱheȱhadȱinȱmind:ȱan ashramȱ withȱ aȱ Hinduȱ setupȱ andȱ closelyȱ reflectingȱ theȱ philoȬ sophyȱofȱtheȱVedanta.ȱGriffithsȱalsoȱassumedȱaȱnewȱname:ȱSwaȬ miȱDayanandaȱ(“theȱBlessingȱofȱCompassion”).ȱUnderȱhisȱleadȬ ershipȱ theȱ ashramȱ becameȱ evenȱ moreȱ ofȱ aȱ meetingȱ placeȱ for EastȱandȱWest,ȱforȱclassicalȱphilosophyȱandȱmodernȱintellectual schools.ȱ Bedeȱ Griffiths,ȱ whoȱ wasȱ muchȱ moreȱ intellectualȱ than hisȱpredecessor,ȱstudiedȱdeeplyȱnotȱonlyȱHinduȱphilosophyȱbut alsoȱTaoism,ȱGnosticism,ȱtheȱnewȱphysicsȱandȱNewȱAgeȱthinkȬ ing.ȱItȱisȱtypicalȱofȱhimȱthatȱhe,ȱinȱaȱholisticȱapproach,ȱattempted toȱreconcileȱemotionȱandȱrationalityȱwithȱeachȱotherȱand,ȱmoreȬ over,ȱ toȱ findȱ theȱ similaritiesȱ inȱ allȱ possibleȱ spiritualȱ schools. Manyȱ publications,ȱ inȱ splendidȱ English,ȱ witnessȱ toȱ hisȱ being wellȬreadȱ andȱtoȱ hisȱbroadȱ interests.25ȱ Atȱ times,ȱ theȱ differences betweenȱ theȱ variousȱ schoolsȱ appear,ȱ inȱ him,ȱ toȱ haveȱ disapȬ pearedȱ completely:ȱ itȱ doesȱ notȱ matterȱ whetherȱ theȱ mysteryȱ of

24 ȱBedeȱGriffithsȱ(transl.),ȱTheȱBookȱofȱCommonȱPrayerȱofȱtheȱSyrian Churchȱ(Vagamon:ȱKurisumalaȱAshram,ȱs.a.).ȱTheȱtitleȱisȱaȱgoodȱindicaȬ tionȱofȱtheȱtranslator’sȱAnglicanȱbackground.

ȱCf.ȱespeciallyȱBedeȱGriffiths,ȱReturnȱtoȱtheȱCentreȱ(London:ȱFount, 1981)ȱ(firstȱpublishedȱinȱ1976)ȱandȱAȱNewȱVisionȱofȱReality:ȱWesternȱScience, EasternȱMysticismȱandȱChristianȱFaith,ȱed.ȱFelicityȱEdwardsȱ(London:ȱColȬ lins,ȱ1989). 25

JESUSȱASȱGURU

180

existenceȱisȱcalledȱBrahman,ȱNirvana,ȱTaoȱorȱGod.26ȱUltimately, however,ȱ itȱ concernsȱ somethingȱ else,ȱ aȱ truthȱ behindȱ allȱ truths: “Weȱ cannotȱ returnȱ toȱ theȱ pastȱ formsȱ ofȱ Catholicismȱ orȱ BudȬ dhismȱorȱConfucianismȱorȱHinduȱorȱIslamicȱorthodoxy.ȱEachȱreȬ ligionȱhasȱtoȱreturnȱtoȱitsȱsourceȱinȱtheȱeternalȱreligion.”27 Thisȱpluralisticȱapproachȱtoȱreligionȱhasȱgivenȱriseȱtoȱmuch opposition,ȱ particularlyȱ amongȱ Indianȱ Christians.ȱ Lourduȱ AȬ nandam,ȱwhoȱwroteȱaȱsolidȱstudyȱonȱGriffiths,ȱdistinguishesȱbeȬ tweenȱ threeȱ phasesȱ inȱ hisȱ Christologicalȱ images.ȱ Inȱ hisȱ earliest writings,ȱ Griffithsȱ assumesȱ thatȱ theȱ aspirationsȱ ofȱ theȱ various religionsȱfindȱtheirȱfulfilmentȱinȱChrist.ȱThisȱfulfilmentȱtheology isȱ followedȱ byȱ aȱ periodȱ ofȱ inclusiveȱ Christologicalȱ thought: ChristȱwasȱactuallyȱalwaysȱalreadyȱpresentȱinȱtheȱvariousȱrevelȬ ationsȱofȱhumanity.ȱInȱtheȱlastȱyearsȱofȱhisȱlife,ȱ GriffithsȱrepreȬ sentsȱ moreȱ ofȱ aȱ theocentricȱ pluralism.ȱ Itȱ isȱ notȱ Christȱ butȱ the oneȱ indescribableȱ mysteryȱ behindȱ allȱ religionsȱ thatȱ isȱ normaȬ tive.ȱ Anandamȱ concludesȱ thatȱ theȱ pathȱ Griffithsȱ tookȱ should notȱbeȱtheȱmodelȱforȱtheȱchurchȱinȱIndia.28ȱItȱisȱaȱfact,ȱhowever, thatȱ Griffithsȱ wasȱ veryȱ importantȱ forȱ Shantivanamȱ andȱ forȱ the ashramȱ movementȱ inȱ itsȱ entirety.ȱ Afterȱ hisȱ deathȱ heȱ wasȱ very muchȱmissed,ȱespeciallyȱinȱtheȱashramȱonȱtheȱbanksȱofȱtheȱKaȬ very:ȱwithoutȱtheȱguru,ȱtheȱcentreȱseemedȱbarelyȱfeasible. Thereȱ areȱ alsoȱ Romanȱ Catholicȱ ashramsȱ thatȱ doȱ notȱ goȱ as farȱinȱtheirȱapproachȱtoȱHinduismȱasȱGriffithsȱdid.ȱTheȱworkȱof theȱsoȬcalledȱ“GoaȱJesuitȱSwamis”ȱisȱnotȱveryȱwellȱknownȱinȱthe West,ȱ butȱ hereȱ weȱ seeȱ anȱ importantȱ andȱ differentȱ approachȱ to ashramȱlife.ȱThisȱconcernsȱaȱnumberȱofȱJesuitsȱfromȱtheȱstateȱof Goa,ȱ traditionallyȱ anȱ areaȱ withȱ aȱ strongȱ Christianȱ stampȱ beȬ causeȱ ofȱ theȱ centuriesȬlongȱ Portugueseȱ rule.ȱ Armandoȱ Alvares cameȱfromȱthisȱarea,ȱcrossingȱtheȱborderȱofȱtheȱstateȱKarnataka toȱleadȱanȱasceticȱlifeȱinȱlineȱwithȱtheȱHinduȱmodel.ȱInȱ1950ȱhe

ȱGriffiths,ȱReturnȱtoȱtheȱCentre,ȱp.ȱ20.

26

ȱGriffiths,ȱReturnȱtoȱtheȱCentre,ȱp.ȱ97.

27

ȱAnandam,ȱTheȱWesternȱLoverȱofȱtheȱEast,ȱp.ȱ278;ȱseeȱalsoȱpp.ȱ258Ȭ67.

28

THEȱETERNALȱCHRISTȱINȱTHEȱASHRAMȱMOVEMENT

181

foundedȱ anȱ ashramȱ inȱ Deshnurȱ (Belgaumȱ Dt.).ȱ Inȱ aȱ wonderful combinationȱ ofȱ Sanskritȱ andȱ Latin,ȱ heȱ calledȱ himselfȱ Swami AnimanandaȱS.J.ȱ(“TheȱBlessingȱofȱtheȱSpirit”). Whatȱ isȱ soȱ specialȱ aboutȱ thisȱ areaȱ isȱ thatȱ theȱ Hinduȱ bhakti movementȱofȱtheȱVirashaivasȱisȱsoȱprominent.ȱ TheseȱVirashaivas orȱLingayatasȱwereȱoriginallyȱdevoteesȱofȱShivaȱbutȱhaveȱbecome monotheistsȱ andȱ haveȱ distancedȱ themselvesȱ fromȱ theȱ temple cultusȱandȱtheȱpriesthood.ȱTheȱashramȱinȱDeshnurȱisȱinȱkeeping withȱ thisȱ formȱ ofȱ Hinduismȱ andȱ externallyȱ appearsȱ toȱ beȱ very similarȱ toȱ aȱ Virashaivaȱ monȬ asteryȱ(matha).29ȱTheȱpurpose ofȱthisȱashramȱisȱtoȱengageȱin pastoralȱ careȱ andȱ toȱ preach theȱ Gospelȱ toȱ theȱ surroundȬ ingȱ villages.ȱ Atȱ theȱ moment thereȱ areȱ fourȱ swamisȱ workȬ ingȱ there.ȱ Theyȱ seldomȱ step intoȱtheȱlimelightȱandȱdoȱnot publishȱanyȱbooksȱorȱarticles aboutȱ theirȱ work.ȱ But,ȱ more thanȱ manyȱ otherȱ ashramȱ saȬ dhus,ȱ theyȱ haveȱ beenȱ accepȬ tedȱ inȱ Hinduȱ society.ȱ The Goaȱ Jesuitȱ Swamisȱ continue aȱlongȱtraditionȱofȱtheȱJesuits thatȱ beganȱ withȱ Robertoȱ de Nobiliȱ (1577Ȭ1656)ȱ andȱ João deȱ Britoȱ (1647Ȭ1693):ȱ aȱ farȬ reachingȱ adaptationȱ toȱ the surroundingȱ cultureȱ inȱ theȱ serviceȱ ofȱ preachingȱ theȱ Gospel. TheirȱwitnessȱofȱChristȱisȱnotȱspectacular,ȱbutȱitȱisȱeffective. TypesȱofȱAshrams Inȱ additionȱ toȱ thoseȱ mentionedȱ above,ȱ thereȱ areȱ manyȱ more ChristianȱashramsȱinȱIndiaȱthatȱhaveȱnotȱhadȱasȱmuchȱinfluence. ȱIȱvisitedȱtheȱashramȱinȱDeshnurȱinȱFebruaryȱofȱ1989.ȱTheȱphoto showsȱtheȱsacredȱroom.ȱAsȱisȱappropriateȱforȱVirashaivas,ȱthereȱareȱno images.ȱThereȱareȱinscriptionsȱwithȱtextsȱ(HinduȱandȱChristian)ȱandȱthe tabernacleȱhasȱunmistakablyȱbeenȱgivenȱtheȱformȱofȱaȱlinga. 29

182

JESUSȱASȱGURU

Itȱisȱnotȱalwaysȱclearȱwhatȱisȱaȱtrueȱashramȱandȱwhatȱisȱnot.ȱKuȬ rishumalaȱ Ashramȱ developedȱ moreȱ andȱ moreȱ intoȱ aȱ normal monasteryȱ withinȱ theȱ SyroȬMalankarȱ tradition.ȱ Andȱ inȱ certain partsȱofȱIndiaȱitȱisȱnotȱunusualȱtoȱcallȱaȱcommonȱvillageȱrectory theȱ “ashram.”ȱ Trueȱ ashramsȱ areȱ moreȱ thanȱ that.ȱ Inȱ everyȱ case theyȱareȱcharacterizedȱbyȱaȱstrongȱadaptationȱtoȱtheȱHinduȱideal ofȱtheȱ sannyasa.ȱ Oneȱ aspectȱ ofȱthisȱ isȱcertainlyȱtheȱ centralȱposiȬ tionȱofȱtheȱguru.ȱBoundariesȱfluctuateȱofȱcourseȱand,ȱmoreover, thereȱ areȱ clearlyȱ variousȱ typesȱ ofȱ Christianȱ ashrams.ȱ Richard Taylorȱ hasȱ attemptedȱ inȱ anȱ articleȱ toȱ outlineȱ aȱ typologyȱ of Christianȱashrams.30ȱHeȱusesȱtheȱconceptsȱkhadiȱandȱkavi,ȱwhich areȱseparated,ȱinȱhisȱview,ȱbyȱaȱworldȱofȱdifferences. Khadiȱisȱtheȱusualȱnameȱ forȱtheȱroughȱcottonȱmaterialȱthat isȱtheȱresultȱofȱtheȱcottageȱindustryȱofȱtheȱGandhians.ȱTheȱMaȬ hatmaȱchargedȱhisȱfollowersȱtoȱspinȱaȱcertainȱamountȱofȱcotton threadȱeachȱday.ȱHisȱintentionȱwasȱtoȱundermineȱtheȱimportȱof factoryȬmadeȱ textilesȱ byȱ theȱ developmentȱ ofȱ villageȱ industry. Butȱspinningȱhadȱadditionallyȱaȱdeeper,ȱsacredȱmeaning.ȱItȱwas aȱmeditativeȱoccupation,ȱintendedȱtoȱpromoteȱserenityȱandȱharȬ monyȱwithȱsurroundingȱnature.ȱGandhiȱhimselfȱcouldȱbeȱfound behindȱhisȱsimpleȱspinningȱwheelȱdailyȱandȱforȱhisȱfollowersȱit wasȱ theȱ wayȱofȱdisplayingȱ theirȱsolidarityȱ withȱ hisȱmovement. Wearingȱ clothingȱ madeȱ fromȱ theȱ white,ȱ undyedȱ khadiȱ wasȱ a formȱ ofȱ protest.ȱ Itȱ isȱ characteristicȱ thatȱ Westernȱ missionaries whoȱ thusȱ displayedȱ theirȱ loyaltyȱ toȱ theȱ independenceȱ moveȬ mentȱ couldȱ countȱ onȱ repression.ȱ Inȱ 1930ȱ R.R.ȱ Keithahnȱ was evenȱthreatenedȱwithȱdeportationȱbyȱtheȱBritishȱauthoritiesȱbeȬ causeȱofȱhisȱclothing. Kaviȱisȱtheȱnameȱforȱtheȱochreȱgarmentȱthatȱhasȱbeenȱworn byȱ Hinduȱ asceticsȱ sinceȱ ancientȱ times.ȱ Inȱ itsȱ simplestȱ form,ȱ it consistsȱ ofȱ oneȱ largeȱ seamlessȱ pieceȱ ofȱ fabricȱ thatȱ isȱ wrapped aroundȱtheȱlowerȱpartȱofȱtheȱbody.ȱTheȱfabricȱisȱdyedȱwithȱclay, ochre,ȱ therebyȱ acquiringȱ aȱ colourȱ thatȱ variesȱ fromȱ reddishȱ to yellow.ȱ Theȱ clothingȱ canȱ alsoȱ beȱ moreȱ extensiveȱ thanȱ justȱ one piece:ȱaȱwraparoundȱskirtȱplusȱaȱshawl,ȱorȱaȱkindȱofȱcassockȱthat coversȱtheȱentireȱbody.ȱItȱisȱtheȱdyeȱthatȱisȱnormative:ȱsomeone wearingȱ kaviȱ canȱ relyȱ onȱ beingȱ recognizedȱ asȱ anȱ ascetic.ȱ This 30 ȱRichardȱW.ȱTaylor,ȱ“FromȱKhadiȱtoȱKavi:ȱTowardȱaȱTypologyȱof ChristianȱAshrams,”ȱReligionȱandȱSocietyȱ24ȱ(1977):ȱ19Ȭ37.

THEȱETERNALȱCHRISTȱINȱTHEȱASHRAMȱMOVEMENT

183

usuallyȱmeansȱbeingȱtreatedȱwithȱmuchȱhonourȱbyȱallȱlayersȱof theȱpopulation. Taylorȱseesȱtheȱashramsȱasȱbeingȱonȱoneȱline,ȱwithȱkhadiȱat oneȱ extremeȱ andȱ kaviȱ atȱ theȱ other.ȱ Theȱ oldestȱ ashramsȱ leaned moreȱ towardȱ theȱ khadiȱ extreme.ȱ Bothȱ Jesudasonȱ andȱ ForresterȬ Patonȱ asȱ wellȱ asȱ Winslowȱ hadȱ aȱ strongȱ affinityȱ withȱ theȱ GanȬ dhianȱ movement.ȱ Theȱ mostȱ importantȱ Christianȱ followerȱ of Gandhi,ȱ C.F.ȱ Andrews,ȱ wasȱ alsoȱ involvedȱ inȱ theȱ establishment ofȱ bothȱ ashrams.ȱ Thereȱ wereȱ differencesȱ ofȱ course.ȱ Forȱ both doctorsȱinȱTirupattur,ȱsocialȱservicesȱwereȱmoreȱimportantȱthan theyȱwereȱinȱtheȱ ashramȱ inȱ Pune,ȱ whichȱwasȱ orientedȱtowards mysticȱ praxis.ȱ Inȱ thatȱ regard,ȱ Puneȱ couldȱ beȱ categorizedȱ as moreȱtowardȱtheȱkaviȱside.ȱButȱtheȱactualȱkaviȱashramsȱareȱherȬ mitagesȱ thatȱ wereȱ foundedȱ byȱ Christianȱ monksȱ afterȱ IndepenȬ dence,ȱ suchȱ asȱ Kurishumalaȱ andȱ Shantivanam.ȱ Theȱ founders wereȱloyalȱtoȱanȱindependentȱIndianȱstate,ȱwhichȱtheȱGandhian movementȱhadȱȱproduced,ȱbutȱtheyȱwereȱnotȱenthusiasticȱabout allȱaspectsȱofȱGandhi’sȱlegacy.ȱItȱwasȱtypicalȱofȱJulesȱMonchanin thatȱ heȱ wantedȱ nothingȱ toȱ doȱ withȱ khadi:ȱ heȱ viewedȱ Gandhi’s encouragementȱofȱvillageȱindustryȱasȱresistanceȱtoȱanȱirreversiȬ bleȱevolution.31 TheȱconceptsȱkhadiȱandȱkaviȱareȱcertainlyȱsuitableȱforȱcharȬ acterizingȱ anȱ importantȱ differenceȱ inȱ orientationȱ betweenȱ the variousȱ ashrams.ȱ Someȱ confusionȱ isȱ obvious—alsoȱ inȱ Taylor. Afterȱall,ȱwearingȱaȱkaviȱwasȱalsoȱpracticedȱinȱtheȱGandhianȬorȬ ientedȱashrams,ȱalthoughȱitȱwasȱnotȱaȱrule.ȱJesudasonȱalsoȱwore ochreȱ sometimes,ȱ andȱ evenȱ acharyaȱ Keithahn,ȱ whoseȱ ashramȱ is situatedȱrightȱatȱtheȱkhadiȱextreme,ȱworeȱ“aȱsaffronȱcassock”ȱon importantȱoccasions.32 Finally,ȱitȱisȱimportantȱtoȱestablishȱthatȱtheȱkhadiȬkaviȱpolarȬ ityȱ demonstratesȱ aȱ vigorousȱ overlappingȱ withȱ theȱ “ProtestantȬ Romanȱ Catholic”ȱ dichotomy.ȱ Evenȱ thoughȱ notȱ allȱ Protestant ashramsȱ areȱ asȱ stronglyȱ orientedȱ toȱ socialȱ activities,ȱ theirȱ inȬ volvementȱ inȱ theȱ Gandhianȱ movementȱ isȱ generallyȱ stronger thanȱ whatȱ weȱ encounterȱ inȱ theȱ Romanȱ Catholicȱ ashrams.ȱ The ȱSwamiȱParamaȱArubiȱAnandam,ȱp.ȱ21.

31

ȱRalphȱRichardȱKeithahn,ȱPilgrimageȱinȱIndia:ȱAnȱAutobiographical Fragment,ȱIndianȱChristianȱThoughtȱSeriesȱ13ȱ(Madras:ȱChristianȱLiteraȬ tureȱSociety,ȱ1973),ȱp.ȱ64. 32

JESUSȱASȱGURU

184

latterȱareȱwithoutȱexceptionȱatȱtheȱkaviȱextreme,ȱalthoughȱthere areȱdifferences,ȱofȱcourse. Howȱ doesȱ anȱ imageȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ ariseȱ inȱ theȱ cultureȱ of theseȱ variousȱ ashrams?ȱ Theȱ precedingȱ historicalȱ overviewȱ has laidȱdownȱcertainȱbuildingȱblocksȱforȱthis.ȱWeȱwillȱnowȱprovide aȱfiveȬpointȱoutlineȱofȱtheȱChristologyȱofȱtheȱashramȱmovement, inȱbothȱitsȱkhadiȱandȱkaviȱforms. JesusȱasȱSadhu Theȱ firstȱ thingȱ thatȱ oneȱ noticesȱ isȱ thatȱ allȱ ashramȱ inhabitants linkȱ theirȱ wayȱ ofȱ lifeȱ withȱ theȱ lifeȱ ofȱ Jesus.ȱ Oneȱ wouldȱ expect theȱ ashramsȱ thatȱ fallȱ underȱ theȱ kaviȱ categoryȱ toȱ payȱ particular attentionȱ toȱ theȱ practiceȱ ofȱ prayerȱ andȱ theȱ mystiqueȱ ofȱ Jesus Christ.ȱButȱthereȱareȱalsoȱrepeatedȱappealsȱtoȱtheȱlifeȱofȱChristȱin theȱ circlesȱ ofȱ theȱ ashramsȱ ofȱ theȱ khadiȱ extremeȱ toȱ justifyȱ their choices.ȱJesusȱisȱseenȱasȱaȱsadhu,ȱaȱholyȱmanȱwhoȱdevotesȱhisȱenȬ tireȱ lifeȱ toȱ religionȱ andȱ isȱ anȱ exampleȱ forȱ others.ȱ Whatȱ JesuȬ dasonȱwrites,ȱinȱ aȱpassionateȱ defenseȱofȱhisȱ choiceȱ forȱ celibacy aboutȱJesusȱasȱtheȱidealȱbrahmachari,ȱisȱtypical.33ȱTheȱexampleȱof Jesusȱ isȱ thatȱ heȱ deniedȱ himselfȱ aȱ sexualȱ relationshipȱ andȱ also relativizedȱhisȱfamilyȱties,ȱfoundingȱinsteadȱaȱfamilyȱwithȱallȱof hisȱ spiritualȱ brothersȱ andȱ sisters.ȱ Theȱ ashramȱ inȱ Tirupatturȱ is alsoȱintendedȱtoȱfunctionȱinȱthisȱway,ȱasȱtheȱ“FamilyȱofȱChrist,” forȱ thoseȱ whoȱ haveȱ distancedȱ themselvesȱ fromȱ theȱ bondsȱ of marriageȱandȱfamily. Jesusȱ Christȱ isȱ theȱ preȬeminentȱ exampleȱ forȱ Jesudasonȱ not onlyȱ withȱ regardȱ toȱ celibacy.ȱ Theȱ Gospelȱ alsoȱ setsȱ theȱ toneȱ for theȱ ashramȱ inhabitantsȱ withȱ regardȱ toȱ possessionsȱ andȱ social positions.ȱ Jesudasonȱ emphasizesȱ that,ȱ likeȱ manyȱ otherȱ theoloȬ giansȱofȱtheȱashramȱmovement,ȱJesusȱledȱanȱitinerantȱexistence: “TheȱSonȱofȱManȱhasȱnoȱplaceȱtoȱlayȱhisȱhead”ȱ(Matthewȱ8:20). Theȱcallȱtoȱtheȱrichȱyoungȱmanȱtoȱsellȱallȱofȱhisȱpossessionsȱand giveȱ theȱ proceedsȱ toȱ theȱ poorȱ hasȱ significanceȱ forȱ theȱ ashram. Jesus’ȱ exampleȱ callsȱ oneȱ toȱ renounceȱ one’sȱ possessionsȱ andȱ to liveȱinȱaȱwayȱthatȱdoesȱjusticeȱtoȱhisȱcallȱforȱselfȬdenial,ȱtoȱtake upȱtheȱcrossȱtoȱfollowȱhim.

ȱJesudason,ȱReminiscencesȱofȱaȱPilgrimȱofȱLife,ȱpp.ȱ138Ȭ39.

33

THEȱETERNALȱCHRISTȱINȱTHEȱASHRAMȱMOVEMENT

185

Jesudasonȱ sawȱ theȱ importanceȱ ofȱ Christȱ forȱ theȱ ashram especiallyȱinȱtheȱ emptyingȱ (kenosis)ȱasȱ describedȱinȱPhilippians 2.34ȱJustȱasȱtheȱLordȱdistancedȱhimselfȱfromȱhisȱposition,ȱsoȱmust hisȱfollowersȱmakeȱtheirȱchoicesȱinȱlife.ȱIfȱtheyȱchooseȱforȱanȱexȬ istenceȱ inȱ anȱ ashram,ȱ theyȱ doȱ soȱ followingȱ theȱ exampleȱ of Christ.ȱAndȱyetȱtheȱkhadiȱashramsȱdoȱnotȱpresentȱJesus’ȱrenunciȬ ationȱofȱtheȱworldȱasȱanȱabsolute:ȱitȱisȱnotȱaȱgoalȱinȱitselfȱbutȱa meansȱtoȱbeȱofȱserviceȱtoȱone’sȱfellowȱbeings.ȱWinslowȱinȱparticȬ ularȱ alsoȱ continuesȱ toȱ seeȱ Christȱ asȱ theȱ Lordȱ ofȱ theȱ goodȱ life, whoȱallowsȱallȱroomȱforȱtheȱhappinessȱofȱexistenceȱinȱtheȱworld andȱthereforeȱcertainlyȱdoesȱnotȱrejectȱmarriage,ȱforȱexample.35 InȱtheȱlaterȱkaviȱashramsȱthisȱlineȱofȱChrist’sȱexampleȱisȱtakȬ enȱ toȱ theȱ extreme.ȱ Bothȱ foundersȱ ofȱ theȱ Shantivanamȱ write withoutȱhesitationȱthatȱifȱJesusȱhadȱarrivedȱinȱtheȱworldȱinȱIndia heȱcertainlyȱwouldȱhaveȱbeenȱaȱsannyasi.36ȱForȱthem,ȱthereȱisȱno doubtȱthatȱtheyȱmustȱchooseȱtheȱmostȱabsoluteȱrenunciationȱof theȱ worldȱ becauseȱ itȱ wasȱ theȱ wayȱ ofȱ Christ.ȱ Andȱ whatȱ isȱ emȬ phaticallyȱexpressedȱinȱtheirȱbookȱhasȱbeenȱtheȱunderlyingȱidea forȱmanyȱashramsȱfoundedȱbyȱRomanȱCatholics.ȱNorȱisȱtheȱidea unfamiliarȱtoȱWesternȱhermitsȱandȱmonks.ȱButȱbyȱcomparingȱit withȱtheȱHinduȱsannyasa,ȱwhichȱentailsȱaȱcompleteȱrejectionȱofȱa normalȱexistence,ȱthisȱimageȱofȱChristȱbecomesȱevenȱmoreȱradȬ icalized.ȱ Oneȱ mustȱ seriouslyȱ doubtȱ whetherȱ itȱ canȱ beȱ ȱ mainȬ tainedȱ thatȱ theȱ gospelȱ writersȱ depictȱ Jesus’ȱ lifeȱ asȱ aȱ sannyasi, withȱitsȱextremeȱconsequenceȱofȱaȱcompleteȱbreakȱwithȱsociety. Thatȱ comparisonȱ wouldȱ certainlyȱ haveȱ arisenȱ inȱ connection withȱJohnȱtheȱBaptist.ȱButȱtheȱgospelsȱportrayȱJesusȱasȱsomeone whoȱwasȱaȱpartȱofȱtheȱlivesȱofȱpeopleȱinȱtheȱworld:ȱheȱsitsȱwith themȱ atȱ table,ȱ heȱ attendsȱ theirȱ weddingsȱ andȱ theirȱ synagogue services,ȱ heȱ speaksȱ toȱ menȱ andȱ womenȱ andȱ ultimatelyȱ delibȬ eratelyȱtakesȱpartȱinȱtheȱsufferingȱandȱdeathȱofȱpeople.ȱHisȱown wordsȱ emphasizeȱ howȱ hisȱ attitudeȱ differsȱ fromȱ John’sȱ renunȬ ciationȱ ofȱ theȱ world:ȱ “Forȱ Johnȱ theȱ Baptistȱ cameȱ neitherȱ eating ȱ S.ȱ Jesudason,ȱ Uniqueȱ Christȱ andȱ Indigenousȱ Christianity,ȱ Indian ChristianȱThoughtȱSeriesȱ4ȱ(Bangalore:ȱTheȱChristianȱ Instituteȱ forȱthe StudyȱofȱReligionȱandȱSociety,ȱ1966),ȱp.ȱ16. 34

ȱWinslow,ȱTheȱEyelidsȱofȱtheȱDawn,ȱp.ȱ99.

35

ȱMonchaninȱandȱLeȱSaux,ȱErmitesȱduȱSaccidânanda,ȱp.ȱ42.

36

JESUSȱASȱGURU

186

breadȱ norȱ drinkingȱ wineȱ ....ȱ Theȱ Sonȱ ofȱ Manȱ cameȱ eatingȱ and drinkingȱ...”ȱ(Lukeȱ7:33Ȭ34). Oneȱaspectȱofȱtheȱsadhuȱfigureȱthatȱeveryoneȱinȱtheȱashram movementȱ connectsȱ toȱ Jesusȱ isȱ hisȱ characterȱ asȱ aȱ teacher.ȱ Itȱ is typicalȱofȱtheȱHinduȱguruȱtoȱtransferȱknowledgeȱandȱinsightȱby meansȱ ofȱ hisȱ wayȱ ofȱ lifeȱ amidstȱ hisȱ followers.ȱ Jesusȱ isȱ also viewedȱ asȱ aȱ guruȱ inȱ thisȱ way.ȱ Hisȱ teachingȱ hasȱ toȱ doȱ notȱ only withȱhisȱwordsȱbutȱwithȱhisȱwholeȱwayȱofȱbeingȱamongȱpeople, whichȱilluminatesȱtheȱmeaningȱofȱhisȱappearance.ȱInȱtheȱHindu experience,ȱaȱguruȱis,ȱbyȱdefinition,ȱaȱdivineȱfigure,ȱaȱgurudeva, forȱitȱisȱthroughȱhisȱwayȱofȱactingȱthatȱpeopleȱcomeȱtoȱGod. Fromȱ theȱ beginningȱpeopleȱ inȱ variousȱashramsȱ haveȱclariȬ fiedȱtheȱmeaningȱofȱChristȱbyȱpresentingȱhimȱasȱaȱguru.ȱHinduȬ ismȱhasȱaȱwordȱforȱaȱteacherȱofȱworldȱsignificance:ȱjagadguruȱor worldȱteacher.ȱItȱisȱsignificantȱthatȱWinslow,ȱinȱtheȱearlyȱyears ofȱ hisȱ ashramȱ life,ȱ wroteȱ anȱ articleȱ calledȱ “Jagadguru,ȱ orȱ the Worldȱ Significanceȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ Christ.”37ȱ Whenȱ hisȱ ashramȱ was foundedȱitȱwasȱstipulatedȱthatȱthereȱwasȱtoȱbeȱnoȱguruȱorȱleader inȱ theȱ ashramȱ otherȱ thanȱ Jesusȱ Christ,ȱ “ourȱ everȱ presentȱ MasȬ ter.”38ȱ Thisȱ wasȱ theȱ startingȱ pointȱ ofȱ manyȱ ashrams,ȱ inȱ theȱ RoȬ manȱ Catholicȱ communitiesȱ asȱ well.ȱ Sisterȱ Vandana,ȱ Henriȱ le Saux’sȱ studentȱ andȱ laterȱ acharyaȱ ofȱ theȱ ashramȱ inȱ Pune,ȱ wrote thatȱforȱaȱlongȱtimeȱsheȱthoughtȱthatȱinȱaȱChristianȱashramȱthe onlyȱguruȱcouldȱbeȱtheȱRisenȱChrist.ȱButȱuponȱfurtherȱreflection sheȱchoseȱforȱtheȱIndianȱ traditionȱofȱaȱhumanȱguruȱasȱtheȱcenȬ tralȱfigureȱinȱanȱashram.39ȱWeȱalreadyȱsawȱthatȱsoonerȱorȱlaterȱin manyȱ ashramsȱ theȱ founderȱ functionedȱ asȱ theȱ guru.ȱ Thisȱ does notȱ detractȱ fromȱ theȱ factȱ thatȱ inȱ theȱ ashramȱ movementȱ theȱ old HinduȱconceptȱofȱtheȱguruȱasȱgodȬmanȱteacherȱbecameȱtheȱmost favouriteȱreferenceȱtoȱChrist. Jesusȱ Christȱ isȱ aȱ guruȱ becauseȱ throughȱ hisȱ teachingȱ and wayȱofȱlifeȱheȱrevealsȱGodȱtoȱothersȱandȱgivesȱthemȱtheȱinsight theyȱneed.ȱLeȱSauxȱdescribesȱthatȱinȱaȱtypicallyȱHinduȱ wayȱby usingȱ theȱ conceptȱ darshana.ȱ Thisȱ refersȱ toȱ theȱ believerȱ seeingȱ a ȱInȱtheȱCalcuttaȱGuardian,ȱ1924.

37

ȱSeeȱNoreen,ȱCrossroadsȱofȱTheȱSpirit,ȱp.ȱ63.

38

39 ȱVandana,ȱGurus,ȱAshramsȱandȱChristiansȱ(Madras:ȱTheȱChristian LiteratureȱSociety,ȱ1980),ȱp.ȱ32.

THEȱETERNALȱCHRISTȱINȱTHEȱASHRAMȱMOVEMENT

187

divinityȱorȱguru,ȱthroughȱwhichȱtheȱbelieverȱparticipatesȱinȱthe divineȱreality.ȱAȱguruȱ“givesȱdarshana”ȱorȱallowsȱpeopleȱtoȱcome toȱ aȱ deeperȱ insightȱ orȱ undergoȱ aȱ mysticalȱ experienceȱ through contactȱ withȱ him.ȱ Leȱ Sauxȱ writesȱ onȱ Christȱ asȱ guru:ȱ “Jesus,ȱ in theȱcourseȱofȱaȱfewȱyears,ȱgaveȱhisȱdarshanȱfreelyȱtoȱhisȱdisciples andȱ readilyȱ allowedȱ himselfȱ toȱ beȱ seenȱ byȱ crowdsȱ ofȱ his contemporaries.”40ȱ Byȱ writingȱ aboutȱ Jesus’ȱ contactȱ withȱ his contemporariesȱinȱthisȱtypicalȱmanner,ȱheȱmakesȱclearȱhowȱthe oldȱHinduȱconceptȱofȱtheȱguruȱcanȱserveȱChristology. JesusȱasȱJivanmukta TheȱashramsȱdidȱnotȱallȱjoinȱtheȱsameȱschoolȱofȱthoughtȱinȱHinȬ duism.ȱ Theȱ oldȱ Protestantȱ ashramsȱ wereȱ theȱ mostȱ orientedȱ to theȱ traditionȱ ofȱ bhakti,ȱ lovingȱ devotion,ȱ inȱ Hinduism.ȱ Inȱ this ChristianȱcommunityȱtheȱdevotionȱtoȱChristȱwasȱexperiencedȱin theȱsameȱpassionateȱwayȱasȱtheȱloveȱforȱKrishna,ȱRamaȱorȱShiva inȱtheȱvariousȱbhaktiȱmovements.ȱWinslowȱwasȱveryȱimpressed byȱ theȱ religiousȱ poetryȱ ofȱ Tukaram,41ȱ seeingȱ thereȱ aȱ modelȱ for theȱlovingȱworshipȱofȱChristȱinȱhisȱownȱashram.ȱAndȱjustȱasȱhe appropriatedȱ theȱ bhaktiȱ versesȱ inȱ theȱ MarathiȬspeakingȱ partȱ of Indiaȱinȱthatȱlanguage,ȱinȱtheȱsameȱwayȱforȱtheȱTamilȱJesudason theȱ poetryȱ ofȱ theȱ greatȱ bhaktaȱ ManikkaȬvacakarȱ inȱ Jesudason’s motherȱtongueȱwasȱtheȱclassicȱexampleȱofȱinspiringȱdevotion.42 Thereȱ appearedȱ toȱ beȱ affinityȱ withȱ theȱ bhaktiȱ amongȱ someȱ RoȬ manȱCatholicȱashramȱinhabitantsȱasȱwell.ȱThisȱholdsȱforȱtheȱGoa swamis,ȱ forȱ example,ȱ withȱ theirȱ intenseȱ involvementȱ inȱ the Virashaivaȱmysticism.ȱButȱforȱmostȱofȱtheȱRomanȱCatholicȱashȬ ramsȱthereȱisȱanotherȱschoolȱthatȱisȱtheȱmainȱsourceȱofȱinspiraȬ tion,ȱandȱthatȱisȱtheȱmonisticȱdoctrineȱbasedȱonȱtheȱVedanta. Advaitaȱorȱmonismȱisȱtheȱconvictionȱthatȱultimatelyȱthereȱis onlyȱoneȱreality.ȱEverything,ȱincludingȱtheȱhumanȱsoul,ȱisȱpart ofȱthisȱoneȱdivineȱexistence.ȱAnythingȱthatȱpresentsȱitselfȱtoȱthe ȱAbhishiktananda,ȱPrayer,ȱȱ4thȱrev.ȱed.ȱ(Delhi:ȱI.S.P.C.K,ȱ1975),ȱp.

40

5. ȱ Winslow,ȱ Theȱ Eyelidsȱ ofȱ theȱ Dawn,ȱ pp.ȱ 52Ȭ53.ȱ Forȱ Tukaramȱ see Schouten,ȱGoddelijkeȱvergezichten,ȱpp.ȱ78Ȭ95. 41

42 ȱS.ȱJesudason,ȱUniqueȱChristȱandȱIndigenousȱChristianity,ȱp.ȱ41.ȱFor ManikkaȬvacakarȱseeȱSchouten,ȱGoddelijkeȱvergezichten,ȱpp.ȱ27Ȭ42.

JESUSȱASȱGURU

188

peopleȱ asȱ existingȱ separatelyȱ isȱ merelyȱ mayaȱ (blinding).ȱ The advaitaȱthatȱwasȱdevelopedȱbyȱShankaraȱinȱtheȱninthȱcenturyȱas aȱphilosophicalȱsystemȱharksȱbackȱtoȱtheȱclassicȱwritingsȱofȱthe Vedanta,ȱ particularlyȱ theȱ secretȱ booksȱ thatȱ areȱ calledȱ “UpanȬ ishad.”ȱHereȱweȱfindȱtheȱdoctrineȱofȱtheȱsupremeȱRealityȱasȱthe indescribableȱ Brahman,ȱ whichȱ isȱ oneȱ andȱ theȱ sameȱ asȱ theȱ core ofȱbeingȱhuman,ȱtheȱatman.ȱForȱRomanȱCatholicȱashramȱleaders suchȱ asȱ Henriȱ leȱ Sauxȱ andȱ Bedeȱ Griffiths,ȱ Sisterȱ Vandanaȱ and Saraȱ Grant,ȱ thisȱ isȱ theȱ wisdomȱ parȱ excellenceȱ atȱ whichȱ theȱ enȬ counterȱwithȱHinduismȱmustȱbeȱaimed.ȱHereȱweȱareȱcompletely immersedȱinȱtheȱsphereȱofȱtheȱkavi. Whatȱ doesȱ thisȱ meanȱ nowȱ forȱ theȱ viewȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ Christ? MostȱtheologiansȱinȱthisȱschoolȱofȱthoughtȱareȱparticularlyȱenerȬ vatedȱbyȱtheȱmysticalȱexperienceȱandȱtheȱcompleteȱunderstandȬ ingȱofȱJesusȱhimself.ȱTheyȱregardȱhimȱasȱaȱjivanmukta,ȱi.e.ȱsomeȬ oneȱ whoȱ hasȱ achievedȱ redemptionȱ (moksha)ȱ alreadyȱ duringȱ his lifetime.ȱ Whoeverȱ readsȱ theȱ messageȱ ofȱ theȱ gospelsȱ fromȱ the perspectiveȱ ofȱ theȱ monisticȱ traditionȱ discoversȱ easyȱ pointsȱ of contact—butȱ ifȱ thisȱ doesȱ justiceȱ toȱ theȱ messageȱ ofȱ Christȱ isȱ anȬ otherȱquestion.ȱButȱitȱisȱnotȱdifficultȱtoȱguessȱhow,ȱaccordingȱto theȱmonistȱview,ȱJesus’ȱownȱexperienceȱofȱunityȱisȱtoȱbeȱunderȬ stood.ȱ Obviouslyȱ theȱ gospelȱ accordingȱ toȱ Johnȱ yieldsȱ many statementsȱthatȱcanȱbeȱinterpretedȱinȱthisȱway. Henriȱ leȱ Sauxȱ especiallyȱ goesȱ intoȱ depthȱ onȱ this.ȱ Heȱ isȱ of theȱopinionȱthatȱtheȱmonisticȱdoctrine,ȱtheȱadvaita,ȱasȱaȱwholeȱis notȱ completelyȱ foreignȱ toȱ Christianȱ revelationȱ butȱ isȱ already presentȱ inȱ theȱ Gospel.43ȱ Heȱ isȱ evenȱ ableȱ toȱ referȱ toȱ theȱ gospel bookȱ inȱ questionȱ asȱ “theȱ Johannineȱ Upanishad.”ȱ Heȱ seesȱ the linkȱbetweenȱtheȱadvaitaȱdoctrineȱandȱtheȱChristianȱfaithȱinȱthe “realizationȱ ofȱ theȱ unity”ȱ byȱ Jesusȱ himself:ȱ “Theȱ experienceȱ of theȱ Absoluteȱ toȱ whichȱ India’sȱ mysticalȱ traditionȱ bearsȱ such powerfulȱ witnessȱ isȱ allȱ includedȱ inȱ Jesus’ȱ saying:ȱ “Myȱ Father andȱ Iȱ areȱ one.”44ȱ Thisȱ textȱ (Johnȱ 10:30)ȱ alwaysȱ arisesȱ whenȱ the discussionȱ inȱ Indiaȱ concernsȱ theȱ relationshipȱ betweenȱ advaita andȱChristianity.ȱIndeed,ȱHenriȱleȱSauxȱpositsȱthatȱthisȱtextȱmay notȱbeȱisolatedȱandȱthereȱisȱcertainlyȱaȱdifferenceȱbetweenȱboth religiousȱsystems.ȱBut,ȱforȱhim,ȱjudgingȱbyȱtheȱquotationȱabove, ȱAbhishiktananda,ȱSaccidananda,ȱp.ȱ194.

43

ȱAbhishiktananda,ȱSaccidananda,ȱp.ȱ82.

44

THEȱETERNALȱCHRISTȱINȱTHEȱASHRAMȱMOVEMENT

189

theȱunityȱofȱJesusȱwithȱtheȱFatherȱisȱproofȱthatȱtheȱadvaitaȱisȱalso presentȱinȱtheȱGospel. Theȱ variousȱ “Iȱ am”ȱ sayingsȱ ofȱ Christȱ inȱ theȱ gospelȱ acȬ cordingȱ toȱ Johnȱ areȱ alsoȱ linkedȱ withȱ theȱ experienceȱ ofȱ unity. Andȱthusȱthereȱareȱmanyȱotherȱquotesȱthatȱareȱintroduced,ȱsuch asȱJesus’ȱwordsȱ“AnyoneȱwhoȱhasȱseenȱmeȱhasȱseenȱtheȱFather” (Johnȱ 14:9).ȱ Butȱ Leȱ Sauxȱ findsȱ mostȱ convincingȱ theȱ useȱ ofȱ the wordȱ “Abba,”ȱ byȱ whichȱ Jesusȱ addressesȱ theȱ heavenlyȱ father: “Theȱ experienceȱ ofȱ intimacy,ȱ ofȱ immanence,ȱ orȱ ratherȱ ofȱ nonȬ distanceȱ whichȱ Jesusȱ hadȱ underȱ theȱ signȱ ofȱ ABBAȱ wasȱ known inȱ Indiaȱ underȱ theȱ signȱ ofȱ atma/Brahman:ȱ ahamȱ Brahmaȱ asȬ mi.”45ȱInȱthisȱcitationȱfromȱhisȱdiariesȱLeȱSauxȱgoesȱfurtherȱthan inȱ hisȱ publications,ȱ althoughȱ heȱ doesȱ speculateȱ inȱ theȱ latterȱ on theȱconceptȱofȱAbba.ȱButȱhere,ȱwithoutȱanyȱreserve,ȱtheȱcoreȱtext ofȱtheȱVedantaȱ(“IȱamȱBrahman”ȱ(BrihadȬAranyakaȱUpanishad I.4.3))ȱ isȱ linkedȱ toȱ theȱ mysticalȱ experienceȱ ofȱ Jesus.ȱ Andȱ soȱ he becomesȱaȱjivanmuktaȱentirely. TheȱEternalȱChrist Forȱ ashramȱ theology,ȱ Jesus’ȱ wayȱ ofȱ lifeȱ andȱ hisȱ ownȱ relaȬ tionshipȱ toȱ Godȱ formȱ anȱ importantȱ sourceȱ ofȱ inspiration,ȱ but moreȱmustȱbeȱsaidȱonȱthis.ȱItȱcannotȱonlyȱbeȱaboutȱaȱperson’sȱreȬ lationshipȱtoȱGodȱinȱPalestineȱduringȱtheȱfirstȱcenturyȱofȱourȱcaȬ lendar—whetherȱ orȱ notȱ thisȱ wasȱ inȱ theȱ formȱ ofȱ monisticȱ mysȬ ticism.ȱ Forȱ allȱ theologiesȱ inȱ theȱ ashramȱ movement,ȱ theȱ imȬ portantȱ questionȱ isȱ howȱ theȱ historicalȱ appearanceȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ of Nazarethȱ canȱ beȱ linkedȱ withȱ theȱ historyȱ ofȱ otherȱ religions. Couldȱ theȱ pietyȱ andȱ theȱ wisdomȱ inȱ theȱ longȱ historyȱ ofȱ HinȬ duismȱbeȱunrelatedȱtoȱChrist? Thoseȱ whoȱ thinkȱ Christocentricallyȱ andȱ atȱ theȱ sameȱ time haveȱ acknowledgedȱ muchȱ truthȱ inȱ otherȱ religionsȱ cannotȱ imaȬ gineȱ thereȱ isȱ noȱ link.ȱ Suchȱ aȱ linkȱ isȱ generallyȱ assumedȱ inȱ the ashrams—ofȱ whateverȱ school.ȱ Itȱ meansȱ that,ȱ likeȱ aȱ cosmic figure,ȱChristȱrisesȱaboveȱtheȱhistoryȱofȱtheȱPalestineȱofȱtheȱfirst century.ȱ Everythingȱ thatȱ humansȱ haveȱ comeȱ toȱ knowȱ about ȱFromȱHenriȱleȱSaux’sȱdiaries,ȱcitedȱbyȱG.ȱGispertȬSauch,ȱ“Christ andȱtheȱIndianȱMysticalȱTradition,”ȱp.ȱ202.ȱInȱhisȱdiariesȱLeȱSauxȱoften expressesȱhimselfȱmoreȱradicallyȱthatȱinȱhisȱworksȱintendedȱforȱpublicaȬ tion;ȱregardingȱ“abba”ȱseeȱalsoȱAbhishiktananda,ȱSaccidananda,ȱpp.ȱ77Ȭ90. 45

JESUSȱASȱGURU

190

Godȱ inȱ oneȱ wayȱ orȱ anotherȱ doesȱ notȱ goȱ beyondȱ thisȱ universal Christ.ȱ Thisȱ isȱ theȱ underlyingȱ principleȱ ofȱ ashramȱ theology, evenȱ thoughȱ itȱ has,ȱ ofȱ course,ȱ givenȱ riseȱ toȱ manyȱ formulations andȱvariousȱconceptionsȱhaveȱarisen. InȱtheȱProtestantȱashramsȱthereȱisȱaȱgeneralȱpreferenceȱfor theȱtermȱ“eternalȱChrist.”ȱWhatȱacharyaȱKeithahnȱofȱtheȱKodaiȬ kanalȱAshramȱFellowshipȱwritesȱisȱtypical: Intoȱ thisȱ cultureȱ [India]ȱ cameȱ theȱ influenceȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ Christ, ofȱhisȱ“love”ȱandȱ“truth”—theȱtraditionȱofȱwhichȱgoesȱback toȱtheȱfirstȱcenturyȱofȱthisȱera.ȱButȱevenȱmoreȱIȱwouldȱstress theȱcommonȱSourceȱofȱ“theȱEternalȱChrist”ȱwhoȱsatȱwithȱthe Buddhaȱ underȱ theȱ Boȱ tree.ȱ Weȱ areȱ stillȱ toȱ recogniseȱ this “CommonȱChrist”ȱthatȱbringsȱglimpsesȱofȱtheȱEternalȱTruth toȱusȱall.46

Inȱ Jesudasonȱ asȱ wellȱ weȱ encounterȱ similarȱ ideasȱ withȱ the sameȱterminology.ȱTheȱprimaryȱexampleȱforȱhimȱisȱnotȱtheȱBudȬ ha’sȱenlightenment,ȱbutȱheȱdoesȱseeȱtheȱdevotionalȱtraditionȱof theȱbhaktiȱasȱaȱpointȱofȱcontact.ȱHeȱexpressesȱthisȱlinkȱinȱornate language:ȱ “Poetsȱ andȱ prophetsȱ ofȱ thisȱ landȱ haveȱ abundantly provedȱ theirȱ experienceȱ ofȱ theȱ eternalȱ Christȱ (thoughȱ strangers toȱ theȱ historicȱ Christ)ȱ throughȱ theirȱ lives,ȱ teachings,ȱ and songs.”47ȱAsȱanȱexample,ȱheȱquotesȱaȱpoemȱbyȱtheȱfamousȱTamil bhaktiȱpoetȱManikkaȬvacakar: OȱThouȱwhoseȱloveȱisȱtenderȱsweet, Moreȱthanȱtheȱnursingȱmotherȱfond, Myȱsinfulȱstonyȱheartȱitȱmelts, Thyȱlightȱpervadesȱmyȱinmostȱheart, Thouȱpourestȱjoyȱlikeȱhoneyȱsweet, OȱallȱpervadingȱtreasureȱThou! TheeȱIȱhaveȱchased,ȱTheeȱIȱhaveȱcaught SublimeȱShiva,ȱwhereȱwiltȱThouȱgo?48

Itȱ isȱ clearȱ that,ȱ forȱ Jesudason,ȱ suchȱ aȱ deepȱ awarenessȱ ofȱ God, evenȱwithȱaȱclearȱnotionȱofȱsinȱandȱmercy,ȱcannotȱbeȱunrelated

ȱKeithahn,ȱPilgrimageȱinȱIndia,ȱp.ȱ60.

46

ȱJesudason,ȱUniqueȱChristȱandȱIndigenousȱChristianity,ȱp.ȱ41.

47

ȱHereȱJesudasonȱgivesȱaȱfreeȱtranslationȱofȱTiruvacakamȱXXXVII:9.

48

THEȱETERNALȱCHRISTȱINȱTHEȱASHRAMȱMOVEMENT

191

toȱ Christ.ȱ Winslowȱ wouldȱ notȱ haveȱ experiencedȱ theȱ poetryȱ of Tukaramȱdifferently. Forȱ Protestantȱ theologians,ȱ itȱ isȱ understandablyȱ important toȱfindȱaȱbasisȱforȱtheseȱthoughtsȱinȱtheȱBible,ȱandȱtheyȱalways findȱ thisȱ basisȱ inȱ theȱ gospelȱ ofȱ John.ȱ Johnȱ doesȱ notȱ hesitateȱ to useȱtheȱGreekȱconceptȱofȱlogosȱtoȱoutlineȱtheȱmeaningȱofȱChrist. Itȱ isȱ nothingȱ lessȱ thanȱ theȱ Word,ȱ throughȱ whichȱ everything cameȱintoȱexistence,ȱthatȱappearsȱasȱJesusȱChristȱinȱhumanȱform onȱ earth:ȱ “Theȱ Wordȱ becameȱ fleshȱ andȱ madeȱ hisȱ dwelling amongȱ us”ȱ (Johnȱ 1:14).ȱ Theȱ philosophyȱ ofȱ theȱ heathenȱ Greeks can,ȱ apparently,ȱ provideȱ theȱ terminologyȱ forȱ describingȱ the mysteryȱ ofȱ theȱ incarnation.ȱ So,ȱ divineȱ revelationȱ mustȱ have beenȱ presentȱ inȱ nonȬChristianȱ philosophy.ȱ Theȱ divineȱ logosȱ is notȱlimitedȱtoȱworkingȱonlyȱwithinȱtheȱChristianȱtradition. ThisȱisȱhowȱJesudasonȱreasons,ȱandȱitȱisȱremarkableȱhowȱhe tracesȱthisȱoperationȱofȱtheȱWordȱinȱIndiaȱasȱwell.ȱHeȱplacesȱthe logosȱ onȱ theȱ sameȱ levelȱ asȱ theȱ holyȱ syllableȱ ofȱ Hinduism,ȱ OM, andȱheȱidentifiesȱthemȱcompletely.ȱIfȱJohnȱhadȱlivedȱinȱIndia,ȱhe wouldȱhaveȱstartedȱhisȱgospelȱwithȱ“InȱtheȱbeginningȱwasȱOM, OMȱwasȱwithȱGodȱandȱOMȱwasȱGod.”49ȱInȱtheȱHinduȱtradition OMȱ isȱ aȱ holyȱ soundȱ thatȱ hasȱ primarilyȱ aȱ ritualȱ andȱ spiritual meaning.ȱ Thereȱ areȱ countlessȱ speculationsȱ thatȱ linkȱ theȱ letters thatȱformȱtheȱsoundȱ(usuallyȱregardedȱasȱaȱthreeȬletteredȱword, AUM)ȱwithȱgodsȱorȱaspectsȱofȱtheȱsupremeȱReality.ȱFinally,ȱthe writtenȱ lettersȱ haveȱ becomeȱ aȱ holyȱ symbolȱ ofȱ theȱ Hindu’sȱ reliȬ gion;ȱtheȱsymbolȱisȱaffixedȱtoȱtemples,ȱbannersȱandȱbooksȱtoȱinȬ spireȱ veneration.ȱ Withȱ respectȱ toȱ that,ȱ oneȱ canȱ objectȱ toȱ the identificationȱofȱlogosȱandȱOM:ȱtheȱconceptȱOMȱhasȱmuchȱmore ofȱaȱreligiousȱcontentȱthanȱlogos. OneȱcanȱseeȱhowȱtheȱconceptȱofȱtheȱeternalȱChristȱdevelops inȱtheȱconcreteȱdetailsȱofȱashramȱlife.ȱIfȱChristȱisȱalreadyȱpresent inȱtheȱHinduȱworld,ȱmuchȱofȱtheȱritualȱcanȱbeȱtakenȱoverȱinȱthe Christianȱworshipȱservice.ȱAndȱthatȱisȱexactlyȱwhatȱhappensȱin allȱashrams.ȱInȱtheȱoldȱChristaȱSevaȱSanghȱinȱPune,ȱtheȱGayatri mantraȱ wasȱ usedȱ asȱ aȱ responseȱ toȱ theȱ callȱ toȱ liftȱ one’sȱ heartȱ to Christ.ȱ Inȱ thisȱ ashram—butȱ alsoȱ inȱ manyȱ others—theȱ famous textȱofȱtheȱBrihadȬAranyakaȱUpanishadȱwasȱusedȱasȱaȱChristian prayer:ȱ ȱJesudason,ȱUniqueȱChristȱandȱIndigenousȱChristianity,ȱpp.ȱ4,ȱ40.

49

JESUSȱASȱGURU

192

Fromȱfalsehoodȱleadȱmeȱtoȱtruth; Fromȱdarknessȱleadȱmeȱtoȱlight; Fromȱdeathȱleadȱmeȱtoȱimmortality.

HenriȱleȱSauxȱseesȱtheȱexpressionȱofȱaȱprayerȱinȱOMȱthatȱisȱmore encompassingȱ thanȱ ordinaryȱ prayers:ȱ “OMȱ isȱ theȱ prayerȱ of man,ȱandȱthroughȱmanȱofȱtheȱwholeȱcreation,ȱforȱtheȱcomingȱof thatȱ finalȱ kingdomȱ proclaimedȱ byȱ Jesus.”50ȱ Heȱ evenȱ expresses reserveȱ regardingȱ recommendingȱ theȱ useȱ ofȱ OMȱ toȱ Christians, notȱbecauseȱitȱwouldȱnotȱfitȱintoȱtheirȱfaithȱbutȱbecauseȱitȱisȱtoo elevatedȱforȱthoseȱwhoȱhaveȱnotȱhadȱanyȱdeepȱinnerȱexperience. Theȱ presenceȱ ofȱ Christȱ isȱ experiencedȱ inȱ thisȱ wayȱ inȱ the spiritualityȱ ofȱ Hinduism.ȱ Andȱ inȱ thisȱ wayȱ theȱ newȱ ashramȱ in Puneȱ canȱ justifyȱ using,ȱ atȱ theȱ preȬeminentȱ celebrationȱ ofȱ the presenceȱofȱChrist,ȱi.e.ȱtheȱEucharist,ȱtextsȱfromȱaȱUpanishadȱin whichȱ theȱ selfȱ statesȱ inȱ theȱ unityȱ withȱ theȱ Brahmanȱ thatȱ has beenȱ realized:ȱ “Iȱ amȱ food.ȱ Iȱ amȱ food.ȱ Iȱ amȱ food”ȱ (Taittiriya Upanishadȱ III:10:ȱ 5).51ȱ Andȱ thereȱ are,ȱ ofȱ course,ȱ manyȱ opȬ portunitiesȱofȱthisȱkind.ȱTheȱhymnȱaboutȱtheȱcosmicȱprimalȱhuȬ manȱwhoȱisȱcutȱintoȱpiecesȱbyȱtheȱgodsȱ(PurushaȬsukta)ȱcanȱbe linkedȱ duringȱ theȱ Easterȱ vigilȱ toȱ theȱ crucifixionȱ ofȱ Jesus.ȱ The textȱ aboutȱ theȱ woundedȱ personȱ whoȱ bleedsȱ likeȱ aȱ treeȱ losing sapȱcanȱfindȱanȱechoȱinȱtheȱepisodeȱofȱtheȱcrucifiedȱChristȱwho wasȱstabbedȱinȱhisȱsideȱbyȱaȱsoldierȱȱ(RigȬVedaȱX:90ȱandȱBrihadȬ AranyakaȱUpanishadȱIII:9:28).52 OneȱmayȱaskȱifȱweȱareȱnotȱtooȱfarȱremovedȱfromȱtheȱhistorȬ icalȱeventsȱthatȱareȱtheȱbasisȱofȱtheȱpreachingȱofȱtheȱgospel.ȱThe figureȱofȱJesusȱChristȱseemsȱtoȱfadeȱifȱeverythingȱinȱtheȱhistory ofȱhumankindȱpointsȱtoȱhim.ȱSpeculationsȱonȱtheȱeternalȱChrist, howeverȱvaluableȱtheyȱmayȱbeȱinȱtheȱencounterȱwithȱHinduism, seemȱtoȱhaveȱlittleȱtoȱdoȱwithȱtheȱJewishȱmanȱfromȱNazareth.ȱA pneumatologicalȱapproachȱwouldȱseemȱtoȱbearȱmoreȱfruitȱinȱthe ȱAbhishiktananda,ȱPrayer,ȱp.ȱ68.

50

ȱSeeȱSaraȱGrant,ȱ“SharedȱPrayerȱandȱSharingȱofȱScriptures,”ȱin: PaulȱPuthanangadyȱ(ed.),ȱSharingȱWorship:ȱCommunicatioȱinȱSacrisȱ(BangaȬ lore:ȱNationalȱBiblical,ȱCatecheticalȱ&ȱLiturgicalȱCentre,ȱ1988),ȱpp.ȱ468, 473. 51

52 ȱȱSeeȱSaraȱGrant,ȱ“SharedȱPrayerȱandȱSharingȱofȱScriptures,”ȱpp. 471,ȱ473.

THEȱETERNALȱCHRISTȱINȱTHEȱASHRAMȱMOVEMENT

193

searchȱ inȱ theȱ ashramsȱ forȱ aȱ wayȱ toȱ linkȱ one’sȱ ownȱ beliefȱ in salvationȱ historyȱ withȱ theȱ wisdomȱ ofȱ otherȱ religions.ȱ Afterȱ all, theȱ Spiritȱ blowsȱ whereȱ itȱ will.ȱ Godȱ hasȱ revealedȱ himselfȱ inȱ a uniqueȱwayȱinȱtheȱlifeȱhistoryȱofȱJesusȱChrist.ȱTheȱSpiritȱofȱGod willȱ continueȱ toȱ illuminateȱ thatȱ secretȱ toȱ humansȱ againȱ and again.ȱ Butȱ couldȱ thatȱ sameȱ Spiritȱ notȱ beȱ activeȱ amongȱ theȱ naȬ tionsȱinȱmanyȱdifferentȱways? JesusȱasȱCosmicȱFigure Andȱyet,ȱoneȱmustȱadmitȱthatȱthereȱisȱmuchȱmoreȱChrist—also inȱtheȱNewȱTestament—thanȱsimplyȱtheȱhistoryȱofȱJesusȱofȱNazȬ areth.ȱ Someȱ Newȱ Testamentȱ lettersȱ evokeȱ aȱ cosmicȱ imageȱ of Christ:ȱheȱisȱ“theȱimageȱofȱtheȱinvisibleȱGod”ȱ(Colossiansȱ1:15) andȱ itȱ canȱ beȱ saidȱ ofȱ himȱ that:ȱ “Heȱ isȱ beforeȱ allȱ things,ȱ andȱ in himȱallȱthingsȱholdȱtogether”ȱ(Colossiansȱ1:17).ȱThisȱisȱaȱhymn ofȱ praiseȱ byȱ aȱ communityȱ thatȱ livesȱ inȱ astonishmentȱ atȱ what theyȱ haveȱ experiencedȱ inȱ theȱ historyȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ ofȱ Nazareth.ȱ The hymnȱ exaltsȱ theȱ risenȱ Lordȱ toȱ aȱ supernaturalȱ figureȱ whoȱ apȬ pearsȱ toȱ determineȱ everythingȱ forȱ thoseȱ whoȱ praiseȱ him.ȱ Here too,ȱ theȱ mostȱ highlyȱ exaltedȱ figureȱ ofȱ Christȱ cannotȱ beȱ sepȬ aratedȱfromȱtheȱhistoricalȱeventsȱaroundȱJesusȱofȱNazareth.ȱBut itȱ remainsȱ aȱ factȱ thatȱ heȱ isȱ portrayedȱ asȱ anȱ allȬencompassing, cosmicȱfigure. BedeȱGriffithsȱjoinsȱinȱwithȱthisȱandȱsimilarȱtextsȱwhenȱhe developsȱ aȱ Christologyȱ inȱ whichȱ theȱ cosmicȱ figureȱ isȱ central.53 Heȱ emphasizesȱ that,ȱ accordingȱ toȱ theȱ hymnȱ inȱ Colossiansȱ 1, ChristȱisȱnotȱsoȱmuchȱGodȱbutȱtheȱimageȱofȱGod.ȱInȱtheȱfigureȱof Christȱ God,ȱ whoȱ asȱ “theȱ invisible”ȱ hasȱ noȱ form,ȱ acquiresȱ a perceptibleȱ shape.ȱ Immediatelyȱ hereȱ alreadyȱ Griffithsȱ seesȱ a parallelȱwithȱIndianȱthought.ȱAccordingȱtoȱtheȱhymnȱinȱPhilipȬ piansȱ 2,ȱ Christȱ wasȱ originallyȱ “inȱ theȱ formȱ ofȱ God.”ȱ Theȱ word “form”ȱ(morph¾ȱinȱȱGreek)ȱisȱmurtiȱinȱSanskrit,ȱandȱaȱnotȱinsigȬ nificantȱ partȱ ofȱ theȱ Hinduȱ traditionȱ consistsȱ preciselyȱ inȱ the searchȱ forȱ aȱ “form”ȱ inȱ whichȱ theȱ invisibleȱ godheadȱ canȱ beȱ exȬ pressed.ȱAnȱinterestingȱdetailȱisȱthatȱinȱeverydayȱHinduȱjargon murtiȱcanȱmeanȱidol.

53 ȱParticularlyȱinȱAȱNewȱVisionȱofȱReality;ȱonȱGriffithsȱseeȱespecially Anandam,ȱTheȱWesternȱLoverȱofȱtheȱEast.

JESUSȱASȱGURU

194

JesusȱChristȱisȱtheȱimageȱofȱtheȱinvisibleȱGod.ȱInȱcontrastȱto muchȱ Indianȱ theology,ȱ Griffithsȱ doesȱ notȱ hoverȱ aboveȱ history. Heȱ wantsȱ toȱ placeȱ allȱ emphasisȱ onȱ theȱ historicalȱ eventsȱ ofȱ the lifeȱofȱJesusȱofȱNazareth.ȱInȱhisȱview,ȱincarnationȱisȱclearlyȱdifȬ ferentȱfromȱtheȱHinduȱavataraȱbecauseȱtheȱChristianȱfaithȱthinks inȱhistoricalȱcategoriesȱandȱnotȱmythicȱones.ȱThusȱJesusȱChristȱis aȱ Christȱ figureȱ whoȱ emergesȱ fromȱ history,ȱ andȱ thatȱ historyȱ is characterizedȱ byȱ theȱ selfȬunderstandingȱ ofȱ Jesus.ȱ Heȱ identifies withȱbothȱtheȱSonȱofȱManȱinȱDanielȱandȱtheȱsufferingȱServantȱof theȱ Lordȱ inȱ DeuteroȬIsaiah.ȱ Griffithsȱ emphasizesȱ thatȱ theȱ comȬ binationȱ ofȱ bothȱ Oldȱ Testamentȱ termsȱ pointȱ toȱ Christ’s uniqueness.ȱNoȱoneȱhadȱeverȱbeforeȱlinkedȱtheseȱtwoȱconcepts, untilȱ bothȱ becameȱ associatedȱ withȱ Jesus.ȱ Thisȱ illuminatesȱ his significanceȱasȱtheȱrepresentativeȱofȱhumankind. Theȱ Bibleȱ usesȱ variousȱ imagesȱ toȱ indicateȱ howȱ Christ representsȱtheȱwholeȱofȱhumanity.ȱGriffithsȱobviouslyȱrefersȱto theȱ wayȱ inȱ whichȱ Paulȱ writesȱ aboutȱ Christȱ asȱ theȱ newȱ Adam: “ForȱasȱinȱAdamȱallȱdie,ȱsoȱinȱChristȱallȱwillȱbeȱmadeȱalive”ȱ(1 Corinthiansȱ15:22).ȱButȱtheȱtextȱthatȱhisȱdeathȱservedȱtoȱ“create inȱ himselfȱ oneȱ newȱ man”ȱ (Ephesiansȱ 2:15)ȱ alsoȱ refersȱ toȱ the sameȱ thing.ȱ Thereforeȱ Jesusȱ isȱ aȱ cosmicȱ figureȱ whoȱ represents theȱwholeȱofȱhumanity. Itȱ isȱ hereȱ that,ȱ forȱ Griffiths,ȱ theȱ connectionȱ toȱ other religionsȱ isȱ found.ȱ Heȱ believesȱ heȱ canȱ demonstrateȱ thatȱ many traditionsȱincludeȱtheȱconceptȱofȱaȱcosmicȱprimalȱmanȱwhoȱwas viewedȱ asȱ theȱ prototypeȱ ofȱ theȱ wholeȱ ofȱ humankind.ȱ Inȱ conȬ nectionȱwithȱHinduismȱheȱrefersȱtoȱtheȱpurusha,ȱinȱtheȱveryȱanȬ cientȱ hymnȱ foundȱ inȱ theȱ RigȬVeda.ȱ Thisȱ isȱ aȱ creationȱ mythȱ in whichȱaȱgiantȱprimalȱmanȱisȱcentral.ȱThisȱpurushaȱisȱtheȱoriginȱof everythingȱthatȱexists:ȱ“HeȱisȱtheȱManȱwhoȱisȱallȱthis,ȱwhatever hasȱbeenȱandȱisȱtoȱbe.ȱHeȱisȱtheȱrulerȱofȱimmortality”ȱ(RigȬVeda X.90.2).54ȱ Itȱ isȱ hisȱ ritualȱ slaughterȱ byȱ theȱ godsȱ thatȱ givesȱ exȬ istenceȱ aȱ beginning—fromȱ hisȱ limbsȱ theȱ differentȱ castesȱ ofȱ huȬ mankindȱarise. Bedeȱ Griffithsȱ seesȱ aȱ similarȱ archetypeȱ forȱ humankindȱ in manyȱ religionsȱ andȱ cultures.ȱ Heȱ thusȱ placesȱ theȱ tathagataȱ of laterȱBuddhismȱwithinȱtheȱsameȱframeworkȱandȱbelievesȱheȱcan ȱTheȱtranslationȱisȱfrom:ȱWendyȱDonigerȱO’Flaherty,ȱTheȱRigȱVeda: AnȱAnthologyȱ(London:ȱPenguinȱBooks,ȱ1981),ȱp.ȱ30. 54

THEȱETERNALȱCHRISTȱINȱTHEȱASHRAMȱMOVEMENT

195

findȱ thisȱ inȱ Islamȱ asȱ well,ȱ inȱ theȱ ideaȱ ofȱ theȱ “perfectȱ human.” Butȱ heȱ doesȱ bringȱ aȱ greatȱ dealȱ fromȱ veryȱ differentȱ waysȱ of thinkingȱ together.ȱ Theȱ desireȱ toȱ arriveȱ atȱ anȱ allȬencompassing approachȱthatȱcanȱincludeȱeveryȱtraditionȱmakesȱGriffithsȱarguȬ mentȱweakerȱthanȱisȱnecessary.ȱAndȱtheȱincreasinglyȱstrongȱtenȬ dencyȱ inȱ theȱ lastȱ yearsȱ ofȱ hisȱ lifeȱ toȱ arriveȱ atȱ aȱ theocentric pluralismȱinȱChristologyȱalsoȱtendsȱtoȱrepressȱtheȱcharacteristics ofȱtheȱChristianȱfaith. Butȱinȱitself,ȱhisȱstressȱonȱtheȱpositionȱofȱChristȱasȱrepresenȬ tativeȱ ofȱ humanȱ beingsȱ isȱ veryȱ valuable.ȱ Andȱ heȱ isȱ rightȱ when heȱpositsȱthatȱitȱisȱhereȱthatȱtheȱfigureȱofȱChristȱcanȱbecomeȱan appealingȱ figureȱ inȱ theȱ contextȱ ofȱ Hinduism.ȱ Theȱ Vedicȱ verses onȱ theȱ purushaȱ areȱ notȱ exactlyȱ suitedȱ toȱ beingȱ placedȱ simply alongsideȱbiblicalȱtexts.ȱButȱaȱChristologyȱthatȱassumesȱtheȱconȬ ceptȱofȱpurushaȱoffersȱtheȱHinduȱrecognitionȱofȱsomethingȱwith whichȱ heȱ isȱ familiarȱ andȱ theȱ Christianȱ aȱ newȱ awarenessȱ ofȱ the cosmicȱaspectȱinȱtheȱbiblicalȱimageȱofȱChrist. ChristȱinȱSaccidananda Theȱ ashramsȱ ofȱ theȱ kaviȱ typeȱ wereȱ stronglyȱ orientedȱ fromȱ the veryȱbeginningȱtoȱtheȱmonisticȱtraditionȱofȱHinduism.ȱTheȱwritȬ ingsȱ ofȱ theȱ Vedantaȱ andȱ theȱ advaitaȱ doctrineȱ ofȱ Shankaraȱ exerȬ cisedȱ aȱ greatȱ pullȱ onȱ theȱ ashramȱ inhabitants.ȱ Weȱ haveȱ already seenȱthatȱtheȱcrossesȱMonchaninȱandȱLeȱSauxȱworeȱaroundȱtheir necksȱhadȱtheȱOMȱsymbolȱcarvedȱinȱtheȱcentre.ȱLeȱSauxȱwrites thatȱ thisȱ combinationȱ wasȱ intendedȱ asȱ “aȱ solemnȱ affirmation thatȱtheȱChristȱrevealedȱinȱhistoryȱisȱtheȱveryȱBrahmanȱitself,ȱthe objectȱofȱallȱtheȱcontemplationsȱofȱtheȱRishis.”55ȱThisȱremark,ȱalȬ thoughȱwrittenȱinȱtheȱmemorialȱbookȱforȱMonchanin,ȱisȱneverȬ thelessȱ Leȱ Saux’s.ȱ Monchaninȱ wasȱ muchȱ moreȱ reticentȱ in linkingȱ theȱ Christianȱ faithȱ andȱ Hinduism.ȱ Heȱ mayȱ haveȱ worn theȱ OMȱ symbolȱ outȱ ofȱ respectȱ forȱ theȱ Hinduȱ environmentȱ in whichȱ heȱ wantedȱ toȱ live,ȱ butȱ heȱ certainlyȱ didȱ notȱ becomeȱ an advaitin.ȱ Amazed,ȱ heȱ observesȱ ȱ howȱ theȱ Hindusȱ inȱ thisȱ school attachȱ littleȱ valueȱ toȱ theirȱ personalityȱ andȱ evenȱ “contemplate withȱ equanimity,ȱ evenȱ withȱ anticipatedȱ happiness,ȱ theȱ lossȱ of theirȱpersonalityȱbyȱabsorptionȱintoȱtheȱinfiniteȱBeingȬConsciousȬ ȱIn:ȱSwamiȱParamaȱArubiȱAnanadam,ȱp.ȱ17.

55

196

JESUSȱASȱGURU

nessȬandȬBlissȱ (SatȬcitȬananda).”56ȱ Griffiths,ȱ theirȱ successorȱ at Shantivanam,ȱ alsoȱ goesȱ aȱ longȱ wayȱ inȱ theȱ directionȱ ofȱ the monisticȱmysticismȱbutȱultimatelyȱwantsȱnothingȱtoȱdoȱwithȱthe erasingȱofȱone’sȱpersonality. HenriȱleȱSaux’sȱgoalȱforȱhisȱlifeȱwasȱincreasinglyȱtoȱbecome absorbedȱ intoȱ Saccidananda.ȱ Initially,ȱ heȱ stillȱ wantedȱ toȱ retain theȱdistinctionȱbetweenȱtheȱpersonalȱimageȱofȱGodȱinȱtheȱChrisȬ tianȱ faithȱ andȱ theȱ impersonalȱ Realityȱ ofȱ monisticȱ thinking.ȱ But byȱ ȱ theȱ endȱ ofȱ hisȱ lifeȱ heȱ becameȱ convincedȱ thatȱ theȱ Christian faithȱ canȱ beȱ nothingȱ otherȱ thanȱ advaita.ȱ Hisȱ ownȱ mysticalȱ exȬ perienceȱonȱtheȱpathȱofȱtheȱVedantaȱledȱhimȱtoȱthisȱconviction. NowȱthereȱisȱonlyȱtheȱquestionȱofȱhowȱChristȱcanȱhaveȱaȱplace inȱtheȱworldȱofȱtheȱadvaita. LeȱSauxȱdistinguishesȱsharplyȱbetweenȱtheȱhistoricalȱJesus andȱ theȱ cosmicȱ Christ.ȱ Itȱ evenȱ becomesȱ unclearȱ whereȱ theȱ two areȱ stillȱ connected.ȱ Ifȱ heȱ beginsȱ fromȱ belowȱ inȱ hisȱ Christology, thenȱheȱseesȱJesusȱasȱaȱjivanmukta,ȱaȱpersonȱwhoȱduringȱhisȱlife attainedȱunityȱwithȱtheȱAll.ȱJesus’ȱmysticalȱexperienceȱ(“Iȱam”) thenȱ becomesȱ anȱ exampleȱ forȱ theȱ believer,ȱ whoȱ mustȱ comeȱ to theȱ sameȱ redemptiveȱ insight.ȱ Butȱ theȱ cosmicȱ Christȱ alsoȱ hasȱ a placeȱinȱLeȱSaux’sȱmonisticȱtheologyȱ–ȱasȱtheȱsecondȱcomponent ofȱSaccidananda. Leȱ Sauxȱ placesȱ theȱ Christianȱ Trinityȱ onȱ theȱ sameȱ levelȱ as theȱSupremeȱRealityȱasȱitȱisȱreferredȱtoȱinȱtheȱadvaitaȱteachingȱby theȱ termsȱ Sat,ȱ Citȱ andȱ Ananda.ȱ Theseȱ termsȱ meanȱ Being,ȱ ConȬ sciousnessȱ andȱ Blessedness,ȱ respectively,ȱ andȱ areȱ foundȱ inȱ the originalȱ Vedantaȱ writings,ȱ appearingȱ separatelyȱ inȱ many Upanishads.ȱButȱ theȱ contractionȱ Saccidanandaȱ isȱ ofȱ aȱ laterȱ date. InȱtheȱadvaitaȱdoctrineȱofȱShankaraȱ(ninthȱcentury)ȱthisȱconcept becomesȱoneȱofȱtheȱdescriptionsȱofȱBrahman,ȱtheȱsupremeȱRealȬ ity.ȱTheȱtermȱgivesȱrise,ȱofȱcourse,ȱtoȱnumerousȱspeculationsȱas toȱtheȱnatureȱofȱthatȱexaltedȱBeing,ȱwhichȱisȱactuallyȱindescribȬ able. Forȱ aȱ Christianȱ likeȱ Leȱ Sauxȱ thisȱ conceptualȱ apparatus yieldsȱtheȱopportunityȱtoȱconsiderȱaȱnewȱwayȱofȱthinkingȱabout 56 ȱJ.ȱMonchanin,ȱ“TheȱChristianȱApproachȱtoȱHinduism”ȱ(articleȱin IndiaȱMissionaryȱBulletinȱ[Juneȱ1952]),ȱincludedȱin:ȱSwamiȱParamaȱArubiȱAȬ nandam,ȱpp.ȱ171Ȭ76;ȱquotationȱfoundȱonȱp.ȱ175.

THEȱETERNALȱCHRISTȱINȱTHEȱASHRAMȱMOVEMENT

197

theȱ Trinityȱ andȱ toȱ describeȱ Christȱ withinȱ it.57ȱ Inȱ Sat,ȱ Being,ȱ he seesȱ theȱ Fatherȱ ofȱ theȱ Trinity,ȱ butȱ thisȱ Beingȱ isȱ unknowableȱ in itself:ȱ “Heȱ isȱ theȱ Abyssȱ ofȱ Silence.”ȱ Butȱ thenȱ thereȱ isȱ theȱ Son whoȱ flowsȱ fromȱ thisȱ sourceȱ likeȱ aȱ streamȱ ofȱ water.ȱ “Citȱ isȱ the selfȬawakeningȱ ofȱ Being,ȱ itsȱ comingȱ toȱ manifestationȱ within itself.”ȱ Thisȱ manifestationȱ ofȱ Beingȱ isȱ notȱ differentȱ fromȱ the Lightȱ thatȱ illuminatesȱ everyȱ person,ȱ asȱ theȱ prologueȱ toȱ the gospelȱ ofȱ Johnȱ states.ȱ Butȱ withȱ equalȱ easeȱ Leȱ Sauxȱ isȱ ableȱ to introduceȱtheȱwisdomȱofȱanȱUpanishadȱinȱthisȱcontext.ȱ TheȱseersȱinȱoldȱtimeȱhadȱanȱintuitionȱofȱthisȱveryȱpureȱselfȬ awarenessȱlyingȱatȱtheȱveryȱsourceȱofȱtheirȱbeingȱasȱwellȱas atȱtheȱultimateȱhorizonȱofȱtheirȱthought,ȱanȱintuitionȱofȱthat whichȱunfailinglyȱescapesȱtheȱgraspȱofȱtheȱdevas,ȱthatȱis,ȱof man’sȱintellectȱandȱwill.ȱ(cf.ȱKenaȱUp.ȱ3)

Inȱhisȱview,ȱthereȱisȱnoȱdifferenceȱbetweenȱtheȱmysticalȱexperiȬ enceȱofȱmonisticȱHindusȱandȱChristians.ȱ“AsȱtheȱFatherȱawakes toȱ himselfȱ inȱ me,ȱ andȱ inȱ meȱ contemplatesȱ hisȱ onlyȱ Son,ȱ soȱ he doesȱinȱeveryȱoneȱofȱmyȱbrethren.” HereȱtheȱfigureȱofȱChristȱisȱentirelyȱembeddedȱinȱtheȱmysȬ ticalȱexperienceȱofȱtheȱadvaita.ȱWhatȱhappensȱhereȱisȱactuallyȱthe oppositeȱofȱBedeȱGriffiths’ȱpurushaȱChristology.ȱThereȱitȱwasȱan attemptȱ toȱ giveȱ aȱ humanȱ faceȱ toȱ theȱ cosmicȱ figureȱ thatȱ reȬ presentsȱ allȱ ofȱ humankind.ȱ Hereȱ itȱ isȱ theȱ impersonalȱ depiction ofȱBeing,ȱunfoldingȱinȱConsciousness,ȱthatȱindicatesȱtheȱcosmic figureȱofȱChrist.ȱButȱbothȱtrainsȱofȱthoughtȱareȱoneȱinȱtheȱcharȬ acteristicȱ gropingȱ forȱ thatȱ whichȱ isȱ theȱ mostȱ allȬencompassing. WhoeverȱwearsȱkaviȱcannotȱthinkȱhighlyȱenoughȱofȱChrist. Theȱ ashramȱ movementȱ inȱ itsȱ variousȱ theological approachesȱ developedȱ newȱ viewsȱ aboutȱ theȱ mysteryȱ ofȱ Jesus Christ.ȱ Althoughȱ ȱ oneȱ canȱ objectȱ toȱ someȱ elementsȱ ofȱ ashram theology,ȱlifeȱinȱtheȱashramsȱhasȱcertainlyȱprovedȱfruitful.ȱItȱhas causedȱbelieversȱinȱandȱoutsideȱofȱIndiaȱtoȱreflectȱanewȱonȱthat whichȱisȱpeculiarȱtoȱChristianȱfaithȱandȱthatȱwhichȱisȱvaluableȱin otherȱ religions.ȱ Itȱ isȱ withȱ goodȱ reasonȱ thatȱ Vanȱ Bergen concludedȱhisȱdissertationȱonȱtheȱsannyasaȱwith:ȱ“Baptizingȱthe homelessȱexistenceȱmeansȱexpressingȱtheȱfactȱthatȱinȱChristȱGod ȱSeeȱAbhishiktananda,ȱSaccidananda,ȱpp.ȱ178Ȭ81,ȱfromȱwhichȱthe quotesȱthatȱfollowȱareȱtaken. 57

JESUSȱASȱGURU

198

isȱalwaysȱwithȱus,ȱbut,ȱforȱtheȱChristianȱasȱwell,ȱalwaysȱinȱaȱreȬ freshinglyȱdifferentȱway.”58

ȱLudgerȱFranzȱMariaȱvanȱBergen,ȱLichtȱopȱhetȱlevenȱvanȱreligieuzen: SannyasaȬdipikaȱ(Nijmegen:ȱThoben,ȱ1975),ȱthesisȱXVI. 58

INTERMEZZO

AlfredȱThomas Fromȱtheȱbeginningȱtheȱashram movementȱ triedȱ toȱ matchȱ the designȱandȱlayoutȱofȱtheȱbuildȬ ingsȱ toȱ theȱ surroundingȱ culȬ ture.ȱ Thus,ȱ inȱ 1928,ȱ aȱ chapel wasȱdesignedȱinȱtheȱChristaȱSeȬ vaȱSanghaȱinȱPuneȱinȱwhichȱthe Hinduȱ traditionȱ wasȱ normaȬ tive.1ȱItȱwasȱaȱfaithfulȱimitation ofȱ oneȱ ofȱ theȱ countlessȱ small edifices,ȱ constructedȱ allȱ over theȱ countryȱ toȱ accommodate imagesȱ ofȱ gods.ȱ “Shrines”ȱ of thisȱ kindȱ areȱ notȱ intendedȱ as placesȱ forȱ communityȱ worship services.ȱ Passersbyȱ pauseȱ forȱ a momentȱinȱconnectionȱwithȱthe sanctityȱ ofȱ theȱ placeȱ andȱ perhapsȱ bringȱ aȱ smallȱ sacrifice.ȱ The buildingȱservedȱforȱyearsȱtoȱmarkȱtheȱreligiousȱcharacterȱofȱthe community.ȱItȱwasȱfinallyȱreplacedȱbyȱaȱnew,ȱlargerȱstructure. Theȱ dailyȱ prayerȱ servicesȱ ofȱ theȱ ashramȱ communityȱ were heldȱinȱaȱroomȱonȱtheȱsecondȱfloor,ȱwhichȱwasȱdesignedȱrather traditionallyȱasȱaȱChristianȱprayerȱroomȱwithȱanȱaltar,ȱantepenȬ dia,ȱ brassȱ crossȱ andȱ sanctuaryȱ lamp.ȱ Inȱ thisȱ prayerȱ roomȱ were alsoȱtwoȱpaintingsȱbyȱtheȱAnglicanȱartistȱAlfredȱThomas,ȱwhich gaveȱ aȱ strongȱ Indianȱ accentȱ toȱ theȱ space.ȱ ȱ Bothȱ paintingsȱ were ofȱChrist,ȱtheȱoneȱofȱJesusȱdeepȱinȱprayerȱandȱtheȱotherȱofȱJesus crucified.ȱ Theȱ membersȱ ofȱ theȱ ashramȱ communityȱ clearlyȱ felt affinityȱ forȱ thisȱ artist’sȱ work.ȱ Inȱ 1932ȱ theyȱ includedȱ aȱ painting byȱThomasȱinȱtheȱChristmasȱissueȱofȱtheirȱperiodical,ȱwhileȱhavȬ ȱTheȱdrawingȱshownȱhereȱisȱbyȱK.G.ȱMathew,ȱandȱhasȱbeenȱtaken fromȱK.G.ȱMathewȱandȱCecilȱHargreaves,ȱ25ȱIndianȱChurchesȱ(Calcutta: BishopȱCollege,ȱ1975),ȱp.ȱ22. 1

199

JESUSȱASȱGURU

200

ingȱalsoȱissuedȱaȱseriesȱofȱreproductionsȱofȱhisȱworkȱearlierȱthat year.ȱ Forȱ thatȱ matter,ȱ theȱ Romanȱ Catholicȱ painterȱ Angeloȱ da Fonseca,ȱwhoȱhadȱlivedȱforȱaȱlongȱtimeȱinȱtheȱashram,ȱwasȱalso veryȱmuchȱappreciatedȱandȱsupported. Itȱwasȱcompletelyȱinȱlineȱwithȱtheȱtaskȱtheȱmembersȱofȱthe ashramȱcommunityȱhadȱsetȱforȱthemselvesȱtoȱpromoteȱsuchȱarȬ tisticȱ expression.ȱ Afterȱ all,ȱ itȱ concernedȱ anȱ inculturationȱ ofȱ the Gospelȱ inȱ theȱ worldȱ ofȱ Hinduism,ȱ andȱ itȱ wasȱ artistsȱ especially who,ȱ beingȱ ableȱ toȱ understandȱ theȱ languageȱ ofȱ images,ȱ could makeȱ anȱ importantȱ contributionȱ here.ȱ Itȱ isȱ certainlyȱ notȱ surȬ prisingȱthatȱAlfredȱThomasȱwasȱtheȱfavouriteȱinȱtheȱcircleȱofȱthe Christaȱ Sevaȱ Sangha.ȱ Thereȱ wereȱ fewȱ artistsȱ whoȱ depictedȱ so manyȱ aspectsȱ ofȱ Christ’sȱ workȱ andȱ wentȱ asȱ farȱ asȱ heȱ didȱ in adaptingȱhisȱsubjectȱmatterȱtoȱHinduȱculture.ȱHeȱdepictsȱChrist asȱ anȱ exaltedȱ sannyasi,ȱ sometimesȱ clearlyȱ withȱ theȱ Buddha’s featuresȱ andȱ atȱ otherȱ timesȱ bearingȱ aȱ strongȱ resemblanceȱ toȱ a divineȱ avataraȱ likeȱ Krishna.ȱ Heȱ alsoȱ reflectedȱ somethingȱ ofȱ a supratemporalȱ reality:ȱ theȱ eternalȱ Christȱ whoȱ descendedȱ into history. Alfredȱ Davidȱ Thomasȱ wasȱ bornȱ inȱ Agraȱ intoȱ aȱ Christian family.ȱ Hisȱ wasȱ educatedȱ atȱ theȱ artȱ academyȱ inȱ Lucknow, whichȱ wasȱ stronglyȱ orientedȱ towardȱ classicalȱ Hinduȱ iconoȬ graphy.ȱHeȱlaterȱtookȱlessonsȱatȱtheȱcentreȱofȱtheȱBengaleseȱreȬ naissance,ȱwithȱAbanindranathȱTagoreȱ(1871Ȭ1951)ȱandȱNandaȬ lalȱ Boseȱ (1882Ȭ1966).2ȱ Thomasȱ workedȱ inȱ Delhiȱ forȱ manyȱ years andȱ thenȱ settledȱ inȱ Chelsea,ȱ England,ȱ inȱ theȱ secondȱ halfȱ ofȱ his lifeȱwhereȱheȱkeptȱaȱstudioȱuntilȱhisȱdeath.ȱHeȱwasȱaȱmemberȱof theȱ Anglicanȱ Churchȱ andȱ hisȱ affinityȱ withȱ theȱ highȬchurch experienceȱ ofȱ theȱ mysteryȱ ofȱ theȱ faithȱ isȱ clearlyȱ visibleȱ inȱ his work.ȱAndȱthatȱaffinityȱwasȱmutual.ȱItȱwasȱpreciselyȱtheȱ“High Church”ȱ missionȱ organization,ȱ theȱ Societyȱ forȱ theȱ Propagation ofȱ theȱ Gospel,ȱ thatȱ wasȱ responsibleȱ forȱ theȱ publicationȱ that madeȱ himȱ worldȬfamous.ȱ Itȱ isȱ aȱ bookȱ containingȱ 24ȱ reproducȬ tionsȱ ofȱ hisȱ paintingsȱ ofȱ themesȱ fromȱ theȱ Gospel.ȱ Itȱ isȱ usually

ȱSeeȱtheȱintermezzoȱonȱNandalalȱBoseȱinȱthisȱvolume,ȱpp.ȱ159Ȭ60.

2

ALFREDȱTHOMAS

201

quotedȱinȱaccordanceȱwithȱtheȱmodestȱtitleȱonȱtheȱcover:ȱTheȱLife ofȱChristȱbyȱanȱIndianȱArtist.3ȱ Aȱ characteristicȱ paintingȱ inȱ thisȱ seriesȱ isȱ Theȱ Womanȱ Taken inȱAdultery.4ȱItȱisȱaȱdepictionȱofȱtheȱepisodeȱdescribedȱinȱJohnȱ8: 1Ȭ11.ȱExpertsȱinȱ theȱ lawȱandȱ Phariseesȱbringȱaȱwomanȱ toȱ Jesus whoȱ hadȱ beenȱ caughtȱ inȱ theȱ actȱ ofȱ adultery.ȱ Theyȱ pointȱ outȱ to Jesusȱ thatȱ theȱ lawȱ demandsȱ stoningȱ forȱ suchȱ anȱ offense,ȱ but Jesusȱremindsȱthemȱofȱtheirȱownȱguiltȱbyȱsaying:ȱ“Ifȱanyȱoneȱof youȱisȱwithoutȱsin,ȱletȱhimȱbeȱtheȱfirstȱtoȱthrowȱaȱstoneȱatȱher.” ThomasȱportrayedȱJesusȱhereȱinȱaȱveryȱspecificȱway:ȱJesus isȱ clothedȱ inȱ kavi,ȱ theȱ ochreȱ garmentȱ ofȱ theȱ Hinduȱ orȱ Buddhist sannyasi.ȱHisȱlightȱskinȱcolour,ȱinȱclearȱcontrastȱtoȱtheȱothersȱin theȱpainting,ȱreinforcesȱtheȱimpressionȱofȱholiness.ȱParticularly strikingȱ (andȱ veryȱ suggestive!)ȱ isȱ thatȱ Christȱ isȱ placedȱ high aboveȱtheȱotherȱfigures.ȱTheȱgospel’sȱstatementȱthatȱJesusȱwrote withȱhisȱfingerȱonȱtheȱgroundȱisȱpresentedȱinȱaȱveryȱspecialȱway byȱtheȱpainter.ȱByȱhavingȱChristȱseatedȱinȱtheȱhalfȬlotusȱposition withȱ hisȱ handsȱ stretchingȱ downwards,ȱ theȱ painterȱ invokesȱ a sceneȱfromȱaȱwholeȱotherȱworld.ȱWeȱseeȱGautama,ȱtheȱBuddha, beforeȱusȱinȱoneȱofȱhisȱfixedȱposes,ȱtheȱȱbhumisparshamudra.ȱThis isȱ theȱ imageȱ thatȱ theȱ Buddha,ȱ afterȱ hisȱ enlightenment,ȱ touches theȱearthȱtoȱcallȱitȱtoȱbeȱaȱwitnessȱthatȱheȱhasȱobtainedȱenlightȬ enmentȱ andȱ willȱ bringȱ theȱ properȱ message.ȱ Inȱ thisȱ connection anotherȱ detailȱ isȱ givenȱ extraȱ significance.ȱ Theȱ Christȱ figure’s hairȱisȱtiedȱupȱinȱaȱknotȱaboveȱtheȱhead,ȱasȱasceticsȱoftenȱdo.ȱBut thisȱ alsoȱ invokesȱ aȱ Buddhistȱ image:ȱ theȱ bumpȱ onȱ theȱ topȱ of Buddha’sȱ headȱ (ushnisha),ȱ whichȱ traditionȱ saysȱ characterized theȱBuddha.ȱ Alsoȱ strikingȱ areȱ Jesus’ȱ closedȱ eyes,ȱ whichȱ expressesȱ disȬ tanceȱ andȱ contemplation.ȱ Thisȱ passageȱ inȱ theȱ gospelȱ givesȱ the occasionȱforȱthisȱbyȱtheȱrepeatedȱreportȱofȱJesusȱwritingȱonȱthe ground.ȱButȱinȱAlfredȱThomas’ȱpaintingȱmoreȱisȱgoingȱonȱthan Jesusȱsimplyȱbeingȱlostȱinȱtheȱwordsȱheȱisȱwriting.ȱInȱthisȱpaintȬ

ȱTheȱtitleȱpageȱdoesȱindicateȱtheȱnameȱofȱtheȱpainter:ȱTheȱLifeȱof Christ:ȱPaintingsȱbyȱAlfredȱThomas,ȱLondonȱ(firstȱprintingȱ1948). 3

4 ȱAlfredȱThomas,ȱTheȱLifeȱofȱChristȱbyȱanȱIndianȱArtist,ȱ2ndȱed.ȱ(LonȬ don:ȱTheȱSocietyȱforȱtheȱPropagationȱofȱtheȱGospel,ȱ1961),ȱp.ȱ37.

202

JESUSȱASȱGURU

ALFREDȱTHOMAS

203

ingȱ heȱ seemsȱ toȱ beȱ aboveȱ theȱ earthlyȱ conflictȱ inȱ allȱ respects. Whatȱ isȱ happeningȱ onȱ theȱ groundȱ levelȱ betweenȱ theȱ experts andȱ theȱ womanȱ cannotȱ moveȱ him.ȱ Hisȱ wordsȱ ofȱ wisdomȱ will settleȱtheȱconflict,ȱbutȱheȱisȱnotȱpersonallyȱinvolvedȱinȱit. Christȱ doesȱ notȱ lookȱ atȱ theȱ womanȱ norȱ atȱ herȱ accusers. Hereȱweȱshouldȱpointȱoutȱaȱratherȱsensualȱtraitȱinȱthisȱpainting. Theȱwoman’sȱsariȱhasȱbeenȱtornȱandȱherȱwristsȱareȱtiedȱtogether behindȱherȱback.ȱTheȱexperts,ȱwhoȱareȱliterallyȱstandingȱbelow, haveȱ apparentlyȱ notȱ sparedȱ herȱ inȱ anyȱ way.ȱ Sheȱ nowȱ stands, withȱ herȱ upperȱ bodyȱ exposedȱ beforeȱ Jesus.ȱ Accordingȱ toȱ the standardsȱofȱtheȱHinduȱcommunity,ȱsheȱisȱinȱanȱextremelyȱemȬ barrassingȱ position.ȱ Butȱ Christȱ doesȱ notȱ lookȱ atȱ her.ȱ Theȱ great shameȱ thatȱ lookingȱ atȱ herȱ wouldȱ surelyȱ arouseȱ isȱ sparedȱ her. Onȱtheȱotherȱhand,ȱtheȱpainterȱthusȱshowsȱhow,ȱforȱhim,ȱChrist doesȱnotȱallowȱhimselfȱtoȱbeȱinfluencedȱbyȱeroticismȱandȱdesire. Inȱ anotherȱ painting,ȱ “Theȱ Temptation,”ȱ Christȱ rejectsȱ Satan, whoȱ appearsȱ toȱ himȱ asȱ aȱ nakedȱ woman,ȱ withȱ theȱ sameȱ castȬ downȱlook.5ȱHeȱdoesȱnotȱsurrenderȱtoȱsexualȱurgesȱandȱcanȱrise aboveȱtheȱstruggleȱthatȱthoseȱurgesȱcauseȱamongȱpeople. Inȱ theȱ eyesȱ ofȱ Westerners,ȱ Thomas’ȱ Christȱ oftenȱ hasȱ an ethereal,ȱunearthlyȱappearance.ȱHisȱthin,ȱgracefulȱfigureȱandȱhis refinedȱ gesturesȱ areȱ mostȱ likelyȱ experiencedȱ asȱ feminineȱ or feeble.ȱ Butȱ oneȱ shouldȱ rememberȱ thatȱ theȱ painterȱ isȱ usingȱ the pictorialȱlanguageȱofȱHinduȱmythology,ȱwhereȱthisȱisȱaȱwayȱof depictingȱaȱdivineȱform.ȱAndȱinȱthisȱtraditionȱgodsȱcanȱbeȱpowȬ erfulȱheroes,ȱlikeȱRama,ȱorȱpassionateȱlovers,ȱlikeȱKrishna.6ȱThe reproachȱ ofȱ apparentȱ docetismȱ isȱ thereforeȱ notȱ justified.ȱ One canȱ objectȱ toȱ thisȱ aestheticȱ whichȱ hasȱ beenȱ takenȱ veryȱ far.ȱ The discerningȱChristȱnowhereȱseemsȱtoȱbearȱtheȱtracesȱofȱsuffering —notȱ inȱ Gethsemaneȱ andȱ alsoȱ notȱ onȱ Golgotha.ȱ Andȱ theȱ proȬ phecyȱofȱtheȱsufferingȱServantȱofȱtheȱLordȱ(Heȱhadȱnoȱbeautyȱor majestyȱtoȱattractȱusȱtoȱhim,ȱnothingȱinȱhisȱappearanceȱthatȱwe ȱThomas,ȱTheȱLifeȱofȱChrist,ȱp.ȱ17.

5

ȱRichardȱTaylorȱpointsȱoutȱcorrectlyȱthatȱfemaleȱdivinitiesȱareȱdeȬ pictedȱveryȱdifferentlyȱinȱthisȱworld.ȱHeȱalsoȱassertsȱthatȱthroughȱthe eroticȱcontextȱThomasȱaccentuatesȱJesus’ȱmasculinity,ȱwhichȱtheȱWestern traditionȱneverȱdaredȱtoȱdo.ȱCf.ȱRichardȱTaylor,ȱJesusȱinȱIndianȱPaintings, ConfessingȱtheȱFaithȱinȱIndiaȱSeries,ȱ11ȱ(Madras:ȱTheȱChristianȱLiterature Society,ȱ1975),ȱpp.ȱ121Ȭ24. 6

204

JESUSȱASȱGURU

shouldȱ desireȱ himȱ (Isaiahȱ 53:2),ȱ doesȱ notȱ appearȱ toȱ haveȱ been inspirationalȱforȱthisȱpainter. Overȱ againstȱ that,ȱ however,ȱ Thomasȱ didȱ depictȱ theȱ mysȬ teryȱofȱtheȱincarnationȱinȱanȱimpressiveȱway.ȱNothingȱlessȱthan God’sȱ presenceȱ onȱ earthȱ isȱ toȱ beȱ experiencedȱ inȱ Jesusȱ Christ. Andȱ thisȱ presenceȱ isȱ characterized,ȱ inȱ goodȱ Indianȱ fashion,ȱ by mildȱ compassionȱ andȱ exaltedȱ wisdom.ȱ Theȱ painterȱ makesȱ inȬ souciantȱuseȱofȱtheȱdifferentȱtraditionsȱtheȱIndianȱreligionsȱhave toȱ offer.ȱ Christȱ standsȱ likeȱ Krishnaȱ inȱ theȱ houseȱ ofȱ Maryȱ and Martha:ȱ theȱ neckȱ bentȱ sidewaysȱ andȱ theȱ pelvisȱ tilted,ȱ causing theȱbodyȱtoȱtakeȱonȱtheȱformȱofȱanȱsȱ(tribhanga).ȱAtȱtheȱtransfigȬ urationȱonȱtheȱmount,ȱChristȱevenȱhasȱtheȱblueȱbodyȱcolourȱof theȱavatarasȱofȱVishnu.ȱWhenȱheȱspeaksȱwithȱtheȱSamaritanȱwoȬ man,ȱtheȱmoonȱisȱsoȱvisibleȱinȱtheȱbackgroundȱthatȱitȱseemsȱasȱif theȱcrescentȱmoonȱisȱpiercingȱhisȱhair,ȱasȱitȱdoesȱShiva.ȱAnd,ȱas theȱ paintingȱ reproducedȱ hereȱ shows,ȱ theȱ shapeȱ ofȱ Buddhaȱ is subservientȱtoȱtheȱmessageȱthatȱChristȱisȱtheȱteacher,ȱtheȱguru, parȱexcellence. ThomasȱpresentedȱJesusȱChristȱinȱtheȱHinduȱcultureȱinȱthe sameȱ wayȱ asȱ theȱ thinkersȱ andȱ contemplativesȱ inȱ theȱ ashram movementȱ did.ȱ Theȱ consequenceȱ wasȱ obviouslyȱ aȱ strongȱ emȬ phasisȱonȱhisȱdivinity.ȱButȱitȱis,ȱafterȱall,ȱnoneȱotherȱthanȱȱ“the eternalȱChrist”ȱwhoȱhasȱreceivedȱaȱplaceȱhereȱinȱaȱdifferentȱenȬ vironment,ȱwhereȱheȱisȱjustȱasȱmuchȱasȱhome.

CHAPTERȱ9

ChristȱbetweenȱtheȱReligions TheȱGreatȱThree:ȱPanikkar,ȱThomas,ȱSamartha Inȱ theȱ lastȱ quarterȱ ofȱ theȱ twentiethȱ centuryȱ threeȱ greatȱ names dominatedȱ Christianȱ theologyȱ inȱ India:ȱ Raimundoȱ Panikkar, M.M.ȱThomasȱandȱS.J.ȱSamartha.ȱTheyȱwereȱtheȱleadersȱwithȱreȬ spectȱ toȱ reflectionȱ onȱ theȱ relationshipȱ ofȱ theȱ churchȱ toȱ HinduȬ ism.ȱAndȱitȱobtainsȱforȱallȱthreeȱthatȱreflectionȱ onȱtheȱfigureȱof Jesusȱ Christȱ wasȱ centralȱinȱthis.ȱ Eachȱofȱthemȱ wroteȱaȱbookȱ on ChristȱinȱconnectionȱwithȱHinduismȱasȱtheȱfirstȱofȱmanyȱpubliȬ cations. Panikkar,ȱThomasȱ andȱ Samarthaȱhadȱ muchȱ inȱ commonȱ in theirȱ openȱ attitudeȱ towardsȱ theȱ Hinduȱ traditionȱ andȱ inȱ their courageȱ toȱ reinterpretȱ Christȱ inȱ aȱ radicalȱ way.ȱ Butȱ thereȱ were alsoȱgreatȱdifferences.ȱEachȱofȱthemȱrepresentsȱoneȱofȱtheȱthree greatȱtraditionsȱinȱChristianity.ȱPanikkarȱisȱRomanȱCatholic,ȱSaȬ marthaȱ wasȱ Protestantȱ andȱ Thomasȱ belongedȱ toȱ theȱ worldȱ of theȱ Easternȱ Orthodoxȱ churchesȱ (albeitȱ inȱ theȱ Reformistȱ wing). Butȱ itȱ wasȱ notȱ onlyȱ onȱ thisȱ levelȱ thatȱ theyȱ wereȱ differentȱ from oneȱanother.ȱAlso,ȱeachȱhadȱhisȱownȱorientationȱinȱtheologyȱand churchȱ practice,ȱ whichȱ wasȱ notȱ unrelatedȱ toȱ theirȱ respective backgroundsȱandȱlives. Raimundoȱ Panikkarȱ (1918Ȭ)ȱ grewȱ upȱ inȱ aȱ Europeanȱ envirȬ onmentȱinȱSpain.ȱHisȱfatherȱwasȱfromȱIndiaȱbutȱhadȱworkedȱfor severalȱyearsȱforȱaȱGermanȱchemicalȱcompanyȱinȱBarcelonaȱand hadȱ marriedȱ aȱ Spanishȱ woman.ȱ Asȱ couldȱ beȱ expected,ȱ PannikȬ kar’sȱfatherȱwasȱHinduȱandȱhisȱmotherȱRomanȱCatholic.ȱHeȱwas initiallyȱraisedȱinȱhisȱmother’sȱreligiousȱtradition,ȱbutȱgradually heȱ beganȱ toȱ exploreȱ increasinglyȱ theȱ religiousȱ worldȱ from whichȱhisȱfatherȱcame.ȱPanikkarȱisȱveryȱgiftedȱintellectually.ȱHe studiedȱ chemistry,ȱ philosophyȱ andȱ theology,ȱ andȱ obtainedȱ a doctorateȱ inȱ allȱ three.ȱ Butȱ itȱ wasȱ primarilyȱ inȱ theologyȱ thatȱ he madeȱ hisȱ mark.ȱ Startingȱ fromȱ aȱ theologyȱ withȱ aȱ stronglyȱ mysȬ ticalȱbent,ȱheȱ soughtȱhisȱ wholeȱlifeȱ forȱ aȱsynthesisȱ betweenȱthe Christianȱ faithȱ andȱ Hinduȱ philosophy.ȱ Panikkarȱ choseȱ forȱ the priesthoodȱwhenȱheȱwasȱaȱyoungȱmanȱbutȱdidȱnotȱfeelȱdrawnȱto 205

JESUSȱASȱGURU

206

pastoralȱwork:ȱheȱwasȱanȱacademic.ȱHeȱbecameȱaȱfullȱprofessor inȱMadridȱwhenȱheȱwasȱonlyȱ33ȱandȱsubsequentlyȱtaughtȱatȱdifȬ ferentȱ universitiesȱ elsewhere—inȱ Rome,ȱ Harvardȱ University andȱ atȱ Unionȱ Theologicalȱ College.ȱ Hisȱ lastȱ appointmentȱ wasȱ a professorshipȱatȱtheȱUniversityȱofȱCaliforniaȱinȱSantaȱBarbara. M.M.ȱ Thomasȱ (1916Ȭ1996)1ȱ wasȱ bornȱ inȱ southernȱ India,ȱ in theȱ stateȱ ofȱ Kerala.ȱ Hisȱ parentsȱ belongedȱ toȱ theȱ Marȱ Thoma churchȱwhichȱhadȱseparatedȱfromȱtheȱancientȱSyrianȱOrthodox churchȱ inȱ Keralaȱ inȱ theȱ nineteenthȱ century.ȱ Theȱ latterȱ church tracedȱitsȱhistoryȱbackȱtoȱtheȱpreachingȱofȱtheȱapostleȱThomasȱin theȱ firstȱ century.ȱ Theȱ Marȱ Thomaȱ churchȱ aroseȱ asȱ aȱ resultȱ ofȱ a reformȱmovementȱthatȱwasȱorientedȱtowardsȱBritishȱProtestanȬ tism.ȱJustȱlikeȱPanikkar,ȱThomasȱfirstȱstudiedȱchemistry.ȱHeȱwas selfȬtaughtȱasȱaȱtheologian.ȱAsȱaȱyoungȱman,ȱThomasȱhadȱbeen stronglyȱinfluencedȱbyȱMarxism.ȱThereȱhadȱbeenȱaȱstrongȱcomȬ munistȱ movementȱ inȱ Keralaȱ sinceȱ theȱ beginningȱ ofȱ theȱ twentiȬ ethȱcentury.ȱForȱThomas,ȱtheȱquestionsȱofȱsocialȱjusticeȱandȱthe necessityȱofȱrevolutionaryȱupheavalȱhaveȱalwaysȱremainedȱimȬ portant.ȱItȱisȱthusȱnotȱsurprisingȱthatȱheȱfoundȱhisȱcareerȱinȱsoȬ ciallyȱengagedȱChristianȱorganizations.ȱHeȱfirstȱworkedȱforȱthe Worldȱ Studentȱ Christianȱ Federation,ȱ andȱ thenȱ becameȱ director ofȱ theȱ Christianȱ Instituteȱ forȱ theȱ Studyȱ ofȱ Religionȱ andȱ Society inȱBangalore.ȱHeȱneverȱheldȱaȱchurchȱofficeȱbutȱwasȱchairperson ofȱ theȱ Centralȱ Committeeȱ ofȱ theȱ Worldȱ Councilȱ ofȱ Churches fromȱ 1968ȱ toȱ 1975.ȱ Lastly,ȱ heȱ heldȱ aȱ highȱ governmentȱ position fromȱ1990ȱtoȱ1992ȱasȱgovernorȱofȱtheȱIndianȱstateȱofȱNagaland. Stanleyȱ Jedidiahȱ Samarthaȱ (1920Ȭ2002)ȱ cameȱ fromȱ the coastalȱareaȱofȱtheȱstateȱofȱKarnataka.ȱHereȱtheȱpietisticȱBaseler Missionȱhadȱbeenȱveryȱactiveȱsinceȱtheȱnineteenthȱcentury.ȱHis fatherȱwasȱaȱministerȱinȱtheȱchurchȱthatȱemergedȱfromȱthisȱmisȬ sionȱ workȱ andȱ laterȱ mergedȱ intoȱ theȱ Churchȱ ofȱ Southȱ India. Stanleyȱfollowedȱinȱhisȱfather’sȱfootsteps,ȱstudiedȱtheologyȱand ȱInȱlineȱwithȱtheȱcustomȱinȱsomeȱareasȱinȱsouthernȱIndia,ȱThomas hadȱonlyȱoneȱname,ȱwhichȱwasȱtheȱnameȱheȱwasȱcalledȱby,ȱhisȱbaptismal nameȱandȱhisȱ“surname”ȱatȱtheȱsameȱtime.ȱTwoȱlettersȱhaveȱbeenȱadded. Theȱfirstȱ(Madathilparampil)ȱindicatesȱtheȱoriginȱofȱhisȱfamilyȱandȱthe secondȱ(Mammen)ȱisȱhisȱfather’sȱname.ȱHisȱbrothersȱandȱsistersȱhave,ȱof course,ȱtheȱsameȱ“initials.”ȱSeeȱhisȱbrother’sȱwebsite:ȱM.M.ȱNinan,ȱ“Dr. M.M.ȱ Thomas,ȱ Ifȱ youȱ don’tȱ love,ȱ whoȱ will?”ȱ www.acns.com/~mm9n/ mmt/mmt.htmȱ(1997). 1

CHRISTȱBETWEENȱTHEȱRELIGIONS:ȱTHEȱGREATȱTHREE

207

becameȱ aȱ ministerȱ inȱ theȱ sameȱ denomination.ȱ Throughoutȱ his lifeȱheȱwasȱveryȱinvolvedȱinȱtheȱdevelopmentsȱinȱtheȱchurchȱin India.ȱHeȱwasȱrectorȱofȱtheȱtheologicalȱseminaryȱofȱhisȱchurchȱin MangaloreȱforȱseveralȱyearsȱandȱthenȱprofessorȱatȱUnitedȱTheoȬ logicalȱ Collegeȱ inȱ Bangalore.ȱ Samarthaȱ receivedȱ hisȱ doctorate fromȱ HartfordȱSeminaryȱ (USA),ȱwritingȱ hisȱ dissertationȱonȱthe conceptȱofȱhistoryȱinȱHinduism.ȱBecauseȱofȱhisȱacademicȱinterȬ estsȱ andȱ hisȱ churchȱ involvement,ȱ heȱ dedicatedȱ himselfȱ toȱ diaȬ logueȱ withȱ Hindus.ȱ Likeȱ M.M.ȱ Thomas,ȱ heȱ wasȱ givenȱ theȱ opȬ portunityȱ toȱ growȱ byȱ theȱ Worldȱ Councilȱ ofȱ Churches:ȱ heȱ was directorȱofȱtheȱWorldȱCouncil’sȱsubȬunitȱonȱDialogueȱfromȱ1971 toȱ1980. Theȱ “Greatȱ Three”ȱ haveȱ receivedȱ aȱ greatȱ dealȱ ofȱ recogniȬ tionȱoverȱtheȱyears,ȱnotȱonlyȱinȱIndiaȱbutȱalsoȱinȱEurope.ȱThatȱis apparentȱ from,ȱ amongȱ otherȱ things,ȱ theȱ honoraryȱ doctorates theyȱreceived—eachȱofȱthemȱtwo:ȱPanikkarȱfromȱtheȱUniversity ofȱ theȱ Balearesȱ andȱ fromȱ theȱ Eberhardȱ Karlsȱ Universityȱ ofȱ TüȬ bingen;ȱThomasȱfromȱSeramporeȱCollegeȱandȱfromȱtheȱUniverȬ sityȱofȱLeiden;ȱSamarthaȱfromȱSeramporeȱCollegeȱandȱtheȱUniȬ versityȱofȱUtrecht.ȱTheirȱrespectiveȱbooksȱonȱChristȱatȱtheȱstart ofȱtheirȱtheologicalȱcareersȱhaveȱplayedȱanȱimportantȱrole.ȱAnd itȱobtainsȱforȱeachȱofȱthemȱthatȱwhatȱisȱuniqueȱtoȱeachȱemerges inȱ theirȱ Christologicalȱ thinking:ȱ Panikkarȱ asȱ aȱ mysticalȱ philoȬ sopher,ȱ Thomasȱ asȱ anȱ inspiredȱ activist,ȱ Samarthaȱ asȱ someone involvedȱinȱtheȱchurch. ThreeȱBooksȱonȱChrist:ȱPanikkar Inȱ 1961ȱ Raimundoȱ Panikkarȱ receivedȱ hisȱ doctorateȱ inȱ theology fromȱ theȱ Lateranȱ Universityȱ inȱ Rome.ȱ Hisȱ dissertationȱ wasȱ on theȱ possibilityȱ ofȱ speakingȱ aboutȱ theȱ presenceȱ ofȱ Christȱ within theȱHinduȱtradition.ȱTheȱresultsȱofȱhisȱstudyȱwereȱpublishedȱin EnglandȱaȱfewȱyearsȱlaterȱunderȱtheȱtitleȱTheȱUnknownȱChristȱof Hinduism.ȱ Theȱ bookȱ drewȱ attentionȱ inȱ generalȱ becauseȱ ofȱ the radicalȱ wayȱ inȱ whichȱ Christȱ wasȱ readȱ intoȱ theȱ sacredȱ textsȱ of Hinduism.ȱ Theȱ bookȱ wasȱ translatedȱ intoȱ German,ȱ Spanish, Frenchȱ andȱ Italian.ȱ Andȱ anȱ expandedȱ editionȱ whoseȱ argument wasȱalsoȱmoreȱpointedȱwasȱpublishedȱinȱEnglandȱandȱtheȱUnitȬ edȱStatesȱinȱ1981. Itȱ isȱ stillȱ surprisingȱ thatȱ Panikkarȱ couldȱ beȱ grantedȱ aȱ docȬ torateȱwithȱthisȱradicalȱstudyȱatȱtheȱpapalȱuniversity,ȱandȱdoȱso

208

JESUSȱASȱGURU

summaȱcumȱlaudeȱatȱthat.ȱAȱfewȱyearsȱlaterȱthereȱwouldȱbeȱmuch moreȱopennessȱforȱ theȱ formȱ ofȱ truthȱ inȱ otherȱ religionsȱbecause ofȱtheȱinfluenceȱofȱtheȱSecondȱVaticanȱCouncil,ȱbutȱthatȱwasȱnot theȱ caseȱ inȱ 1961.ȱ Inȱ theȱ firstȱ editionȱ ofȱ theȱ bookȱ severalȱ thorny pointsȱ wereȱ formulatedȱ moreȱ carefullyȱ thanȱ inȱ theȱ secondȱ ediȬ tionȱofȱtwentyȱyearsȱlater.ȱButȱitȱisȱalsoȱclearȱtoȱtheȱcloseȱreader inȱthisȱfirstȱeditionȱhowȱfarȱPanikkarȱwantsȱtoȱgoȱinȱrecognizing HinduismȱasȱaȱrevelationȱbyȱGod. Aȱcharmingȱanecdoteȱgivesȱaȱgoodȱexampleȱofȱthis.ȱInȱthe secondȱ revisedȱ editionȱ ofȱ 1981ȱ Panikkarȱ returnsȱ toȱ whatȱ he wroteȱ inȱ theȱ forewordȱ ofȱ theȱ firstȱ edition.ȱ Inȱ theȱ latterȱ heȱ had statedȱthatȱheȱhadȱoftenȱbeenȱaskedȱtoȱwriteȱaȱbookȱaboutȱChrist thatȱ Hindusȱ couldȱ appreciate.ȱ Hisȱ responseȱ atȱ thatȱ timeȱ was thatȱ suchȱ aȱ bookȱ didȱ notȱ haveȱ toȱ beȱ writtenȱ becauseȱ itȱ already existed.ȱ Manyȱ peopleȱ assumedȱ heȱ meantȱ theȱ Bible.ȱ Inȱ theȱ new editionȱ heȱ returnsȱ toȱ thisȱ comment,ȱ somewhatȱ ashamed,ȱ and declaresȱ thatȱ heȱ hadȱ neverȱ intendedȱ anythingȱ elseȱ byȱ thisȱ alȬ readyȱ existingȱ bookȱ thanȱ theȱ shruti,ȱ i.e.ȱ theȱ holyȱ booksȱ ofȱ HinȬ duism,ȱsuchȱasȱtheȱvedas. Itȱ isȱ immediatelyȱ clearȱ whatȱ Pannikarȱ wantsȱ toȱ doȱ inȱ his book.ȱ Heȱ wantsȱ toȱ showȱ thatȱ Christȱ isȱ alreadyȱ presentȱ inȱ the classicalȱHinduȱtradition.ȱHeȱdoesȱnotȱmean, ofȱcourse,ȱthatȱtheȱwritersȱofȱtheȱancientȱwisȬ domȱ booksȱ ofȱ Hinduismȱ hadȱ formedȱ aȱ conȬ ceptionȱofȱChristȱseveralȱcenturiesȱbeforeȱhis incarnation.ȱButȱmoreȱcanȱbeȱsaidȱaboutȱJesus thanȱmerelyȱtalkingȱaboutȱtheȱlifeȱofȱJesusȱof Nazareth.ȱPanikkarȱwantsȱtoȱviewȱJesusȱonȱa differentȱlevel:ȱasȱtheȱSonȱofȱGod,ȱtheȱsecond PersonȱofȱtheȱTrinity.ȱHeȱisȱthusȱtheȱonlyȱconȬ nectionȱbetweenȱGodȱandȱtheȱworld.ȱThisȱis, therefore,ȱ notȱ aȱ historicalȱ levelȱ ofȱ thinkingȱ butȱ anȱ ontological one.ȱIfȱweȱspeakȱaboutȱbeingȱitself,ȱweȱcanȱdevelopȱaȱtotalȱview inȱwhichȱChristȱisȱcentral. Accordingȱ toȱ Pannikkarȱ himself,ȱ theȱ thesisȱ ofȱ hisȱ bookȱ is simple,ȱevenȱifȱitsȱelaborationȱisȱnot.ȱThisȱthesisȱis:ȱ“Christianity andȱ Hinduismȱ meetȱ eachȱ otherȱ inȱ aȱ realityȱ whichȱ partakesȱ of bothȱtheȱDivineȱandȱtheȱHuman,ȱi.e.ȱwhatȱChristiansȱcannotȱbut

CHRISTȱBETWEENȱTHEȱRELIGIONS:ȱTHEȱGREATȱTHREE

209

callȱ Christ.”2ȱ Fromȱ aȱ Christianȱ pointȱ ofȱ view,ȱ Christȱ isȱ thusȱ alȬ readyȱpresentȱinȱHinduism.ȱInȱPanikkar’sȱview,ȱthisȱisȱalsoȱaȱneȬ cessity.ȱHeȱgivesȱtwoȱproofsȱforȱthis,ȱoneȱpositiveȱandȱoneȱnegaȬ tive.ȱ Firstȱ ofȱ all,ȱ itȱ mustȱ beȱ saidȱ thatȱ Christȱ isȱ theȱ universal redeemer,ȱ aȱ pointȱ toȱ whichȱ justiceȱ isȱ oftenȱ notȱ doneȱ whenȱ itȱ is claimedȱ thatȱ Hinduismȱ hasȱ noȱ placeȱ inȱ hisȱ work.3ȱ Itȱ mustȱ also beȱsaidȱthatȱHinduismȱcannotȱbeȱrejectedȱasȱsomethingȱoutside ofȱ Christ.ȱ Shouldȱ Hindusȱ thenȱ believeȱ thatȱ theȱ lovingȱ God aboutȱ whomȱ Christiansȱ speakȱ wouldȱ beȱ soȱ cruelȱ asȱ toȱ leave themȱinȱdarkness?4 Panikkarȱ hasȱdevelopedȱ hisȱ ownȱvocabularyȱforȱ clarifying thisȱcentralȱpositionȱofȱChrist.ȱHeȱresortsȱtoȱtheȱoldȱwordȱ“theȬ andrism”ȱ(godȱ+ȱhumanȱinȱoneȱperson),ȱbyȱwhichȱheȱmeantȱthe completeȱunionȱofȱtheȱdivineȱandȱtheȱhuman,ȱasȱrealizedȱparaȬ digmaticallyȱinȱChrist.ȱIfȱreligionsȱlikeȱChristianityȱandȱHinduȬ ismȱareȱtoȱencounterȱeachȱother,ȱitȱcanȱonlyȱbeȱthere,ȱinȱChrist. Religionsȱ needȱ aȱ concreteȱ pointȱ ofȱ encounterȱ likeȱ this:ȱ “‘That theandricȱ‘thing’,ȱtheȱconcreteȱconnectionȱbetweenȱtheȱAbsolute andȱrelativeȱwhichȱallȱreligionsȱrecognizeȱinȱoneȱwayȱorȱanothȬ er,ȱ weȱ couldȱ callȱ ‘Lord’,ȱ butȱ weȱ mayȱ alsoȱ callȱ itȱ ‘Christ’.”5 Panikkarȱ laterȱ expandedȱ thisȱ conceptȱ ofȱ theandrismȱ toȱ include theȱ cosmos,ȱ whichȱ makesȱ itȱ evenȱ clearerȱ thatȱ thisȱ isȱ aȱ mystical approach.ȱItȱisȱaȱwayȱofȱseeingȱinȱwhichȱtheȱrealitiesȱofȱGod,ȱhuȬ mansȱandȱtheȱuniverseȱslideȱintoȱoneȱanother,ȱaȱcosmotheandric intuition—toȱ useȱ Panikkar’sȱ famousȱ term.ȱ Theȱ firstȱ initiatives forȱthisȱareȱfoundȱinȱhisȱbookȱonȱChrist.6 Whyȱ shouldȱ itȱ beȱ Christȱ preciselyȱ whoȱ becomesȱ aȱ symbol ofȱ universalȱ encounter?ȱ Panikkarȱ alsoȱ posesȱ thisȱ questionȱ and givesȱ aȱ lessȱ fundamentalȱ answerȱ thanȱ wouldȱ beȱ expected.ȱ A Hinduȱ symbolȱ wouldȱ alsoȱ beȱ possible:ȱ Rama,ȱ forȱ example, ȱRaimundoȱPanikkar,ȱTheȱUnknownȱChristȱofȱHinduism:ȱTowardsȱan EcumenicalȱChristophany,ȱrev.ȱed.ȱofȱ1981ȱ(Maryknoll:ȱOrbisȱBooks,ȱ1994), p.ȱ37. 2

ȱPanikkar,ȱTheȱUnknownȱChrist,ȱpp.ȱ67Ȭ68.

3

ȱPanikkar,ȱTheȱUnknownȱChrist,ȱp.ȱ73.

4

ȱPanikkar,ȱTheȱUnknownȱChrist,ȱȱpp.ȱ48Ȭ49.

5

ȱPanikkar,ȱTheȱUnknownȱChrist,ȱȱp.ȱ93.

6

JESUSȱASȱGURU

210

couldȱ beȱ aȱ formȱ thatȱ couldȱ beȱ describedȱ inȱ aȱ similarȱ function. Butȱ thereȱ isȱ noȱ generallyȱ acceptedȱ symbolȱ inȱ Hinduismȱ like Christȱ inȱ Christianity.ȱ Ramaȱ hasȱ centralȱ significanceȱ forȱ only someȱ Hindusȱ andȱ aȱ “Ramalogy”ȱ wouldȱ neverȱ haveȱ theȱ same universalȱvalueȱthatȱaȱChristologyȱhas.7 Itȱ thusȱ concernsȱ theȱ questionȱ ofȱ howȱ Christȱ canȱ beȱ recogȬ nizedȱ inȱ classicalȱ Hinduism.ȱ Panikkarȱ employsȱ aȱ surprising methodȱhere.ȱHeȱdoesȱnotȱstartȱfromȱHinduȱmythologyȱorȱspirȬ itualityȱ butȱ fromȱ theȱ philosophyȱ ofȱ Hinduism.ȱ Inȱ aȱ lengthy treatment,ȱ heȱ givesȱ hisȱ ownȱ Christologicalȱ commentaryȱ onȱ a fragmentȱ fromȱ theȱ Brahmaȱ Sutra.8ȱ Thisȱ collectionȱ ofȱ proverbs fromȱ theȱ beginningȱ ofȱ theȱ Christianȱ era,ȱ attributedȱ toȱ BadaraȬ yana,ȱ givesȱ anȱ overviewȱ inȱ anȱ extremelyȱ lapidaryȱ formȱ ofȱ the greatȱthemesȱofȱtheȱHinduȱworldview.ȱThroughoutȱtheȱcenturȬ iesȱ manyȱ thinkersȱ fromȱ differentȱ schoolsȱ haveȱ explainedȱ their philosophicalȱsystemsȱbyȱcommentingȱonȱthisȱoriginalȱtext.ȱEvȬ eryȱ philosopherȱ ofȱ anyȱ standingȱ wroteȱ hisȱ ownȱ commentary (bhashya)ȱonȱtheȱBrahmaȱSutra. Raimundoȱ Panikkarȱ startsȱ withȱ theȱ secondȱ (veryȱ short) proverb,ȱ whichȱ says:ȱ “Whenceȱ theȱ originȱ etceteraȱ ofȱ this” (janmadyasyaȱyatah)ȱ(BrahmaȱSutraȱI.1.2).ȱTheȱ“whence”ȱrefersȱto theȱ Brahman,ȱ whichȱ isȱ theȱ subjectȱ ofȱ theȱ firstȱ proverb.ȱ All thinkersȱ areȱ thereforeȱ agreedȱ thatȱ theȱ originȱ ofȱ everythingȱ is foundȱ inȱ Brahman,ȱ theȱ principleȱ ofȱ theȱ All.ȱ Butȱ thereȱ isȱ disaȬ greementȱ asȱ toȱ howȱ aȱ changeableȱ worldȱ canȱ beȱ broughtȱ into connectionȱwithȱtheȱunchangeable,ȱeternalȱBrahman. Forȱ Panikkar,ȱ itȱ isȱ importantȱ thatȱ theȱ philosophicalȱ tradiȬ tionȱofȱIndiaȱspeaksȱofȱBrahmanȱinȱtwoȱways.ȱOnȱtheȱoneȱhand, Brahmanȱisȱcompletelyȱunknowableȱandȱimmutable,ȱtranscendȬ ingȱ everything.ȱ Onȱ theȱ otherȱ hand,ȱ Brahmanȱ canȱ beȱ described asȱ“Ishvara,”ȱtheȱLord.ȱTheȱpersonalȱsideȱofȱtheȱdivineȱAllȱemerȬ gesȱinȱthisȱmoreȱtheisticȱapproach,ȱwhichȱisȱconcernedȱwithȱthe turningȱofȱtheȱdivineȱtoȱtheȱworld.ȱHoweverȱmuchȱitȱcanȱalsoȱbe saidȱ thatȱ Brahmanȱ isȱ selfȬenclosedȱ andȱ inaccessible,ȱ Ishvara shouldȱalwaysȱbeȱmentionedȱinȱorderȱtoȱdoȱjusticeȱtoȱtheȱsuperȬ naturalȱoriginȱofȱhumanȱbeingsȱandȱtheȱcosmos.ȱ

ȱPanikkar,ȱTheȱUnknownȱChrist,ȱp.ȱ38.

7

ȱPanikkar,ȱTheȱUnknownȱChrist,ȱpp.ȱ97Ȭ162.

8

CHRISTȱBETWEENȱTHEȱRELIGIONS:ȱTHEȱGREATȱTHREE

211

Theȱ wordȱ Brahmanȱ doesȱ notȱ meanȱ theȱ sameȱ thingȱ as “God”ȱdoesȱinȱChristianity,ȱbutȱPanikkarȱisȱconvincedȱthatȱboth conceptsȱpointȱtoȱtheȱsameȱreality.ȱTheyȱdifferȱformallyȱbutȱare theȱsameȱrealityȱmaterially.ȱItȱisȱthusȱpossibleȱforȱhim,ȱbyȱmeans ofȱ theȱ speculationsȱ aboutȱ Brahman,ȱ toȱ writeȱ aȱ Christianȱ reflecȬ tion.ȱIshvaraȱbecomesȱcentralȱinȱhisȱcommentaryȱonȱBrahmaȱSuȬ traȱI.1.2.ȱApparently,ȱGodȱhasȱtwoȱfaces:ȱoneȱturnedȱtowardsȱhis ownȱdivinity,ȱofȱwhichȱitȱisȱtheȱmostȱcompleteȱexpression,ȱand theȱotherȱtowardsȱtheȱworld,ȱinȱrelationshipȱwithȱhumanȱbeings andȱ theȱ cosmos.ȱ Itȱ canȱ thenȱ beȱ said:ȱ “theȱ Ishvaraȱ ofȱ ourȱ interȬ pretationȱpointsȱtowardsȱtheȱMysteryȱofȱChrist.”9ȱAndȱhisȱfinal conclusionȱ isȱ evenȱ lessȱ reserved:ȱ “thatȱ fromȱ whichȱ thisȱ World comesȱ forthȱ andȱ toȱ whichȱ itȱ returnsȱ andȱ byȱ whichȱ itȱ isȱ susȬ tained,ȱthatȱisȱIshvara,ȱtheȱChrist.”10 HereȱPanikkarȱseemsȱtoȱhaveȱwanderedȱfarȱfromȱtheȱbibliȬ calȱapproachȱtoȱChristȱasȱtheȱmanȱofȱGodȱwithȱaȱhistoryȱamong people,ȱculminatingȱinȱtheȱcrossȱandȱresurrection.ȱButȱPanikkar thinksȱotherwise.ȱHeȱexplainsȱthatȱtheȱtitleȱofȱhisȱbookȱrefersȱto howȱPaulȱfoundȱaȱpointȱofȱcontactȱinȱAthensȱwithȱtheȱreligious worldȱ ofȱ hisȱ audience.ȱ Justȱ asȱ Paulȱ explainedȱ toȱ theȱ Athenians onȱ theȱ Areopagusȱ whoȱ wasȱ behindȱ theȱ “unknownȱ God,”ȱ so Panikkarȱrevealsȱwhoȱtheȱ“unknownȱChrist”ȱisȱinȱtheȱcontextȱof Hinduism.11ȱAndȱnotȱwithoutȱgoodȱreason,ȱheȱpointsȱinȱtheȱfinal wordsȱofȱhisȱbookȱtoȱtheȱbiblicalȱtextȱthat,ȱmoreȱthanȱanyȱother, describesȱ aȱ cosmicȱ Christ:ȱ “Heȱ isȱ beforeȱ allȱ things,ȱ andȱ inȱ him allȱthingsȱholdȱtogether”ȱ(Colossiansȱ1:17).12 Nevertheless,ȱaȱcriticalȱremarkȱcanȱbeȱmadeȱaboutȱtheȱcosȬ micȱChristȱwhoȱisȱpresentedȱtoȱusȱasȱsoȱseparatedȱfromȱhistory. ChristȱhasȱbecomeȱanotherȱwordȱhereȱforȱanȱaspectȱofȱGod,ȱasȱa resultȱ ofȱ whichȱ theȱ connectionȱ toȱ Jesusȱ ofȱ Nazarethȱ hasȱ been completelyȱcut.ȱAfterȱall,ȱitȱcouldȱhaveȱbeenȱRamaȱwhoȱsymbolȬ izedȱ theȱ turningȱ ofȱ Godȱ toȱ theȱ earth.ȱ Butȱ inȱ Indianȱ mythology Ramaȱrepresentsȱdifferentȱvaluesȱandȱformsȱofȱspiritualityȱfrom thoseȱJesusȱrepresentsȱinȱtheȱBible.ȱPannikarȱhimselfȱcontinually ȱPanikkar,ȱTheȱUnknownȱChrist,ȱp.ȱ160.

9

ȱPanikkar,ȱTheȱUnknownȱChrist,ȱp.ȱ162.

10

ȱPanikkar,ȱTheȱUnknownȱChrist,ȱp.ȱ168.

11

ȱPanikkar,ȱTheȱUnknownȱChrist,ȱp.ȱ169.

12

JESUSȱASȱGURU

212

stressesȱ thatȱ Christȱ isȱ notȱ exhaustedȱ inȱ theȱ historicalȱ Jesus— thereȱ isȱ moreȱ toȱ sayȱ aboutȱ him.ȱ Thatȱ isȱ true,ȱ butȱ Brinkmanȱ is correctȱ whenȱ heȱ writes:ȱ “ifȱ itȱ isȱ placedȱ tooȱ emphaticallyȱ inȱ the foreground,ȱitȱwillȱinevitablyȱleadȱtoȱtheȱtrivializationȱofȱtheȱimȬ portanceȱofȱJesus’ȱownȱchoicesȱinȱlife.”13 AnotherȱhesitationȱinȱPanikkar’sȱapproachȱwasȱarticulated byȱArnulfȱCampsȱatȱanȱearlyȱstageȱalready.ȱInȱhisȱdiscussionȱof Panikkarȱ andȱ Klostermaier,14ȱ heȱ wroteȱ aboutȱ theȱ ontological wayȱ ofȱ thinkingȱ ofȱ bothȱ Romanȱ Catholicȱ theologians.ȱ Heȱ susȬ pectsȱthatȱtheirȱWesternȱoriginȱhasȱaȱgreatȱdealȱtoȱdoȱwithȱit.ȱHe continues:ȱ“Weȱwonderȱwhetherȱtheirȱtheologyȱwillȱfindȱmuch understandingȱ fromȱ purelyȱ Indianȱ Christianȱ theologians.”15 Thatȱ wasȱ completelyȱ toȱ theȱ point.ȱ Panikkarȱ hasȱ becomeȱ very wellȱ knownȱ outsideȱ ofȱ Indiaȱ becauseȱ ofȱ hisȱ originalityȱ and scholarship,ȱ butȱ inȱ Indiaȱ thereȱ areȱ othersȱ whoȱ managedȱ toȱ inȬ spireȱ moreȱ peopleȱ inȱ theȱ Christianȱ communitiesȱ thanȱ heȱ did. M.M.ȱThomasȱisȱanȱexampleȱofȱthis. ThreeȱBooksȱonȱChrist:ȱThomas WhenȱPanikkar’sȱbookȱonȱChristȱwasȱpublishedȱinȱ1964,ȱheȱwas workingȱatȱtheȱChristianȱInstituteȱforȱtheȱStudyȱofȱReligionȱand Societyȱ(C.I.S.R.S.)ȱinȱBangalore.ȱTheȱdirectorȱofȱtheȱinstituteȱat thatȱtimeȱwasȱM.M.ȱThomas.ȱThus,ȱtheyȱknewȱeachȱotherȱwell. Butȱ whenȱ Thomasȱ startedȱ workingȱ twoȱ yearsȱ laterȱ onȱ hisȱ own bookȱ aboutȱ Christ,ȱ thereȱ wasȱ noȱ signȱ ofȱ anyȱ affinityȱ withȱ PanȬ ȱMartienȱE.ȱBrinkman,ȱTheȱNonȬWesternȱJesus:ȱJesusȱasȱBodhisattva, Avatara,ȱGuru,ȱProphet,ȱAncestorȱorȱHealer?ȱtransl.ȱHenryȱandȱLucyȱJansen, CrossȱCulturalȱTheologiesȱ(London:ȱEquinox,ȱ2008),ȱforthcoming. 13

ȱInȱ1967ȱKlausȱKlostermaierȱpublishedȱaȱsmallȱChristologicalȱwork that,ȱjustȱlikeȱPanikkar’sȱbook,ȱlinkedȱupȱwithȱIndianȱphilosophicalȱsysȬ tems.ȱCf.ȱKlausȱK.ȱKlostermaier,ȱKristvidya:ȱAȱSketchȱofȱanȱIndianȱChristoȬ logy,ȱIndianȱChristianȱThoughtȱSeriesȱ8ȱ(Bangalore:ȱChristianȱInstituteȱfor theȱStudyȱofȱReligionȱandȱSociety,ȱ1967).ȱWeȱwillȱnotȱdiscussȱhisȱwork hereȱbecauseȱinȱtheȱendȱitȱhadȱmuchȱlessȱinfluenceȱthanȱPanikkar’s.ȱFor thatȱmatter,ȱKlostermaierȱshowsȱaffinityȱwithȱHinduismȱasȱitȱisȱlived, whichȱisȱmuchȱlessȱsoȱinȱPanikkar. 14

ȱA.ȱCamps,ȱ“TheȱPersonȱandȱFunctionȱofȱChristȱinȱHinduismȱand inȱHinduȬChristianȱTheology,”ȱBulletinȱsecretariatusȱproȱnonȱchristianisȱ6 (1971):ȱ199Ȭ211.ȱ 15

CHRISTȱBETWEENȱTHEȱRELIGIONS:ȱTHEȱGREATȱTHREE

213

ikkar’sȱbook.ȱThomasȱwroteȱhisȱbookȱwhileȱteachingȱasȱaȱguest lecturerȱ atȱ Unionȱ Theologicalȱ Seminaryȱ inȱ Newȱ York.ȱ Itȱ apȬ pearedȱinȱ1969ȱunderȱtheȱtitleȱTheȱAcknowledgedȱChristȱofȱtheȱIndiȬ anȱRenaissance.ȱThisȱtitleȱis,ȱofȱcourse,ȱaȱplayȱonȱPanikkar’sȱbook, whichȱhadȱbecomeȱfamousȱinȱtheȱmeantime,ȱandȱThomasȱstates thisȱasȱwellȱinȱhisȱforeword.16ȱBut,ȱapartȱfromȱoneȱfurtherȱreferȬ enceȱtoȱPanikkar’sȱbook,ȱThomasȱfollowsȱhisȱownȱpathȱandȱdoes notȱ engageȱ inȱ debateȱ withȱ Panikkar.ȱ Theȱ reasonȱ isȱ thatȱ he viewedȱhimselfȱ toȱbeȱaȱscholarȱinȱanotherȱdiscipline.ȱHeȱopens hisȱforewordȱveryȱ explicitlyȱ withȱ theȱ apologeticȱ assuranceȱ that heȱ wasȱ notȱ aȱ systematicȱ theologianȱ inȱ anyȱ way.ȱ Heȱ simply wantedȱ toȱ provideȱ unprocessedȱ materialsȱ onȱ whichȱ others couldȱbuildȱtheirȱsystems.17ȱThisȱmodestyȱisȱsomewhatȱexaggerȬ ated;ȱinȱfact,ȱThomasȱbuildsȱaȱveryȱconsistentȱviewȱwithȱhisȱhisȬ toricalȱ materialȱ ofȱ theȱ placeȱ ofȱ Christȱ inȱ theȱ developmentȱ of modernȱHinduism. Thomas’ȱintentionȱinȱhisȱwholeȱtheologyȱisȱtoȱmakeȱthinkȬ ingȱaboutȱGodȱanȱimpetusȱforȱaction.ȱHeȱisȱconvincedȱthatȱGod canȱbeȱfoundȱprimarilyȱwhereȱchangesȱforȱtheȱgoodȱoccurȱinȱhuȬ manȱsociety.ȱThus,ȱitȱisȱcertainlyȱnotȱaȱvalueȬfreeȱhistoryȱofȱHinȬ duismȱthatȱThomasȱisȱpresentingȱinȱhisȱbook.ȱOverȱagainstȱthe traditional,ȱ moreȱ orȱ lessȱ staticȱ Hinduismȱ toȱ whichȱ Panikkar addressedȱhimself,ȱThomasȱlookedȱatȱdynamicsȱofȱHinduismȱin itsȱ“renaissance”ȱsinceȱtheȱbeginningȱofȱtheȱnineteenthȱcentury. Indeed,ȱ theȱ religionȱ ofȱ Indiaȱ underwentȱ aȱ remarkableȱ revival duringȱtheȱcolonialȱperiod. ForȱThomas,ȱitȱisȱespecially importantȱ thatȱ inȱ thisȱ reȬ naissanceȱ theȱ intransigent socialȱ ethicsȱ ofȱ Hinduism alsoȱ beganȱ toȱ change.ȱ ReȬ flectionȱ onȱ socialȱ justice couldȱ beȱ observedȱ inȱ HinȬ duȱ circlesȱ sinceȱ RammoȬ hanȱ Roy,ȱ whichȱ inȱ some casesȱ subjectedȱ theȱ socioȬ ȱM.M.ȱThomas,ȱTheȱAcknowledgedȱChristȱofȱtheȱIndianȱRenaissance (London:ȱSCMȱPress,ȱ1969),ȱp.ȱX. 16

ȱThomas,ȱTheȱAcknowledgedȱChrist,ȱp.ȱIX.

17

JESUSȱASȱGURU

214

religiousȱtraditionsȱofȱHinduism—suchȱasȱtheȱcasteȱsystemȱand theȱpositionȱofȱwomen—toȱheavyȱcriticism. Sinceȱ Rammohanȱ Royȱ publishedȱ hisȱ miscellanyȱ fromȱ the gospels,18ȱ theȱ greatȱ leadersȱ ofȱ modernȱ Hinduismȱ haveȱ always lookedȱatȱJesus’ȱsayingsȱandȱhisȱwayȱofȱlife.ȱValuesȱinȱtheȱGosȬ pelȱsuchȱasȱloveȱofȱneighbourȱandȱnonȬviolenceȱhaveȱhadȱgreat influence,ȱbutȱtheȱrelationshipȱofȱJesusȱtoȱGodȱhasȱalsoȱbecomeȱa topicȱinȱreligiousȱreflectionȱinȱHinduȱcircles.ȱChristȱhasȱthusȱreȬ ceivedȱ aȱ fixedȱ placeȱ inȱ Hinduism.ȱ Itȱ isȱ thisȱ Christȱ ofȱ modern Hinduismȱ whomȱ Thomasȱ wantsȱ toȱ describe.ȱ Andȱ hereȱ heȱ is concernedȱ primarilyȱ withȱ whatȱ theȱ confrontationȱ withȱ the Christȱ ofȱ theȱ Gospelȱ hasȱ broughtȱ aboutȱ inȱ theȱ areaȱ ofȱ renewal andȱsocialȱchange.ȱGod’sȱactingȱinȱChristȱisȱapparentlyȱnotȱlimȬ itedȱ toȱ theȱ churchȱ andȱ Christianityȱ butȱ canȱ alsoȱ beȱ detected withinȱHinduism.ȱThomasȱborrowedȱthisȱideaȱofȱChrist’sȱwork amongȱ theȱ Hindusȱ fromȱ Paulȱ D.ȱ Devanandanȱ (1901Ȭ1962),ȱ his predecessorȱatȱC.I.S.R.S.ȱDevanandanȱhadȱalreadyȱbeenȱstrongly interestedȱ inȱ theȱ moreȱ recentȱ Hinduȱ movementsȱ andȱ hadȱ conȬ nectedȱaȱclearȱChristologicalȱconceptȱtoȱthem.ȱAȱnewȱhumanity hadȱbeenȱrevealedȱinȱChrist.ȱPeopleȱoutsideȱtheȱchurchȱasȱwell sharedȱinȱthisȱnewȱcreationȱinȱChristȱifȱtheyȱbrokeȱthroughȱtraȬ ditionalȱboundariesȱandȱthusȱrespondedȱtoȱtheȱproclamationȱof theȱKingdomȱofȱGod.ȱȱ Therefore,ȱlikeȱPanikkar,ȱThomasȱcanȱspeakȱaboutȱChristȱin Hinduism,ȱ butȱ itȱ isȱ aȱ veryȱ differentȱ wayȱ ofȱ understandingȱ the workȱofȱChrist.ȱTheȱdifferenceȱbetweenȱbothȱinterpretationsȱhas beenȱsummarizedȱneatlyȱasȱPanikkar’sȱaȱprioriȱChristologyȱverȬ susȱThomas’ȱaȱposterioriȱChristology.19ȱInȱPanikkar,ȱChristȱisȱalȬ waysȱpresentȱfromȱtheȱstartȱinȱtheȱHinduȱphilosophicalȱsystems inȱaȱsuprahistoricalȱway;ȱinȱThomasȱanȱactiveȱpresenceȱofȱChrist unfoldsȱinȱtheȱhistoricalȱdevelopmentȱofȱtheȱreligion. WhereȱdoesȱThomasȱ thenȱ seeȱ theȱ clearestȱ signsȱ ofȱChrist’s workȱ inȱ India?ȱ Heȱ pointsȱ toȱ theȱ greatȱ reformers—convertsȱ to theȱChristianȱfaithȱorȱnot—whoȱgaveȱIndianȱsocietyȱaȱnewȱface. Firstȱ hereȱ is,ȱ ofȱ course,ȱ Rajaȱ Rammohanȱ Roy,ȱ whomȱ Thomas callsȱ “theȱ prophetȱ ofȱ Indianȱ nationalism.”ȱ Accordingȱ toȱ him,ȱ a ȱSeeȱchapterȱ2ȱofȱthisȱbook.

18

19 ȱHeupȱYoungȱKim,ȱ“TowardsȱaȱChristotao:ȱChristȱasȱtheȱTheanȬ thropocosmicȱTao,”ȱStudiesȱinȱInterreligiousȱDialogueȱ10ȱ(2000):ȱ7.

CHRISTȱBETWEENȱTHEȱRELIGIONS:ȱTHEȱGREATȱTHREE

215

firstȱ effectȱ ofȱ theȱ renewingȱ spiritȱ ofȱ Christȱ canȱ alreadyȱ beȱ obȬ servedȱ inȱ aȱ revivedȱ Indianȱ selfȬconsciousness,ȱ toȱ whichȱ Roy’s strongȱ commitmentȱ toȱ socialȱ justiceȱ andȱ renewalȱ ofȱ Hinduism canȱbeȱadded.ȱTheȱBrahmoȱSamajȱmovement,ȱwhichȱthusȱarose, hasȱ broughtȱ aboutȱ intenseȱ discussionsȱ betweenȱ Christiansȱ and Hindus.ȱ Thomasȱ describesȱ severalȱ thingsȱ here,ȱ includingȱ the contributionȱbyȱNehemiahȱGoreh.20ȱHeȱthenȱdiscussesȱthreeȱmaȬ jorȱ figuresȱ inȱ theȱ Brahmoȱ Samajȱ movement:ȱ Keshubȱ Chunder Senȱ (1838Ȭ1884),ȱ P.C.ȱ Mozoomdarȱ (1840Ȭ1905)ȱ andȱ BrahmaȬ bhandavȱUpadhyayaȱ(1861Ȭ1907).ȱSwamiȱVivekanandaȱoccupies aȱveryȱuniqueȱplaceȱbecauseȱofȱhisȱattemptȱtoȱaddressȱtheȱneeds ofȱ theȱ time—preciselyȱ thoseȱ forȱ whichȱ theȱ Christiansȱ wereȱ deȬ mandingȱ attention—fromȱ theȱ perspectiveȱ ofȱ theȱ Advaita.21 ThomasȱthenȱdiscussesȱaȱmodernȱHinduȱthinkerȱinȱtheȱAdvaita tradition,ȱSarvepalliȱRadhakrishnanȱ(1888Ȭ1975),ȱwithȱhisȱarguȬ mentȱ forȱ aȱ newȱ humanity.ȱ Duringȱ theȱ yearsȱ thatȱ Thomasȱ was workingȱ onȱ hisȱ book,ȱ Radhakrishnanȱ wasȱ seenȱ asȱ theȱ most influentialȱ Hinduȱ leader;ȱ inȱ additionȱ heȱ wasȱ thenȱ presidentȱ of India.ȱ Finally,ȱ Thomasȱ lookedȱ atȱ theȱ figureȱ whoȱ would ultimatelyȱproveȱtoȱhaveȱaȱmoreȱpermanentȱinfluence:ȱMahatma Gandhi.22ȱ Thisȱ isȱ theȱ climaxȱ ofȱ Thomas’ȱ historicalȱ sketch—for him,ȱ Gandhiȱ isȱ theȱ oneȱ parȱ excellenceȱ who,ȱ inspiredȱ byȱ Christ, soughtȱnewȱpathsȱforȱIndia.ȱ Thomasȱisȱrepeatedlyȱlookingȱforȱviewsȱthatȱgiveȱmeaning toȱhistory.ȱInȱhisȱview,ȱitȱisȱonlyȱinȱhistoryȱthatȱGod’sȱrevelation comesȱtoȱlight.ȱWhenȱtheȱthinkersȱofȱtheȱIndianȱrenaissanceȱinȬ spiredȱpeopleȱtoȱseeȱtheirȱlife’sȱtaskȱinȱthatȱlight,ȱThomasȱindiȬ catesȱ theȱ renewalȱ heȱ seeks.ȱ Thus,ȱ heȱ appreciatesȱ Vivekananda forȱhisȱprotestȱagainstȱwhatȱtheȱswamiȱcalledȱ“theȱPhariseesȱand Sadduceesȱ inȱ Hinduism.”ȱ Andȱ heȱ praisesȱ hisȱ engagementȱ “for man’sȱdignityȱandȱforȱjusticeȱforȱmenȱinȱsociety,ȱandȱforȱhistorȬ icalȱ actionȱ toȱ realizeȱ it.”23ȱ Inȱ contrast,ȱ theȱ convertȱ BrahmabanȬ dhavȱ Upadhyayaȱ fallsȱ short,ȱ becauseȱ heȱ neverȱ distancedȱ himȬ selfȱfromȱtheȱcasteȱsystemȱandȱthusȱdidȱnotȱappearȱtoȱputȱGod’s ȱForȱGorehȱseeȱchapterȱ3ȱofȱthisȱvolume.

20

ȱForȱVivekanandaȱseeȱchapterȱ5ȱofȱthisȱvolume.

21

ȱForȱGandhiȱseeȱchapterȱ7ȱofȱthisȱvolume.

22

ȱThomas,ȱTheȱAcknowledgedȱChrist,ȱpp.ȱ147Ȭ48.

23

JESUSȱASȱGURU

216

willȱaboveȱeverything.24ȱOneȱcanȱthereforeȱalsoȱunderstandȱwhy Thomas’ȱaccountȱofȱIndianȱhistoryȱendsȱwithȱMahatmaȱGandhi. Hereȱheȱseesȱsomeoneȱwhoȱgaveȱeverythingȱinȱorderȱtoȱact,ȱacȬ cordingȱtoȱtheȱexampleȱofȱChrist,ȱinȱtotalȱdevotionȱonȱbehalfȱof theȱ leastȱ inȱ society.ȱ Thatȱ doesȱ notȱ meanȱ thatȱ Thomasȱ wasȱ unȬ criticalȱ ofȱ Gandhi.ȱ Heȱ doesȱ thinkȱ thatȱ inȱ Gandhiȱ theȱ personȱ of Christȱ disappearsȱ tooȱ muchȱ behindȱ theȱ principlesȱ ofȱ hisȱ teachȬ ings.ȱAndȱThomasȱdoesȱnotȱfeelȱanyȱaffinityȱforȱhisȱrejectionȱof theȱmissionȱworkȱofȱtheȱchurchȱthatȱGandhiȱdevelopedȱinȱconȬ nectionȱ withȱ thoseȱ teachings.ȱ Nonetheless,ȱ Thomasȱ endorsed severalȱpointsȱinȱGandhi.ȱTheȱlatter’sȱsatyagrahaȱ(stickingȱtoȱthe Truth),ȱ whichȱ wasȱ expressedȱ inȱ totalȱ dedicationȱ toȱ nonȬviolent resistance,ȱ isȱ aȱ Christianȱ value.ȱ Forȱ Thomas,ȱ theȱ Mahatma’s wordsȱ andȱ deedsȱ haveȱ aȱ Christianȱ meaningȱ andȱ constituteȱ a challengeȱ forȱ theȱ churchȱ inȱ India.ȱ Butȱ somethingȱ hasȱ also changedȱ definitelyȱ forȱ Hindus:ȱ throughȱ hisȱ example,ȱ Gandhi madeȱclearȱwhatȱsubstitutionaryȱsufferingȱis.ȱAndȱThomasȱconȬ cludesȱ that,ȱ becauseȱ ofȱ that,ȱ Indiaȱ canȱ neverȱ returnȱ toȱ theȱ old teachingȱofȱkarma. TheȱwayȱinȱwhichȱM.M.ȱThomasȱpresentedȱGandhi’sȱlife’s workȱtheologicallyȱtoȱChristiansȱinȱIndiaȱhasȱevokedȱmuchȱapȬ preciation—andȱrightlyȱso.ȱItȱisȱaȱgoodȱexampleȱofȱwhatȱThomȬ asȱconsideredȱtoȱbeȱtheȱtaskȱofȱtheology:ȱ“theȱexplicationȱofȱthe truthȱ ofȱ theȱ contemporaryȱ encounterȱ betweenȱ theȱ Gospelȱ and theȱsituation.”25ȱAndȱaȱveryȱniceȱcomplimentȱaboutȱhisȱtheologȬ icalȱ workȱ isȱ thatȱ ifȱ Gandhiȱ hadȱ becomeȱ aȱ Christianȱ andȱ had livedȱ aȱ quarterȱ ofȱ aȱ centuryȱ longer,ȱ hisȱ theologyȱ wouldȱ have lookedȱlikeȱthis.26 ButȱThomas’ȱworkȱdidȱnotȱonlyȱevokeȱadmiration;ȱheȱwas alsoȱsubjectedȱtoȱharshȱcriticismȱandȱvilification.ȱHisȱorientation toȱsocialȱaction,ȱwherebyȱheȱeven,ȱveryȱcarefully,ȱȱreferredȱaȱfew timesȱtoȱMarx,ȱevokedȱmuchȱresistanceȱinȱtheȱrightȱwingȱofȱProȬ testantism.ȱWhenȱThomasȱwasȱchairpersonȱofȱtheȱCentralȱComȬ mitteeȱ ofȱ theȱ Worldȱ Councilȱ ofȱ Churches,ȱ heȱ wasȱ forȱ someȱ the ȱThomas,ȱTheȱAcknowledgedȱChrist,ȱp.ȱ109.

24

ȱThomas,ȱTheȱAcknowledgedȱChrist,ȱp.ȱ298.

25

26 ȱR.H.S.ȱBoyd,ȱAnȱIntroductionȱtoȱIndianȱChristianȱTheology,ȱ2ndȱrev. ed.ȱ(Madras:ȱTheȱChristianȱLiteratureȱSociety,ȱ1975),ȱp.ȱ331.

CHRISTȱBETWEENȱTHEȱRELIGIONS:ȱTHEȱGREATȱTHREE

217

symbolȱofȱtheȱpoliticizationȱofȱchurchȱandȱtheology,ȱwhichȱwas fiercelyȱresisted.ȱThusȱtheȱMethodistȱministerȱSunandȱSumithra defendedȱaȱdissertationȱinȱTübingenȱthatȱconcludedȱthat,ȱinȱthe end,ȱ Thomasȱ robbedȱ Godȱ ofȱ hisȱ holiness,ȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ ofȱ his lordshipȱandȱtheȱhumanȱbeingȱofȱhisȱfaith.27ȱHisȱsupervisorȱwas theȱ missiologistȱ Peterȱ Beyerhaus,ȱ whoȱ hadȱ becomeȱ knownȱ as theȱ leaderȱ ofȱ theȱ conservativeȱ pressureȱ groupȱ Keinȱ anderes Evangelium. Twentyȱ yearsȱ later,ȱ suchȱ criticism,ȱ basedȱ notȱ onȱ analysis butȱ onlyȱ onȱ completeȱ polarization,ȱ evokesȱ mainlyȱ astonishȬ ment.ȱ Butȱ thereȱ isȱ aȱ questionȱ toȱ beȱ posedȱ concerningȱ Thomas’ work.ȱItȱisȱundeniablyȱcorrectȱtoȱlookȱforȱtheȱwaysȱinȱwhichȱthe Gospelȱ inspiresȱ peopleȱ toȱ renewal,ȱ alsoȱ outsideȱ theȱ Christian church.ȱButȱpointingȱtoȱtheȱintentionȱofȱGodȱinȱhistoricalȱmoveȬ mentsȱ hereȱ andȱ thereȱ isȱ alsoȱ notȱ withoutȱ risk.ȱ Whatȱ isȱ theȱ criȬ terionȱ forȱ doingȱ so?ȱ Hereȱ Thomasȱ remainsȱ vague.ȱ Inȱ aȱ later bookȱ heȱ returnedȱ toȱ thisȱ questionȱ andȱ pointsȱ toȱ aȱ document fromȱtheȱAssemblyȱofȱtheȱWorldȱCouncilȱinȱNewȱDelhiȱinȱ1961. Thisȱ documentȱ warnedȱ againstȱ theȱ temptationȱ ofȱ seeingȱ the handȱofȱGodȱinȱcertainȱhistoricalȱmovementsȱthatȱweȱpersonally support.ȱ Thomas’ȱ commentaryȱ hereȱ saysȱ aȱ greatȱ deal:ȱ “But withoutȱ someȱ discernmentȱ ofȱ whatȱ isȱ ofȱ Godȱ inȱ theȱ changing situationȱandȱwhatȱisȱnot,ȱhowȱdoȱChristiansȱparticipateȱinȱhisȬ toricalȱaction?”28ȱThatȱis,ȱafterȱall,ȱtheȱcentralȱissueȱforȱThomas: thatȱbelieversȱbecomeȱactiveȱinȱtheirȱhistoricalȱsituation. ThreeȱBooksȱonȱChrist:ȱSamartha AtȱtheȱsameȱtimeȱthatȱM.M.ȱThomasȱwasȱworkingȱ onȱ hisȱbook onȱ theȱ acknowledgedȱ Christȱ ofȱ theȱ Indianȱ renaissance,ȱ Stanley Samarthaȱ wasȱ busyȱ withȱ theȱ sameȱ topic.ȱ Hisȱ book,ȱ Theȱ Hindu Responseȱ toȱ theȱ Unboundȱ Christ,ȱ wouldȱ notȱ beȱ publishedȱ until

27 ȱSunandȱSumithra,ȱRevolutionȱasȱRevelation:ȱAȱStudyȱofȱM.M.ȱThomȬ as’sȱTheology,ȱProȱfideȱdefendendaȱSeriesȱ1ȱ(Tübingen/NewȱDelhi:ȱInterȬ nationalȱChristianȱNetwork/TheologicalȱResearchȱandȱCommunications Institute,ȱ1984),ȱp.ȱ317.

ȱM.M.ȱThomas,ȱRiskingȱChristȱforȱChrist’sȱSake:ȱTowardsȱanȱEcumenȬ icalȱ Theologyȱ ofȱ Pluralism,ȱ Indianȱ editionȱ (Geneva:ȱ WCCȱ Publications, 1999),ȱp.ȱ111.ȱOriginallyȱpublishedȱinȱ1987. 28

JESUSȱASȱGURU

218

1974,ȱbutȱitȱhadȱbeenȱfinishedȱforȱseveral yearsȱalready.ȱAȱGermanȱtranslationȱwas publishedȱinȱ1970.ȱTheȱbasisȱforȱtheȱbook wasȱ aȱ numberȱ ofȱ lecturesȱ Samarthaȱ had givenȱ someȱ yearsȱ earlierȱ atȱ Unitedȱ TheoȬ logicalȱ College.29ȱ Justȱ likeȱ Thomas,ȱ SaȬ marthaȱ hadȱ beenȱ heavilyȱ influencedȱ by Paulȱ Devanandan.ȱ Samartha’sȱ interest wasȱ inȱ whatȱ Devanandanȱ calledȱ “the Christianȱ concernȱ inȱ Hinduism.”30ȱ Just likeȱ Thomas,ȱ Samarthaȱ describesȱ aȱ numȬ berȱ ofȱ responsesȱ byȱ prominentȱ Hindu thinkersȱtoȱtheȱmessageȱofȱChrist.ȱForȱhimȱasȱwell,ȱtheȱpositive responseȱbyȱHindusȱtoȱChristȱisȱanȱindicationȱofȱGod’sȱinvolveȬ mentȱwithȱpeopleȱoutsideȱtheȱChristianȱchurch. Samartha’sȱworkȱdoes,ȱhowever,ȱhaveȱitsȱownȱaccent.ȱMore thanȱThomas,ȱheȱisȱorientedȱtowardsȱchurchȱlife.ȱForȱSamartha, theȱquestionsȱofȱdialogueȱwithȱHinduismȱhaveȱeverythingȱtoȱdo withȱ theȱ relationshipȱ betweenȱ Hindusȱ andȱ Christiansȱ inȱ daily lifeȱinȱIndiaȱandȱwithȱtheȱpositionȱofȱtheȱsmallȱchurchȱcommunȬ itiesȱ inȱ theȱ midstȱ ofȱ theȱ dominantȱ Hinduȱ culture.ȱ Samartha’s theologizingȱhasȱaȱstrongȱpastoralȱsideȱasȱwell.ȱThatȱisȱalsoȱapȬ parentȱ fromȱ theȱ subjectsȱ heȱ treatsȱ inȱ hisȱ articles.ȱ Interreligious celebrationsȱareȱimportantȱtoȱthem.ȱHeȱpublishedȱtheȱwedding sermonȱ heȱ preachedȱ atȱ aȱ mixedȱ weddingȱ serviceȱ andȱ wroteȱ a funeralȱ serviceȱ inȱ whichȱ bothȱ Christiansȱ andȱ Hindusȱ hadȱ a part.31ȱ Oneȱ ofȱ hisȱ mostȱ importantȱ articlesȱ concernsȱ dialogueȱ in theȱcontextȱofȱtheȱpoliticizationȱofȱtheȱreligionsȱinȱIndia.32ȱItȱcontains 29 ȱ Cf.ȱ Janȱ vanȱ Lin,ȱ “Christologyȱ andȱ Christologiesȱ inȱ India,”ȱ ExȬ changeȱXIVȱ(1985):ȱ6.

ȱS.J.ȱSamartha,ȱTheȱHinduȱResponseȱtoȱtheȱUnboundȱChristȱ(Madras: ChristianȱLiteratureȱSociety,ȱ1974),ȱp.ȱ6. 30

ȱS.J.ȱSamartha,ȱ“OnȱLoveȱandȱTruth,”ȱCurrentȱDialogueȱ(1985)ȱ8:ȱ3Ȭ4; S.J.ȱSamartha,ȱ“AȱHinduȬChristianȱFuneral,”ȱTheologyȱTodayȱXLIVȱ(1988): 480Ȭ83. 31

ȱS.J.ȱSamartha,ȱ“DialogueȱandȱtheȱPoliticizationȱofȱReligionsȱinȱInȬ dia,”ȱInternationalȱBulletinȱofȱMissionaryȱResearchȱ8ȱ(1984):ȱ104Ȭ07.ȱTheȱarȬ ticleȱwasȱpublishedȱinȱDutchȱinȱaȱfestschriftȱforȱD.C.ȱMulder,ȱReligiesȱin 32

CHRISTȱBETWEENȱTHEȱRELIGIONS:ȱTHEȱGREATȱTHREE

219

aȱ vehementȱ protestȱ againstȱ “communalism”ȱ asȱ theȱ fixationȱ on theȱ interestsȱ ofȱ one’sȱ ownȱ religiousȱ groupȱ isȱ calledȱ inȱ India. Throughȱdialogueȱtheȱdifferentȱreligiousȱgroupsȱshouldȱlearnȱto cooperateȱinȱaȱsharedȱresponsibilityȱforȱsociety.ȱ Thisȱ tendencyȱ canȱ alsoȱ beȱ foundȱ inȱ Samartha’sȱ bookȱ on Christ.ȱHeȱbeginsȱhisȱbookȱbyȱstatingȱhisȱconvictionȱthatȱ“Christ hasȱ alreadyȱ made,ȱ andȱ continuesȱ toȱ make,ȱ anȱ impactȱ onȱ the heartȱandȱmindȱofȱIndia.”33ȱTheȱchurchȱmustȱexploreȱthatȱpoint, inȱwhichȱcaseȱChristianityȱwillȱnotȱbeȱinȱcompetitionȱwithȱHinȬ duismȱ butȱ inȱ aȱ positionȱ toȱ cooperate.ȱ Forȱ theȱ churchȱ doesȱ not possessȱChrist—thatȱisȱSamartha’sȱconstantȱargument.ȱChristȱis “unbound”ȱandȱthusȱuniversallyȱaccessible.ȱInȱtheȱmodernȱperȬ iodȱthereȱareȱalsoȱHindusȱwhoȱattachedȱgreatȱvalueȱtoȱthisȱuniȬ versalityȱandȱaccessibilityȱofȱChrist.ȱTheyȱhaveȱrespondedȱtoȱthe unboundȱChristȱinȱtheirȱownȱway. SamarthaȱinvestigatesȱtheseȱresponsesȱbyȱmeansȱofȱaȱnumȬ berȱ ofȱ historicalȱ sketches.ȱ Again,ȱ Rajaȱ Rammohanȱ Royȱ isȱ disȬ cussedȱfirst.ȱSamarthaȱvaluesȱhimȱforȱhisȱopenȱattitudeȱtowards ChristȱandȱChristians,ȱbutȱheȱalsoȱpointsȱtoȱtheȱoneȬsidednessȱof hisȱimageȱofȱChrist.ȱTheȱRajaȱdidȱfamiliarizeȱhimselfȱwithȱJesus’ moralȱteachingȱbutȱdidȱnotȱgainȱmuchȱinsightȱintoȱhisȱsuffering andȱ theȱ questionȱ ofȱ sinȱ andȱ humanȱ suffering.ȱ Samarthaȱ then discussesȱ inȱ detailȱ threeȱ thinkersȱ fromȱ theȱ Ramakrishnaȱ MisȬ sion:ȱ Shriȱ Ramakrishnaȱ himself,ȱ thenȱ Swamiȱ Vivekanandaȱ and Swamiȱ Akhilananda.34ȱ Forȱ them,ȱ theȱ mysticalȱ experienceȱ that Jesusȱ Christȱ attainedȱ wasȱ firstȱ andȱ foremost.ȱ Samarthaȱ did,ȱ of course,ȱ pointȱ outȱ theȱ oneȬsidednessȱ hereȱ asȱ well.ȱ Theyȱ doȱ not payȱ properȱ attentionȱ toȱ theȱ historicityȱ andȱ salvificȱ meaningȱ of theȱ crossȱ andȱ resurrection.ȱ Theȱ themeȱ ofȱ theȱ unboundȱ Christ emergesȱclearlyȱonlyȱinȱGandhi.ȱSamarthaȱemphasizesȱthat,ȱasȱa Hindu,ȱGandhiȱlistenedȱtoȱChrist.ȱForȱtheȱMahatma,ȱitȱisȱnotȱonȬ lyȱ Christiansȱ whoȱ trulyȱ believeȱ inȱ Christȱ andȱ canȱ explainȱ his teachingȱwell:ȱ“ThisȱseemedȱtoȱhimȱnotȱonlyȱnarrowȱandȱexcluȬ siveȱbutȱalsoȱaȱdenialȱofȱtheȱuniversalityȱofȱJesusȱChristȱandȱthe nieuwȱperspectiefȱ(Kampen:ȱKok,ȱ1985),ȱpp.ȱ18Ȭ28. ȱSamartha,ȱTheȱHinduȱResponse,ȱp.ȱ1.

33

ȱSeeȱchapterȱ5ȱofȱthisȱvolumeȱforȱaȱdiscussionȱofȱtheseȱthreeȱthinkȬ

34

ers.

JESUSȱASȱGURU

220

allȬinclusivenessȱofȱhisȱmessageȱofȱlove.”35ȱBecauseȱofȱhisȱorthoȬ doxȱ Protestantȱ background,ȱ Samarthaȱ did,ȱ ofȱ course,ȱ question theȱ wayȱ inȱ whichȱ Gandhiȱ ignoresȱ topicsȱ likeȱ forgivenessȱ and grace.ȱ Butȱ heȱ returnsȱ repeatedlyȱ toȱ theȱ greatȱ significanceȱ that Gandhiȱ attributedȱ toȱ theȱ universalȱ significanceȱ ofȱ Christ.ȱ And heȱappreciatesȱtheȱMahatmaȱprimarilyȱbecauseȱofȱhisȱcontribuȬ tionȱ toȱ respectȱ forȱ thoseȱ ofȱ differentȱ faithsȱ andȱ cooperationȱ beȬ tweenȱ theȱ religiousȱ groupsȱ inȱ theȱ population.ȱ Thatȱ isȱ alsoȱ preȬ ciselyȱ whatȱ Samarthaȱ isȱ lookingȱ forȱ inȱ theȱ workȱ ofȱ Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan,ȱ whomȱ he,ȱ likeȱ M.M.ȱ Thomas,ȱ considersȱ toȱ the mostȱimportantȱmodernȱHinduȱthinker.ȱAndȱRadhakrishnanȱis certainlyȱ inclinedȱ toȱ ascribeȱ greatȱ valueȱ toȱ allȱ religiousȱ tradiȬ tions,ȱ includingȱ theȱ Christianȱ faith.ȱ Heȱ placesȱ Christȱ onȱ aȱ par withȱ Krishnaȱ andȱ theȱ Buddhaȱ asȱ divineȱ teachers.ȱ Butȱ thisȱ typȬ icalȱ Hinduȱ tolerance,ȱ asȱ Samarthaȱ isȱ forcedȱ toȱ note,ȱ entailsȱ the lossȱofȱChrist’sȱuniqueness.ȱNonetheless,ȱheȱremainsȱimpressed byȱ theȱ wayȱ inȱ which,ȱ onȱ theȱ basisȱ ofȱ theȱ advaita,ȱ theȱ monistic system,ȱRadhakrishnanȱcanȱgiveȱaȱplaceȱtoȱChristȱasȱaȱmanifestȬ ationȱofȱGod. SamarthaȱstartsȱwithȱthisȱinȱhisȱownȱChristology.ȱHeȱdelibȬ eratelyȱ choosesȱ theȱ monisticȱ traditionȱ asȱ theȱ startingȱ pointȱ for Indianȱ theologizing.36ȱ Inȱ hisȱ view,ȱ theȱ advaita—inȱ particularȱ in itsȱ purestȱ formȱ inȱ Shankara’sȱ interpretation—isȱ theȱ mostȱ imȬ portantȱschoolȱinȱHinduism.ȱȱForȱmanyȱmodernȱIndians,ȱthisȱis theȱ startingȱ pointȱ forȱ theirȱ religiousȱ outlook.ȱ Itȱ isȱ preciselyȱ the advaita,ȱ adaptedȱ andȱ reinterpreted,ȱ thatȱ isȱ usedȱ byȱ contemȬ poraryȱthinkersȱlikeȱRadhakrishnanȱtoȱdevelopȱaȱviewȱofȱmodȬ ernȱ society.ȱ Andȱ theȱ seriousȱ andȱ balancedȱ attitudeȱ thatȱ ShanȬ karaȱ expectedȱ fromȱ hisȱ studentsȱ inȱ theirȱ religiousȱ explorations isȱ preciselyȱ theȱ idealȱ attitudeȱ forȱ dialogueȱ inȱ theȱ currentȱ situaȬ tion.ȱ Inȱ addition,ȱ Samarthaȱ wasȱ stronglyȱ affectedȱ byȱ theȱ monȬ isticȱworldview,ȱforȱitȱwasȱaȱmysticalȱworldview,ȱinȱwhichȱGod, humansȱ andȱ theȱ cosmosȱ canȱ beȱ surveyedȱ inȱ oneȱ whole.ȱ That alsoȱhasȱconsequencesȱforȱtheȱwayȱinȱwhichȱtheȱotherȱfaithsȱare viewed.ȱ Modernȱ Hindusȱ whoȱ engageȱ inȱ dialogueȱ withȱ others onȱtheȱbasisȱofȱtheȱadvaitaȱdoȱthisȱthereforeȱwithȱanȱinclusiveȱapȬ

ȱSamartha,ȱTheȱHinduȱResponse,ȱp.ȱ87.

35

ȱSamartha,ȱTheȱHinduȱResponse,ȱpp.ȱ162Ȭ67.

36

CHRISTȱBETWEENȱTHEȱRELIGIONS:ȱTHEȱGREATȱTHREE

221

proachȱthatȱSamarthaȱfindsȱespeciallyȱappealing:ȱ“TheȱallȬincluȬ sivenessȱ ofȱ theȱ advaitaȱ approachȱ hasȱ aȱ certainȱ generosityȱ and magnanimityȱ whichȱ isȱ reflectedȱ inȱ theȱ approachȱ ofȱ neoȬadvaȬ itinsȱtoȱotherȱreligions.”37ȱThisȱattitudeȱbreaksȱthroughȱtheȱhosȬ tilityȱbetweenȱtheȱgroupsȱinȱtheȱpopulation,ȱandȱthatȱisȱprecisely whatȱSamarthaȱhasȱinȱmind. Preciselyȱ byȱ choosingȱ theȱ advaitaȱ asȱ hisȱ startingȱ pointȱ for Christologyȱ Samarthaȱ doesȱ notȱ makeȱ itȱ easyȱ forȱ himself.ȱ Itȱ is veryȱ importantȱ toȱ himȱ toȱ underscoreȱ theȱ historicityȱ ofȱ Jesus Christ,ȱandȱtheȱmonisticȱtraditionȱdoesȱnotȱpayȱmuchȱattention toȱhistory:ȱtheȱimpermanenceȱandȱtransienceȱofȱhistoricalȱevents doȱnotȱbelong,ȱafterȱall,ȱtoȱwhatȱisȱrealȱbutȱareȱshovedȱasideȱas mayaȱ(blinding,ȱillusion).ȱSamarthaȱtakesȱaȱgreatȱdealȱofȱtrouble toȱ showȱ thatȱ theȱ importanceȱ ofȱ historyȱ canȱ certainlyȱ haveȱ a placeȱ inȱ aȱ modernȱ interpretationȱ ofȱ advaita.ȱ Hereȱ heȱ makes gratefulȱ useȱ ofȱ Radhakrishnan’sȱ expositions,ȱ who,ȱ asȱ anȱ adȬ vaitin,ȱdemandedȱthatȱmoreȱattentionȱbeȱpaidȱtoȱhistory.ȱMoreȬ over,ȱ Samarthaȱ holdsȱ thatȱ theȱ Christianȱ faithȱ canȱ teach somethingȱ toȱ Indiaȱ preciselyȱ onȱ thisȱ point.ȱ Afterȱ all,ȱ ifȱ God’s loveȱ isȱ visibleȱ inȱ theȱ lifeȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ andȱ inȱ hisȱ deathȱ and resurrection,ȱ thenȱ notȱ onlyȱ hisȱ lifeȱ storyȱ butȱ historyȱ inȱ general receivesȱaȱnewȱmeaning.38ȱȱ Whatȱ placeȱ doesȱ Christȱ receiveȱ inȱ theȱ contextȱ ofȱ aȱ worldȬ viewȱthatȱisȱdeterminedȱbyȱtheȱadvaita?ȱSamarthaȱdoesȱnotȱwant toȱ describeȱ Christȱ asȱ anȱ avatara,ȱ forȱ avatarasȱ are,ȱ inȱ hisȱ view, lowerȬclassȱ divineȱ forms.ȱ Forȱ thatȱ matter,ȱ thisȱ isȱ anȱ argument thatȱfitsȱspecificallyȱinȱtheȱmonisticȱargumentation;ȱsomeoneȱin theȱbhaktiȱrangeȱwhoȱisȱdedicatedȱtoȱKrishnaȱȱcertainlyȱdoesȱnot seeȱ thisȱ avataraȱ asȱ anȱ inferiorȱ figure.39ȱ Samarthaȱ laterȱ offeredȱ a moreȱ nuancedȱ viewȱ ofȱ theȱ avataraȱ concept.ȱ Butȱ initiallyȱ heȱ did notȱwantȱtoȱhaveȱanythingȱtoȱdoȱwithȱdivineȱdescentsȱasȱaȱmodȬ elȱ forȱ Christology.ȱ Heȱ wantedȱ toȱ doȱ nothingȱ lessȱ thanȱ connect ChristȱwithȱtheȱBrahman,ȱtheȱprincipleȱofȱtheȱuniverse.ȱThenȱevȬ ȱSamartha,ȱTheȱHinduȱResponse,ȱp.ȱ176.

37

ȱSamartha,ȱTheȱHinduȱResponse,ȱp.ȱ157.

38

ȱThusȱcorrectlyȱEeuwoutȱKlootwijk,ȱCommitmentȱandȱOpenness:ȱThe InterreligiousȱDialogueȱandȱ TheologyȱofȱReligionsȱinȱtheȱWorkȱofȱStanleyȱJ. Samarthaȱ(Zoetermeer:ȱBoekencentrum,ȱ1992),ȱp.ȱ252.ȱ 39

JESUSȱASȱGURU

222

erythingȱ comesȱ togetherȱ inȱ Christ:ȱ theȱ cosmosȱ andȱ life,ȱ human beingȱandȱhistory.ȱTheȱadvaita’sȱmonisticȱviewȱforcesȱoneȱtoȱsee preciselyȱChristȱasȱtheȱallȬencompassing.ȱSamarthaȱseesȱbiblical pointsȱofȱcontactȱforȱthatȱinȱtheȱnotionȱthatȱeverythingȱisȱcreated inȱChrist,ȱasȱlaidȱoutȱinȱtheȱgospelȱofȱJohnȱandȱtheȱlettersȱtoȱthe Colossiansȱ andȱ theȱ Hebrews.ȱ Christȱ appearsȱ toȱ usȱ inȱ aȱ highly exaltedȱ form,ȱ theȱ greatestȱ conceivableȱ form.ȱ Itȱ isȱ thusȱ alsoȱ not surprisingȱthatȱSamarthaȱhailsȱwithȱapprovalȱtheȱnewȱimageȱof “theȱ cosmicȱ Christ”ȱ thatȱ becameȱ popularȱ aroundȱ 1960.ȱ Butȱ he distancesȱhimselfȱfirmlyȱfromȱPanikkarȱwho,ȱinȱconnectionȱwith theȱ cosmicȱ Christ,ȱ talkedȱ onlyȱ aboutȱ ontologyȱ andȱ noȱ more aboutȱhistoricity.ȱForȱSamartha,ȱitȱisȱalwaysȱtheȱearthlyȱhistory ofȱJesusȱofȱNazareth,ȱwithȱtheȱcrossȱandȱresurrection,ȱthatȱconȬ tinuesȱtoȱdetermineȱtheȱimage.ȱHisȱChristologyȱisȱthusȱalso—in oppositionȱ toȱ thatȱ ofȱ Panikkar—calledȱ aȱ “cosmicȱ Christology fromȱbelow.”40 NotȱeveryoneȱwasȱconvincedȱbyȱSamartha’sȱpreferenceȱfor theȱadvaita.ȱAȱnoteworthyȱexampleȱwasȱofferedȱbyȱtheȱGerman translationȱofȱhisȱbook.ȱTheȱtranslatorȱwasȱFrisoȱMelzer,ȱaȱformȬ erȱmissionaryȱwithȱtheȱBaselerȱMission.41ȱHeȱobviouslyȱfeltȱlittle affinityȱforȱ Samartha’sȱwork:ȱinȱ hisȱ forewordȱheȱ writesȱthatȱhe didȱnotȱagreeȱwithȱtheȱbook’sȱargumentȱbutȱthatȱtheȱtranslation couldȱinȱanyȱcaseȱshowȱthatȱadvaitaȱdidȱnotȱofferȱanyȱpromiseȱof aȱChristology.42ȱThatȱisȱveryȱblunt.ȱItȱdoesȱnotȱdoȱanyȱjusticeȱto Samartha’sȱsincereȱattemptȱtoȱsketchȱaȱbiblicallyȱgroundedȱconȬ ceptionȱofȱChristȱagainstȱtheȱbackgroundȱofȱtheȱpopularȱIndian systemȱ ofȱ monisticȱ philosophy.ȱ Thatȱ hisȱ expositionsȱ wereȱ very abstractȱandȱareȱsometimesȱquiteȱelaborateȱisȱanotherȱmatter. FurtherȱDevelopments ItȱbeganȱwithȱthreeȱinfluentialȱbooksȱonȱChristȱinȱtheȱcontextȱof Hinduȱ culture,ȱ writtenȱ inȱ theȱ 1960s.ȱ Howȱ didȱ itȱ progressȱ furȬ

ȱKlootwijk,ȱCommitmentȱandȱOpenness,ȱp.ȱ256.

40

ȱ Onȱ Melzerȱ seeȱ D.J.ȱ Hoens,ȱ Dr.ȱ Frisoȱ Melzer,ȱ Farewellȱ Lecture, UtrechtȱUniversity,ȱ1983. 41

42 ȱMelzerȱlaterȱarguedȱthatȱtheȱadvaitaȱandȱtheȱmessageȱofȱChrist wereȱcontradictory;ȱcf.ȱKlootwijk,ȱCommitmentȱandȱOpenness,ȱp.ȱ36.

CHRISTȱBETWEENȱTHEȱRELIGIONS:ȱTHEȱGREATȱTHREE

223

ther?ȱ Eachȱ ofȱ theȱ threeȱ greatȱ thinkersȱ continuedȱ withȱ hisȱ own emphases.ȱSeveralȱbooksȱfollowed. Raimundoȱ Panikkar,ȱ laterȱ calledȱ mainlyȱ byȱ theȱ English formȱ ofȱ hisȱ name,ȱ Raimon,ȱ continuedȱ hisȱ studyȱ ofȱ Indianȱ reliȬ giousȱtraditions.ȱTheȱclassicȱHinduȱwritingsȱwereȱtheȱfirstȱsubȬ jectȱ ofȱ hisȱ study,ȱ whichȱ resultedȱ inȱ aȱ heftyȱ (moreȱ thanȱ 900ȱ paȬ ges)ȱmiscellanyȱofȱtheȱsacredȱtextsȱofȱHinduism.ȱTheȱtitleȱisȱsugȬ gestive:ȱ Theȱ Vedicȱ Experience.ȱ Heȱ wasȱ notȱ concernedȱ soȱ much withȱ studyingȱ asȱ heȱ wasȱ withȱ experiencingȱ theȱ religiousȱ wisȬ domȱofȱIndia.ȱTheȱtextsȱȱcouldȱlendȱthemselves,ȱinȱparticular,ȱto “contemporaryȱ celebration,”ȱ asȱ theȱ subtitleȱ makesȱ clear.43ȱ For thatȱ matter,ȱ theȱ bookȱ discussesȱ notȱ onlyȱ theȱ Vedicȱ writingsȱ in theȱnarrowȱsense—theȱupanishads,ȱtheȱBhagavadȬGita,ȱtheȱMaȬ habharataȱ andȱ theȱ Ramayanaȱ yieldȱ aȱ greatȱ manyȱ textȱ fragȬ ments. TheȱnextȱstepȱinȱPanikkar’sȱdevelopmentȱisȱhisȱorientation toȱ Buddhism.ȱ Heȱ didȱ indeedȱ exploreȱ Buddhismȱ alreadyȱ atȱ the beginningȱofȱtheȱ1960sȱandȱpublishedȱaȱbookȱaboutȱit.ȱButȱitȱwas notȱpublishedȱuntilȱ1995,ȱafterȱdifferentȱradicalȱrevisions,ȱinȱthe formȱ thatȱ theȱ authorȱ himselfȱ sawȱ asȱ exemplifyingȱ theȱ pointȱ at whichȱ heȱ ultimatelyȱ hadȱ toȱ arrive.ȱ Theȱ titleȱ wasȱ Elȱ silencioȱ del Buddhaȱ (Theȱ Silenceȱ ofȱ theȱ Buddha),ȱ withȱ theȱ veryȱ suggestive subtitle:ȱUnaȱintroducciónȱalȱateísmoȱreligiosoȱ(AnȱIntroductionȱto ReligiousȱAtheism).44ȱPanikkarȱwantsȱtoȱeraseȱtheȱdividingȱline betweenȱbelieversȱandȱatheistsȱbyȱanȱapproachȱinȱwhichȱoneȱcan noȱlongerȱspeakȱaboutȱGod,ȱanȱontologicalȱapophatism. Itȱ seemsȱ thatȱ heȱ hasȱ becomeȱ farȱ removedȱ fromȱ hisȱ book aboutȱChristȱwithȱwhichȱitȱallȱbegan.ȱNevertheless,ȱthatȱisȱonly partlyȱtrue.ȱInȱtheȱforewordȱtoȱtheȱsecondȱeditionȱofȱthatȱbook, heȱalsoȱseesȱitȱasȱaȱmergingȱtogetherȱofȱfourȱrivers:ȱ theȱHindu, theȱChristian,ȱtheȱBuddhistȱandȱtheȱsecularȱtraditions.ȱWithȱreȬ spectȱtoȱcontent,ȱoneȱcanȱremarkȱthatȱtheȱconceptȱofȱGodȱinȱhis bookȱ onȱ theȱ unknownȱ Christȱ isȱ alreadyȱ extremelyȱ thin.ȱ After all,ȱ everythingȱ thatȱ Godȱ meansȱ forȱ peopleȱ isȱ presentȱ inȱ Christ. ȱRaimonȱPanikkar,ȱTheȱVedicȱExperienceȱ(MantramañjarÎ):ȱAnȱAnthoȬ logyȱofȱtheȱVedasȱforȱModernȱManȱandȱContemporaryȱCelebrationȱ(Delhi:ȱMoȬ tilalȱBanarsidass,ȱ2006);ȱoriginallyȱpublishedȱinȱ1977. 43

44 ȱRaimonȱPanikkar,ȱElȱsilencioȱdelȱBuddha:ȱUnaȱintroducciónȱalȱateísmo religiosoȱ(Madrid:ȱEdicionesȱSiruela,1996).

JESUSȱASȱGURU

224

AndȱifȱeverythingȱisȱsaidȱaboutȱtheȱSon,ȱthereȱisȱthenȱnothingȱto beȱ saidȱ aboutȱ theȱ Father.ȱ Whenȱ Christȱ thenȱ almostȱ disappears fromȱ theȱ stageȱ inȱ hisȱ laterȱ work,ȱ nothingȱ moreȱ thanȱ aȱ vague “somethingism”ȱ remains.ȱ Theȱ secularizedȱ Westernȱ individual findsȱ itȱ appealingȱ perhaps,ȱ butȱ itȱ willȱ notȱ findȱ anyȱ echoȱ inȱ the experienceȱofȱtheȱIndian,ȱHinduȱorȱChristian.ȱ Althoughȱ M.M.ȱ Thomasȱ hadȱ noȱ formalȱ theologicalȱ trainȬ ing,ȱ heȱ developedȱ intoȱ aȱ broadlyȱ thinkingȱ ecumenicalȱ theoloȬ gian.ȱ Hisȱ centralȱ positionȱ atȱ theȱ Worldȱ Councilȱ ofȱ Churches broughtȱ himȱ intoȱ contactȱ withȱ veryȱ differentȱ theologicalȱ apȬ proaches.ȱ Likeȱ theȱ trueȱ Indianȱ heȱ was,ȱ heȱ wasȱ constantly searchingȱ forȱ aȱ synthesisȱ inȱ theȱ pluralityȱ ofȱ theȱ contradictory andȱapparentlyȱmutuallyȱexclusiveȱideas.ȱ Inȱ1987ȱtheȱWorldȱCouncilȱpublishedȱaȱbookȱofȱmodestȱsize inȱwhichȱThomasȱtookȱstockȱofȱmanyȱyearsȱofȱstudyȱandȱactivity inȱ interreligiousȱ dialogue.ȱ Inȱ theȱ previousȱ yearsȱ Thomasȱ had givenȱ guestȱ lecturesȱ inȱ theȱ Unitedȱ States,ȱ includingȱ Princeton. Thatȱ gaveȱ himȱ theȱ opportunityȱ toȱ systematizeȱ allȱ theȱ knowlȬ edgeȱ heȱ hadȱ acquiredȱ inȱ theȱ previousȱ period.ȱ Theȱ bookȱ isȱ the resultȱofȱthatȱandȱ isȱ calledȱ RiskingȱChristȱ forȱChrist’sȱ Sake.ȱ After all,ȱ Thomasȱ hadȱ experiencedȱ thatȱ Christiansȱ areȱ forcedȱ toȱ put Christȱatȱstakeȱinȱtheȱsituationȱofȱdialogue.ȱButȱtheyȱdoȱthatȱfor theȱsakeȱofȱChrist.ȱTheȱultimateȱgoalȱisȱ“toȱreaffirmȱourȱconfesȬ sionȱofȱtheȱultimacyȱofȱChristȱasȱtheȱjudgeȱandȱredeemerȱofȱhuȬ manȱ rationality,ȱ communityȱ andȱ otherȱ penultimateȱ values—as wellȱ asȱ ofȱ theȱ religiosityȱ ofȱ humankind.”45ȱ Thomasȱ isȱ thusȱ still concernedȱwithȱtheȱallȬencompassingȱChristȱwhoȱisȱactiveȱinȱthe strugglesȱofȱpeople. But,ȱwhatȱisȱnewȱisȱthatȱThomasȱattachesȱmuchȱmoreȱvalue toȱ theȱ contributionȱ ofȱ veryȱ divergentȱ theologicalȱ schools.ȱ He thusȱ discussesȱ extensivelyȱ andȱ withȱ sympathyȱ theȱ theologyȱ of Panikkarȱ asȱ aȱ typicalȱ exampleȱ ofȱ Romanȱ Catholicȱ contribution toȱtheȱdebate.ȱInȱaddition,ȱheȱpresentsȱtheȱapproachȱofȱhisȱown teacherȱDevanandanȱasȱanȱexampleȱofȱwhereȱanȱauthenticȱProȬ testantȱperspectiveȱleads.ȱThus,ȱtheyȱeachȱhaveȱtheirȱownȱvalue, theȱontologicalȱreflectionȱandȱtheȱhistoricallyȱfoundedȱanalysis. Butȱcanȱtheȱtwoȱbeȱconnected?ȱItȱisȱveryȱremarkableȱthatȱThomȬ asȱnowȱseesȱaȱtaskȱhereȱforȱtheȱtheologiansȱofȱtheȱEasternȱOrthoȬ ȱȱThomas,ȱRiskingȱChristȱforȱChrist’sȱSake,ȱp.ȱ7.ȱ

45

CHRISTȱBETWEENȱTHEȱRELIGIONS:ȱTHEȱGREATȱTHREE

225

doxȱchurches.46ȱTheyȱalwaysȱemphasizedȱthatȱinȱChristȱGodȱbeȬ cameȱunitedȱwithȱtheȱwholeȱcreation.ȱTheȱnewȱlifeȱhasȱalready beenȱrealizedȱinȱChrist—andȱhisȱchurch—andȱtheȱwholeȱofȱhuȬ manityȱhas,ȱasȱitȱwere,ȱaȱplaceȱinȱthat.ȱȱThus,ȱThomasȱhas,ȱinȱthe end,ȱcomeȱbackȱtoȱwhereȱheȱbegan—inȱtheȱworldȱofȱEasternȱOrȬ thodoxy. Stanleyȱ Samarthaȱ hasȱ developedȱ mostȱ clearlyȱ ofȱ theȱ three withȱrespectȱtoȱhisȱviewȱofȱChrist.ȱInȱhisȱfirstȱbookȱonȱChrist,ȱhe hadȱ advocatedȱ aȱ clearlyȱ inclusiveȱ Christology,ȱ whichȱ wasȱ conȬ cernedȱ withȱ howȱ Hindusȱ respondedȱ toȱ theȱ universalȱ “unȬ bound”ȱ Christ.ȱ Apparently,ȱ Christianityȱ couldȱ notȱ claimȱ Jesus Christ;ȱhisȱactivityȱcouldȱbeȱobservedȱfarȱbeyondȱtheȱboundaries ofȱtheȱchurch,ȱamongȱpeopleȱofȱotherȱreligions.ȱȱSamarthaȱthus presentedȱtheȱconceptȱofȱaȱcosmicȱChrist.ȱHeȱchangedȱhisȱmind onȱthisȱpositionȱcompletelyȱinȱlaterȱyears.ȱTheȱrepercussionsȱof thisȱ turnaroundȱ canȱ beȱ foundȱ mostȱ clearlyȱ inȱ hisȱ bookȱ One ChristȱȬȱManyȱReligionsȱthatȱappearedȱinȱ1991. Samarthaȱ appearsȱ toȱ haveȱ distancedȱ himselfȱ fromȱ every formȱofȱexclusivisticȱthinkingȱbyȱwhichȱtheȱChristianȱchurchȱcan proclaimȱtheȱtruthȱtoȱthoseȱofȱotherȱfaiths.ȱTheȱexperiencesȱwith dialogueȱ inȱ theȱ yearsȱ thatȱ heȱ workedȱ atȱ theȱ Worldȱ Councilȱ of Churchesȱbroughtȱhimȱtoȱthisȱview.ȱEverythingȱthatȱstillȱtended towardsȱaȱtruthȱclaimȱwasȱforcefullyȱshovedȱasideȱasȱaȱcolonial leftover.ȱButȱinȱhisȱnewȱviewsȱthereȱwasȱalsoȱanȱinvolvementȱin societyȱinȱIndiaȱthatȱoverȱtimeȱȱseemedȱmoreȱandȱmoreȱtoȱbeȱdiȬ videdȱ alongȱ linesȱ ofȱ religiousȱ identity.ȱ Samarthaȱ isȱ convinced thatȱ Indiaȱ preciselyȱ needsȱ aȱ specialȱ kindȱ ofȱ Christology,ȱ in whichȱ firstȱ ofȱ allȱ aȱ senseȱ ofȱ theȱ Mysteryȱ isȱ present:ȱ “Mystery providesȱtheȱontologicalȱbasisȱforȱtolerance.”47ȱAndȱanȱexclusive attitudeȱwithȱrespectȱtoȱ“ultimateȱmatters”ȱmustȱbeȱrejectedȱenȬ tirely. Theȱ Christologyȱ thatȱ thusȱ arisesȱ isȱ aȱ theocentricȱ ChristoȬ logy.ȱSamarthaȱcontinuesȱtoȱemphasizeȱtheȱuniquenessȱofȱJesus Christ,ȱ butȱ itȱ isȱ theȱ connectionȱ withȱ Godȱ thatȱ isȱ primary.ȱ This ȱThomas,ȱRiskingȱChristȱforȱChrist’sȱSake,ȱpp.ȱ116Ȭ18.

46

ȱS.J.ȱSamartha,ȱOneȱChristȱ–ȱManyȱReligions:ȱTowardsȱaȱRevisedȱChrisȬ tology,ȱFaithȱMeetsȱFaithȱSeries,ȱ3rdȱed.ȱ(Maryknoll:ȱOrbisȱBooks,ȱ1995); originallyȱpublishedȱinȱ1991. 47

JESUSȱASȱGURU

226

connectionȱ canȱ alsoȱ beȱ sharedȱ withȱ thoseȱ ofȱ otherȱ faiths.ȱ For Christians,ȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ remainsȱ normative,ȱ butȱ oneȱ canȱ no longerȱ speakȱ ofȱ universalȱ normativity.ȱ Othersȱ haveȱ theirȱ own divineȱ figures,ȱ Ramaȱ orȱ Krishna,ȱ andȱ theirȱ waysȱ ofȱ salvation. Thereȱcanȱnowȱbeȱmanyȱavatarasȱexistingȱalongsideȱoneȱanother. Inȱ hisȱ view,ȱ itȱ isȱ onlyȱ inȱ thatȱ wayȱ thatȱ anȱ openȱ dialogicalȱ attiȬ tudeȱbetweenȱpeopleȱofȱdifferentȱreligionsȱcanȱbeȱattained—and thatȱisȱwhatȱitȱisȱfinallyȱallȱabout! Samarthaȱusesȱaȱniceȱimageȱtoȱclarifyȱwhatȱitȱisȱthatȱdrives him.ȱHeȱdistinguishesȱbetweenȱtwoȱkindsȱofȱChristology,ȱwhich heȱcomparesȱwithȱaȱhelicopterȱandȱanȱbullockȬcart,ȱrespectively. ChristianȱmissionsȱalwaysȱpresentedȱaȱChristologyȱthatȱlanded onȱ Asianȱ soilȱ likeȱ aȱ helicopterȱ withȱ aȱ greatȱ dealȱ ofȱ noiseȱ and raisedȱ soȱ muchȱ theologicalȱ dustȱ thatȱ theȱ hearingȱ andȱ sightȱ of thoseȱstandingȱaroundȱwasȱblocked.ȱButȱtheȱChristologyȱofȱthe bullockȬcartȱ typeȱ movesȱ steadilyȱ forwardȱ atȱ aȱ slowȱ pace,ȱ with theȱwheelsȱfirmlyȱonȱtheȱunpavedȱroadsȱofȱAsia.48 Theȱimageȱisȱappealing,ȱandȱtheȱChristologyȱthatȱSamartha sketchesȱ inȱ broadȱlinesȱisȱappealingȱasȱwell.ȱHeȱplacesȱtheȱemȬ phasisȱ onȱ Jesusȱ Christ’sȱ willingnessȱ toȱ serveȱ andȱ hisȱ solidarity withȱ theȱ suffering.ȱ Christiansȱ canȱ learnȱ aȱ greatȱ dealȱ fromȱ that and,ȱinȱanyȱcase,ȱtheyȱwillȱbeȱcuredȱofȱtheirȱchurchȱtriumphalȬ ism.ȱTheȱfeelingȱforȱtheȱdivineȱmysteryȱisȱalsoȱaȱvaluableȱpoint, certainlyȱ inȱ theȱ Indianȱ context.ȱ Butȱ muchȱ isȱ lostȱ asȱ well.ȱ NoȬ thingȱ moreȱ isȱ saidȱ aboutȱ reconciliationȱ andȱ justification,ȱ andȱ it remainsȱunclearȱasȱtoȱwhatȱsignificanceȱtheȱcrossȱandȱresurrecȬ tion—soȱimportantȱinȱSamartha’sȱearlierȱwork—canȱnowȱhave. TheȱquestionȱremainsȱasȱtoȱwhatȱChristiansȱhaveȱtoȱofferȱin interreligiousȱdialogueȱwithȱsuchȱaȱnonȬnormativeȱChristology. Thisȱisȱallȱtheȱmoreȱsoȱsinceȱtheȱpartnersȱinȱtheȱdialogueȱwantȱto winȱtheȱChristiansȱoverȱtoȱtheirȱnorms!ȱEeuwoutȱKlootwijkȱconȬ cludesȱinȱaȱcriticalȱdiscussionȱofȱthisȱdevelopmentȱbyȱSamartha: “Perhapsȱ christologyȱ shouldȱ beȱ moreȱ inclusiveȱ andȱ lessȱ relaȬ tivizedȱ thanȱ Samartha’s.”49ȱ Itȱ remainsȱ remarkableȱ thatȱ inȱ his earlierȱ workȱ Samarthaȱ defendedȱ suchȱ anȱ inclusiveȱ Christology withȱsoȱmuchȱauthority.ȱWhateverȱobjectionsȱcouldȱbeȱbrought ȱSamartha,ȱOneȱChristȱ–ȱManyȱReligions,ȱpp.ȱ115Ȭ16,

48

ȱKlootwijk,ȱCommitmentȱandȱOpenness,ȱp.ȱ269.

49

CHRISTȱBETWEENȱTHEȱRELIGIONS:ȱTHEȱGREATȱTHREE

227

againstȱtheȱtheologicalȱmodeȱofȱtheȱ“cosmicȱChrist,ȱ”ȱinȱanyȱcase itȱ meantȱ aȱ messageȱ thatȱ wasȱ relevantȱ forȱ all—Christiansȱ and nonȬChristians.ȱ Theȱ allȱ tooȱ modestȱ Christȱ ofȱ Samartha’sȱ later work,ȱwhichȱfromȱtheȱstartȱhasȱnoȱmessageȱforȱnonȬChristians, isȱquiteȱthinȱinȱcomparison.

INTERMEZZO

JyotiȱSahi Allȱ threeȱ ofȱ theȱ theologiansȱ inȱ theȱ previousȱ chapterȱ attemptȱ to comeȱupȱwithȱanȱimageȱofȱChristȱinȱtheȱmidstȱofȱotherȱreligions. Jyotiȱ Sahiȱ isȱ anȱ Indianȱ artistȱ who,ȱ moreȱ thanȱ anyoneȱ else, portraysȱ Christȱ inȱ thisȱ wayȱ inȱ hisȱ art.ȱ Heȱ isȱ theȱ mostȱ famous Christianȱ painterȱ inȱ Indiaȱ atȱ thisȱ time.ȱ Manyȱ churchesȱ have beenȱdecoratedȱorȱembellishedȱbyȱhim.ȱHeȱisȱalsoȱtheȱoneȱwho, moreȱ thanȱ others,ȱ hasȱ reflectedȱ onȱ theȱ roleȱ ofȱ artȱ inȱ theȱ Indian churchȱandȱhasȱwrittenȱsignificantȱbooksȱonȱthisȱtopic.1 Fromȱhisȱyouthȱon,ȱJyotiȱSahiȱwasȱconfrontedȱwithȱtheȱdifȬ ferencesȱconcerningȱcultureȱandȱreligion.ȱHisȱfatherȱwasȱanȱInȬ dianȱ whoseȱ familyȱ belongedȱ toȱ theȱ Radhasvamiȱ Satsang,ȱ aȱ ReȬ formistȱ movementȱ inȱ northernȱ India.ȱ Hisȱ motherȱ wasȱ British withȱ aȱ Protestantȱ Christianȱ background.ȱ Butȱ sheȱ wasȱ also stronglyȱ interestedȱ inȱ Easternȱ philosophy,ȱ withȱ whichȱ sheȱ had becomeȱ acquaintedȱ particularlyȱ inȱ theȱ circlesȱ aroundȱ KrishȬ namurti.ȱJyotiȱwasȱbornȱinȱ1944ȱinȱPune,ȱwhereȱbothȱhisȱparents wereȱ teachers.ȱ Heȱ wasȱ baptizedȱ inȱ theȱ Scottishȱ Presbyterian Churchȱ andȱ receivedȱ aȱ Christianȱ education.ȱ Interestȱ inȱ HinduȬ ismȱ andȱ theȱ Indianȱ religiousȱ cultureȱ wasȱ alsoȱ impartedȱ toȱ him asȱ aȱ child.ȱ Theȱ contactsȱ withȱ artistsȱ inȱ hisȱ parentalȱ homeȱ conȬ vincedȱJyotiȱatȱaȱyoungȱageȱthatȱhisȱlife’sȱtaskȱlayȱinȱtheȱpractice ofȱart.ȱAfterȱhighȱschool,ȱheȱwentȱtoȱEnglandȱwhenȱheȱwasȱfifȬ teenȱtoȱbeȱeducatedȱatȱtheȱCamberwellȱSchoolȱofȱArtsȱandȱCrafts inȱ London.ȱ Duringȱ thisȱ timeȱ heȱ becameȱ interestedȱ inȱ monastic life,ȱparticularlyȱinȱanȱIndianȱsetting.ȱMeetingsȱwithȱBedeȱGrifȬ fiths,ȱwhoȱwasȱinȱEnglandȱtemporarily,ȱputȱhimȱonȱtheȱtrackȱof theȱ ashramȱ movement.2ȱ Backȱ inȱ Indiaȱ heȱ movedȱ intoȱ theȱ KurȬ ishumalaȱ ashramȱ inȱ Kerala.ȱ Heȱ acquaintedȱ himselfȱ withȱ the spiritualityȱofȱEasternȱOrthodoxyȱandȱwasȱalsoȱinvolvedȱinȱthe developmentȱofȱaȱnew,ȱmoreȱIndianȱstyleȱofȱchurchȱbuilding. ȱInȱparticular:ȱJyotiȱSahi,ȱSteppingȱStones:ȱReflectionsȱonȱtheȱTheology ofȱIndianȱChristianȱCultureȱ(Bangalore:ȱAsianȱTradingȱCorporation,ȱ1986). 1

ȱOnȱtheȱashramȱmovementȱandȱBedeȱGriffithsȱseeȱchapterȱ8ȱofȱthis

2

book.

229

230

JESUSȱASȱGURU

Jyotiȱ neverȱ becameȱ aȱ trueȱ monk.ȱ Inȱ 1970ȱ heȱ marriedȱ Jane, anȱ Englishȱ womanȱ fromȱ aȱ Quakerȱ family.ȱ Theȱ marriageȱ cereȬ monyȱwasȱconductedȱinȱtheȱchapelȱofȱtheȱShantivanamȱashram byȱ Bedeȱ Griffiths.ȱ Jyotiȱ andȱ Janeȱ settledȱ inȱ Siluvepura,ȱ aȱ small Christianȱ villageȱ closeȱ toȱ Bangalore.ȱ Heȱ wentȱ toȱ workȱ forȱ the Romanȱ Catholicȱ Nationalȱ Biblicalȱ Catecheticalȱ andȱ Liturgical Centreȱ inȱ Bangalore,ȱ whereȱ heȱ becameȱ intenselyȱ preoccupied withȱ theȱ issuesȱ ofȱ inculturation.ȱ Jyotiȱ andȱ Janeȱ establishedȱ a schoolȱ inȱ theȱ village,ȱ openȱ toȱ childrenȱ ofȱ allȱ castes.ȱ Fromȱ the veryȱbeginningȱtheirȱhouseȱwasȱalsoȱanȱopenȱmeetingȱplaceȱfor thoseȱ engagedȱ inȱ interreligiousȱ dialogue.3ȱ Afterȱ aȱ numberȱ of years,ȱJyotiȱandȱJaneȱextendedȱtheirȱvillageȱactivitiesȱbyȱfoundȬ ingȱ anȱ artȱ ashramȱ whereȱ youngȱ artistsȱ couldȱ trainȱ themselves furtherȱwithinȱaȱcommunityȱinȱartȱformsȱthatȱtranslateȱtheȱGosȬ pelȱ intoȱ Indianȱ images.ȱ Theȱ centrumȱ isȱ calledȱ “Theȱ Indian SchoolȱofȱArtȱforȱPeace”ȱ(INSCAPE)ȱorȱtheȱLucasȱAshram. ThroughoutȱtheȱyearsȱJyotiȱSahiȱhasȱproducedȱmanyȱworks ofȱ art,ȱ particularlyȱ paintingsȱ andȱ woodcuts,ȱ butȱ heȱ alsoȱ works inȱbatik,ȱstainedȱglassȱwindowsȱandȱdesignsȱforȱrailingsȱandȱliȬ turgicalȱ furniture.ȱ Heȱ usesȱ Indianȱ formsȱ toȱ portrayȱ Christian themesȱbutȱalsoȱattempts,ȱaboveȱall,ȱtoȱpenetrateȱtheȱmindȱofȱthe Hinduȱ andȱ Buddhistȱ cultureȱ andȱ thusȱ masterȱ theȱ religiousȱ exȬ perienceȱ underlyingȱ them.ȱ Thisȱ isȱ howȱ actualȱ encounterȱ beȬ tweenȱreligionsȱoccurs.ȱTheȱmanyȱmandalasȱwithȱChristȱmotifs heȱpaintedȱinȱaȱcertainȱperiodȱofȱhisȱlifeȱareȱaȱgoodȱexample.ȱFoȬ cusingȱonȱChristȱcanȱapparentlyȱbeȱseenȱasȱaȱformȱofȱmeditative concentrationȱinȱlineȱwithȱtheȱHinduȱmodel. ChristȱisȱatȱtheȱcentreȱofȱtheȱwholeȱofȱtheȱreligiousȱexperiȬ entialȱ worldȱ ofȱ humankind.ȱ Thisȱ isȱ theȱ imageȱ ofȱ theȱ eternal Christȱ thatȱ weȱ encounterȱ inȱ theȱ ashramȱ movement.ȱ Although thisȱ isȱ whereȱ theȱ rootsȱ ofȱ Jyoti’sȱ spiritualityȱ lie,ȱ heȱ hasȱ gone further,ȱintoȱaȱincreasinglyȱdeepȱreflectionȱonȱtheȱlinksȱbetween theȱ religions.ȱ And,ȱ justȱ asȱ aȱ synthesisȱ arisesȱ inȱ theȱ theological workȱofȱPanikkar,ȱThomasȱandȱSamartha,ȱsoȱalsoȱinȱJyotiȱSahi’s art. Aȱ veryȱ goodȱ exampleȱ isȱ hisȱ paintingȱ thatȱ hasȱ beenȱ reproȬ ducedȱ here,ȱ Livingȱ Water.ȱ Christȱ isȱ portrayedȱ asȱ theȱ risenȱ Lord 3 ȱMyȱfirstȱcontactȱwithȱJyotiȱandȱJaneȱSahiȱwasȱduringȱanȱextensive visitȱtoȱSiluvepuraȱinȱOctoberȱ1976.

JYOTIȱSAHI

231

inȱtheȱmidstȱofȱhumanȱreligiosity.ȱThisȱworkȱhasȱaȱveryȱspecial liturgicalȱ function.ȱ Itȱ isȱ aȱ soȬcalledȱ Lentenȱ veil,ȱ orȱ “hunger cloth,”ȱ whichȱ hasȱ aȱ centralȱ placeȱ inȱ theȱ churchȱ duringȱ Lent. DuringȱtheȱMiddleȱAges,ȱtheȱcustomȱaroseȱinȱtheȱperiodȱofȱfastȬ ingȱbeforeȱEasterȱofȱcoveringȱtheȱsplendourȱofȱtheȱmainȱaltarȱby aȱcloth.ȱThisȱclothȱwasȱofficiallyȱcalledȱtheȱvelumȱtempliȱbutȱwas commonlyȱcalledȱaȱhungerȱclothȱbecauseȱitȱwasȱassociatedȱwith fasting.ȱ Initiallyȱ theȱ clothsȱ wereȱ bare,ȱ butȱ theyȱ becameȱ more andȱ moreȱ richlyȱ decoratedȱ withȱ depictionsȱ ofȱ biblicalȱ themes. Theȱtraditionȱofȱtheȱhungerȱclothȱfellȱintoȱdisuseȱalreadyȱinȱthe nineteenthȱcentury.ȱButȱinȱ1976ȱtheȱoldȱcustomȱwasȱgivenȱnew lifeȱinȱGermany.ȱTheȱRomanȱCatholicȱdiaconalȱorganizationȱMiȬ sereorȱ hadȱ aȱ hungerȱ clothȱ designedȱ forȱ aȱ Lentenȱ fundȬraising appealȱforȱtheȱThirdȱWorld.ȱThisȱwasȱaȱclothȱthatȱdemandedȱatȬ tentionȱ forȱ theȱ livesȱ ofȱ peopleȱ inȱ otherȱ countries.ȱ Sahiȱ painted theȱfirstȱmodernȱhungerȱcloth.

AȱnewȱhungerȱclothȱwouldȱappearȱeachȱyearȱforȱLent,ȱdeȬ signedȱ byȱ anotherȱ artistȱ fromȱ anotherȱ country.ȱ First,ȱ onlyȱ GerȬ manȱRomanȱCatholicȱparishesȱ participated,ȱ butȱ soonȱotherȱ EuȬ ropeanȱ countriesȱ adoptedȱ theȱ custom,ȱ includingȱ theȱ NetherȬ lands.ȱAndȱcongregationsȱofȱotherȱdenominationsȱseemedȱtoȱbe interestedȱ inȱ thisȱ newȱ liturgicalȱ form.ȱ Inȱ 1984ȱ Jyotiȱ Sahiȱ was

232

JESUSȱASȱGURU

askedȱtoȱmakeȱaȱsecondȱhungerȱcloth.4ȱItȱwasȱthisȱclothȱheȱthen created,ȱcalledȱLivingȱWater. TheȱrisenȱChristȱstandsȱcentral,ȱtriumphantȱoverȱdeath.ȱHe isȱsurroundedȱbyȱaȱnumberȱofȱscenesȱthatȱgiveȱexpressionȱtoȱthe religiousȱ searchingȱ ofȱ people,ȱ sometimesȱ linkedȱ withȱ aȱ biblical depiction.ȱ Theȱ biblicalȱ narrativesȱ areȱ takenȱ fromȱ theȱ Lentȱ lecȬ tionaryȱ forȱ yearȱ A.ȱ Thusȱ atȱ theȱ topȱ leftȱ weȱ seeȱ Lazarusȱ rising fromȱ theȱ graveȱ (Johnȱ 11);ȱ butȱ theȱ graveȱ isȱ aȱ mausoleumȱ inȱ InȬ dianȱMuslimȱstyle.ȱAȱsimilarȱbuildingȱusuallyȱcontainsȱtheȱsarȬ cophagusȱofȱanȱIslamicȱholyȱmanȱandȱisȱthereforeȱaȱplaceȱofȱpilȬ grimageȱandȱprayer.ȱAtȱtheȱtopȱrightȱweȱseeȱaȱtypicallyȱIndian representation.ȱOnȱaȱmountainȱinȱtheȱlotusȱpositionȱsitsȱaȱbeardȬ edȱman,ȱclearlyȱaȱwiseȱyogiȱwhoȱcomesȱcloserȱtoȱGodȱviaȱmediȬ tationȱandȱdevotionȱ(withȱaȱmusicalȱinstrument!).ȱButȱChristians wouldȱalsoȱseeȱMosesȱonȱtheȱmountainȱinȱthisȱscene,ȱandȱthusȱit refersȱtoȱtheȱstoryȱofȱtheȱtransfigurationȱonȱtheȱmountainȱ(MatȬ thewȱ17).ȱUnderȱtheȱrightȱhandȱofȱChristȱweȱseeȱaȱwomanȱmakȬ ingȱ theȱ Hinduȱ gestureȱ ofȱ worshipȱ andȱ respectȱ (anjali)ȱ withȱ her hands.ȱSheȱisȱpaintedȱwithinȱtheȱcontoursȱofȱaȱtearȱandȱthusȱreȬ presentsȱ theȱ emotionalȱ involvementȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ withȱ people.ȱ The basicȱshapeȱofȱtheȱtearȱisȱlikeȱtheȱmandorla,ȱwhichȱoftenȱappears inȱJyotiȱSahi’sȱwork.ȱOnȱtheȱrightȱweȱseeȱtheȱSamaritanȱwoman (Johnȱ 4).ȱ Sheȱ isȱ standingȱ underȱ aȱ treeȱ thatȱ isȱ consideredȱ toȱ be sacredȱinȱtheȱstateȱKarnataka,ȱwhichȱisȱwhereȱtheȱpainterȱlives: theȱ laburnumȱ orȱ goldenȱ showerȱ tree.ȱ Thusȱ itȱ isȱ aȱ sacredȱ event whenȱ theȱ womanȱ becomesȱ acquaintedȱ withȱ theȱ livingȱ water. Theȱ traditionalȱ well—theȱ placeȱ inȱ everyȱ villageȱ whereȱ theȱ disȬ crepanciesȱ ofȱ casteȱ areȱ mostȱ stronglyȱ felt—isȱ closeȱ by,ȱ abanȬ doned.ȱOnȱtheȱleftȱinȱtheȱforegroundȱweȱseeȱaȱgroupȱofȱpeople comingȱoutȱofȱtheȱvillageȱhutsȱtowardȱChrist.ȱTheȱlightȱfallsȱonȱa blindȱ man,ȱ whoȱ is,ȱ ofȱ courseȱ aȱ referenceȱ toȱ theȱ healingȱ ofȱ the blindȱmanȱ(Johnȱ9).ȱTheȱgroupȱofȱpeopleȱrepresentȱtheȱpoorȱand lowerȱ castesȱ whoȱ comeȱ toȱ standȱ beforeȱ Jesus.ȱ Finally,ȱ onȱ the rightȱinȱtheȱforegroundȱisȱaȱwaterȱpot,ȱlikeȱthoseȱusedȱinȱmany Hinduȱrituals.ȱThereȱareȱbranchesȱwithȱlotusȱblossomsȱinȱit,ȱthe symbolȱofȱtheȱbeautyȱofȱnewȱlife.

4 ȱȱTheȱclothȱwasȱreleasedȱinȱGermanyȱforȱLentȱinȱ1984,ȱbutȱitȱwasȱinȬ troducedȱinȱtheȱNetherlandsȱaȱfewȱyearsȱlater,ȱforȱLentȱinȱ1987.

JYOTIȱSAHI

233

TheȱpainterȱrefersȱtoȱreligiosityȱinȱIndiaȱinȱeverything.ȱBut whatȱstrikesȱtheȱobservantȱpersonȱtheȱmostȱisȱtheȱmatterȱofȱthe centralȱpositioningȱofȱtheȱlivingȱwater.ȱAtȱfirstȱglanceȱitȱseemsȱto beȱ theȱ usualȱ Europeanȱ depiction,ȱ byȱ whichȱ theȱ waterȱ flows fromȱ theȱ horizonȱ toȱ theȱ observerȱ andȱ thenȱ branchesȱ offȱ inȱ the foregroundȱ intoȱ twoȱ rivers.ȱ Nothingȱ isȱ lessȱ true.ȱ Theȱ water comesȱfromȱabove,ȱoutȱofȱheaven!ȱItȱflowsȱthroughȱChristȱtoȱthe earth,ȱ andȱ thenȱ dividesȱ intoȱ threeȱ riversȱ thatȱ flowȱ towardȱ the back,ȱtowardȱtheȱfrontȱandȱtowardȱtheȱfrontȱleft,ȱsoȱthatȱtheȱenȬ tireȱearthȱisȱprovidedȱwithȱwater.ȱTheȱwaterȱevenȱspringsȱupȱin theȱ pitcherȱ ofȱ theȱ Samaritanȱ woman;ȱ thisȱ isȱ “aȱ springȱ ofȱ water wellingȱ upȱ toȱ eternalȱ life,”ȱ asȱ Jesusȱ explainsȱ toȱ herȱ (Johnȱ 4:14). TheȱbackgroundȱofȱthisȱdepictionȱisȱtheȱHinduȱmythȱaboutȱthe originȱofȱtheȱholyȱriver,ȱtheȱGanges,ȱwhichȱisȱviewedȱasȱaȱdivine figureȱdescendingȱfromȱheavenȱtoȱearth.ȱWhenȱtheȱwaterȱofȱthe Gangesȱwasȱgoingȱtoȱdescendȱforȱtheȱfirstȱtime,ȱitȱthreatenedȱto comeȱdownȱwithȱsuchȱaȱdestructiveȱforceȱthatȱShivaȱpositioned himselfȱunderȱitȱtoȱprotectȱtheȱearth.ȱHeȱcaughtȱtheȱforceȱofȱthe waterȱ withȱ hisȱ headȱ andȱ allowedȱ itȱ toȱ flowȱ calmlyȱ alongȱ his bodyȱ toȱ theȱ earth.ȱ Christȱ isȱ standingȱ hereȱ inȱ theȱ centreȱ asȱ the oneȱ whoȱ protectsȱ theȱ earthȱ fromȱ deadlyȱ forcesȱ andȱ allowsȱ huȬ mankindȱtoȱshareȱinȱtheȱlifeȬgivingȱwater. ViaȱthisȱhungerȱclothȱJyotiȱSahiȱhasȱshownȱthatȱChristȱisȱto beȱlinkedȱwithȱtheȱreligiousȱexperienceȱofȱIndiaȱandȱcultureȱthat hasȱarisenȱoutȱofȱit.ȱEverythingȱthatȱisȱholyȱforȱtheȱIndiansȱhas somethingȱ toȱ sayȱ aboutȱ Godȱ whoȱ revealedȱ himselfȱ through Christȱtoȱhumankind.ȱInȱthisȱwayȱJyotiȱSahi’sȱworkȱfitsȱintoȱthe traditionȱofȱtheȱChristianȱashramȱmovementȱandȱtheȱgreatȱtheoȬ logiansȱ ofȱ dialogue,ȱ althoughȱ thisȱ doesȱ dateȱ hisȱ workȱ someȬ what.ȱ Sinceȱ theȱ 1980sȱ otherȱ issuesȱ haveȱ beenȱ givenȱ priorityȱ in theȱ churchesȱ inȱ India.ȱ Attentionȱ hasȱ shiftedȱ fromȱ inculturation andȱ interreligiousȱ dialogueȱ toȱ socialȱ issues:ȱ justiceȱ andȱ liberaȬ tionȱhaveȱbecomeȱtheȱnewȱtopics.ȱInȱoneȱofȱhisȱlatestȱbooksȱJyoti Sahiȱ indignantlyȱ observedȱ thatȱ todayȱ monksȱ andȱ artistsȱ must justifyȱ themselvesȱ andȱ proveȱ thatȱ theirȱ contributionȱ hasȱ releȬ vanceȱasȱwell.ȱHeȱadds: Theȱ blindȱ forcesȱ ofȱ prejudiceȱ andȱ violence,ȱ whichȱ erupt whenȱaȱsortȱofȱfundamentalistȱtunnelȱvisionȱcutsȱoutȱofȱsight allȱ thoseȱ widerȱ concernsȱ whichȱ characteriseȱ aȱ trulyȱ human concernȱforȱtheȱworldȱinȱwhichȱweȱlive,ȱthreatenȱjusticeȱand

JESUSȱASȱGURU

234

peaceȱ farȱ moreȱ perilouslyȱ thanȱ anyȱ lackȱ ofȱ materialȱ reȬ sources.5

Althoughȱ thisȱ commentȱ doesȱ demonstrateȱ someȱ bias,ȱ Jyotiȱ is certainlyȱrightȱinȱhisȱpleaȱtoȱsearchȱforȱlinksȱwithȱotherȱcultural andȱ religiousȱ traditions.ȱ Thisȱ mayȱ haveȱ retreatedȱ toȱ theȱ backȬ groundȱ inȱ India,ȱ butȱ theȱ riseȱ ofȱ aȱ multiculturalȱ societyȱ inȱ the Westȱhasȱproducedȱgreatȱinterestȱinȱit. Jyotiȱ Sahi’sȱ workȱ isȱ thereforeȱ especiallyȱ interestingȱ for thoseȱ whoȱ areȱ involvedȱ inȱ interreligiousȱ dialogue.ȱ Bothȱ ofȱ his hungerȱclothsȱmadeȱaȱparticularȱimpressionȱonȱmanyȱinȱtheȱEuȬ ropeanȱ churches.ȱ Andȱ expositionsȱ ofȱ hisȱ workȱ attractȱ enthusiȬ asticȱ visitorsȱ inȱ manyȱ places,ȱ includingȱ theȱ Netherlandsȱ and Flanders.ȱInȱ2004ȱthereȱwasȱanȱexpositionȱofȱhisȱworkȱinȱtheȱStuȬ dentenkerkȱ (Studentȱ Church)ȱ inȱ Nijmegenȱ andȱ inȱ 2005ȱ inȱ the galleryȱ ofȱ theȱ Mennoniteȱ Churchȱ inȱ Haarlemȱ andȱ inȱ theȱ CathȬ olicȱUniversityȱinȱLouvain.ȱAtȱtheȱopeningȱofȱtheȱexpositionȱin HaarlemȱIȱcitedȱtheȱfollowingȱquoteȱfromȱanȱoldȱarticleȱbyȱSahi: Aȱforeignȱartȱcannotȱrevealȱ toȱtheȱIndianȱChristianȱwhatȱhe is.ȱ Theȱ questionȱ isȱ not,ȱ ‘Wasȱ Christȱ everȱ inȱ suchȱ aȱ cultural environment?ȱWasȱheȱdressedȱinȱsuchȱclothes?ȱDidȱheȱmove inȱsuchȱaȱlandscape?’ȱTheȱpurposeȱofȱaȱChristianȱartȱisȱtoȱreȬ vealȱtoȱtheȱworshipperȱtheȱculturalȱenvironmentȱinȱwhichȱhe moves,ȱtheȱclothesȱheȱwears,ȱtheȱlandscapeȱheȱmovesȱin,ȱbut allȱthisȱinȱChristo.ȱChristȱisȱhere,ȱtheȱTruthȱandȱBeingȱofȱthe worshipper.6

Theȱ imageȱ ofȱ thisȱ allȬencompassingȱ Christȱ remainsȱ relevant, andȱnotȱonlyȱforȱIndianȱbelievers. ȱȱJyotiȱSahi,ȱHolyȱGround:AȱNewȱApproachȱtoȱtheȱMissionȱofȱtheȱChurch inȱIndiaȱ(Auckland:ȱPaceȱPublishing,ȱ1998),ȱp.ȱ13. 5

ȱȱJyotiȱSahiȱinȱanȱarticleȱin:ȱWordȱandȱWorship,ȱ1972,ȱcitedȱbyȱRichard W.ȱTaylor,ȱJesusȱinȱIndianȱPaintings,ȱConfessingȱtheȱFaithȱinȱIndiaȱSeries, 11ȱ(Madras:ȱTheȱChristianȱLiteratureȱSociety,ȱ1975),ȱp.ȱ144. 6

CHAPTERȱ10

JesusȱasȱLiberator inȱtheȱTheologyȱofȱtheȱDalits InȱrecentȱcenturiesȱChristianȱtheologiansȱinȱIndiaȱhaveȱsoughtȱa connectionȱwithȱtheȱoriginalȱreligionȱofȱtheȱcountry,ȱHinduism. Someȱhaveȱdirectedȱthemselvesȱtowardȱtheȱmonisticȱphilosophy ofȱ theȱ Vedantaȱ inȱ theȱ convictionȱ thatȱ thatȱ wasȱ whereȱ theȱ most elevatedȱformȱofȱHinduismȱwasȱtoȱbeȱfound.ȱOthersȱwereȱconȬ vincedȱ thatȱ theȱ theisticȱ bhaktiȱ devotionȱ wasȱ moreȱ valuableȱ beȬ causeȱ thatȱ wasȱ whereȱ suchȱ strikingȱ parallelsȱ withȱ one’sȱ own Christianȱreligionȱwereȱtoȱbeȱfound.ȱButȱtheȱmissionaryȱandȱtheȬ ologianȱ wereȱ alwaysȱ concernedȱ withȱ findingȱ someȱ connection toȱtheȱpanȬIndianȱHinduȱtradition,ȱwhichȱhadȱitsȱsourcesȱinȱthe classicalȱholyȱwritingsȱinȱSanskrit. Butȱ inȱadditionȱtoȱ thisȱGreatȱTradition,ȱ asȱ culturalȱ anthroȬ pologistsȱcallȱit,ȱthereȱisȱanotherȱHinduism.ȱItȱisȱcalledȱtheȱLittle Traditionȱofȱtheȱreligionȱofȱsimpleȱpeopleȱwhoȱwereȱnotȱpartȱof theȱhighȬmindedȱandȱeducatedȱreligiousȱcultureȱofȱtheȱelite.ȱThe distinctionȱbetweenȱtheȱGreatȱTraditionȱandȱtheȱLittleȱTradition isȱapplicableȱ inȱmanyȱculturalȱareas,ȱ butȱ inȱ Hinduȱ Indiaȱ itȱcerȬ tainlyȱ concernsȱ aȱ quiteȱ largeȱ andȱ meaningfulȱ difference.ȱ The GreatȱTraditionȱisȱtheȱreligionȱofȱthoseȱwhoȱcanȱboastȱofȱaȱcerȬ tainȱreligiousȱpurityȱonȱtheȱbasisȱofȱbirthȱinȱaȱcertainȱcaste.ȱThey possesȱtheȱexclusiveȱrightȱtoȱtheȱritualsȱandȱtheȱknowledgeȱthat isȱlaidȱdownȱinȱtheȱsacredȱtextsȱinȱSanskrit.ȱTheȱcountlessȱpeoȬ pleȱofȱlowerȱbirthȱwereȱexcludedȱofȱoldȱandȱhadȱnoȱpartȱinȱthe practiceȱ ofȱ thisȱ religion.ȱ Thisȱ didȱ notȱ meanȱ thatȱ theyȱ hadȱ no religion.ȱTheyȱworshippedȱtheȱgreatȱHinduȱgodsȱorȱotherȱlocal divineȱ figuresȱ inȱ theirȱ ownȱ way.ȱ Theyȱ hadȱ theirȱ ownȱ temples, theirȱownȱritualsȱwithȱtheirȱownȱpriestsȱand,ȱinȱpart,ȱtheirȱown mythology.ȱ Insteadȱ ofȱ holyȱ Sanskritȱ theyȱ usedȱ theȱ languageȱ of theirȱareaȱtoȱexpressȱreligiousȱknowledge.ȱThusȱtheȱLittleȱTradiȬ tionȱ doesȱ notȱ concernȱ onlyȱ oneȱ religiousȱ complexȱ thatȱ canȱ be foundȱuniversallyȱinȱtheȱsameȱform.ȱRather,ȱitȱconcernsȱaȱgreat varietyȱ ofȱ religiousȱ elements,ȱ varyingȱ stronglyȱ inȱ eachȱ area, casteȱorȱtribe.

235

JESUSȱASȱGURU

236

ItȱisȱthereforeȱalsoȱunderstandableȱthatȱtheȱChristianȱtheoȬ logiansȱpaidȱnoȱattentionȱtoȱthisȱLittleȱTraditionȱofȱHinduism.ȱIn theseȱcirclesȱthereȱareȱnoȱgenerallyȱacceptedȱsacredȱtexts,ȱnoȱimȬ pressiveȱbuildings,ȱandȱscarcelyȱanyȱreflectiveȱthinkingȱhasȱdeȬ veloped.ȱAnd,ȱaboveȱall,ȱthisȱformȱofȱreligionȱisȱdifferentȱinȱevȬ eryȱpartȱofȱtheȱcountry.ȱNonetheless,ȱitȱisȱremarkableȱthatȱsoȱlitȬ tleȱattentionȱhasȱbeenȱ paidȱ toȱ thisȱformȱ ofȱHinduism,ȱ sinceȱ the greatȱ majorityȱ ofȱ theȱ Christianȱ Indiansȱ belongȱ thereȱ according toȱtheirȱsocialȱbackground!ȱButȱhereȱtheȱstrictȱhierarchalȱ thinkȬ ingȱthatȱcontrolsȱtheȱHinduȱcultureȱtakesȱitsȱrevenge.ȱWhatȱHinȬ duismȱisȱisȱdeterminedȱbyȱtheȱhighestȱpriestlyȱgroupsȱinȱsociety. Onȱtheȱwhole,ȱtheȱpeopleȱatȱtheȱbottomȱofȱsocietyȱdoȱnotȱcount —notȱ inȱ socioȬeconomicȱ termsȱ norȱ inȱ culturalȬreligiousȱ terms. Theȱ irrefutableȱ casteȱ systemȱ determinesȱ theȱ viewȱ ofȱ theȱ whole ofȱsociety. Inȱ Hinduȱ culture,ȱ birthȱ isȱ determinativeȱ forȱ one’sȱ life.ȱ EvȬ eryȱ personȱ isȱ bornȱ intoȱ aȱ certainȱ casteȱ (jati).ȱ Everyȱ regionȱ conȬ tainsȱaȱvarietyȱofȱcastes,ȱandȱacrossȱtheȱentireȱcountryȱtheȱcastes numberȱ inȱ totalȱ atȱ leastȱ inȱ theȱ hundreds,ȱ althoughȱ theȱ exact numberȱ isȱ disputable:ȱ whetherȱ similarȱ castesȱ inȱ theȱ oneȱ region areȱ actuallyȱ theȱ sameȱ asȱ inȱ anotherȱ regionȱ isȱ difficultȱ toȱ deȬ termine.ȱTheȱbasicȱideaȱofȱcasteȱisȱhierarchy.ȱItȱisȱnotȱforȱnothing thatȱtheȱclassicȱstudyȱonȱtheȱIndianȱcasteȱsystemȱisȱcalledȱhomo hierarchicus.1ȱTheȱbasisȱofȱthisȱhierarchyȱisȱreligiousȱpurity.ȱThe membersȱ ofȱ theȱ higherȱ castesȱ would,ȱ throughȱ birth,ȱ possessȱ a largerȱdegreeȱofȱpurityȱthatȱenablesȱthemȱtoȱmanageȱtheȱsacred fromȱaȱpositionȱcloserȱby.ȱCertainȱoccupationsȱbelongȱtoȱcertain castes,ȱandȱitȱisȱnoȱwonderȱthatȱtheȱpriesthoodȱwasȱlinkedȱofȱold toȱ theȱ highestȱ caste,ȱ i.e.ȱ theȱ brahmanȱ caste.ȱ Theȱ oldestȱ sacred textȱofȱHinduism,ȱtheȱRigȱVeda,ȱalreadyȱpointsȱtoȱaȱritualȱhierȬ archyȱamongȱpeopleȱinȱaȱsystemȱofȱfourȱclassesȱ(varna).ȱItȱisȱthis religiousȱtheoryȱthatȱhasȱheldȱswayȱoverȱtheȱdifferencesȱamong peopleȱforȱatȱleastȱthreeȱmillennia. TheȱfourȱclassesȱareȱarrangedȱinȱdecreasingȱdegreeȱofȱpurȬ ity:ȱbrahmanȱ(priest),ȱkshatriyaȱ(warriorsȱandȱgovernors),ȱvaishya (tradersȱ andȱ farmers)ȱ andȱ shudraȱ (servantsȱ andȱ labourers). ȱLouisȱDumont,ȱHomoȱHierarchicus:ȱTheȱCasteȱSystemȱandȱItsȱImplicaȬ tionsȱ (Chicago/London:ȱ Universityȱ ofȱ Chicagoȱ Press,ȱ 1980);ȱ original Frenchȱeditionȱpublishedȱinȱ1966. 1

JESUSȱASȱLIBERATORȱINȱTHEȱTHEOLOGYȱOFȱTHEȱDALITS

237

Thoseȱinȱtheȱfirstȱthreeȱofȱtheseȱfourȱclassesȱareȱcalledȱ“reborn” (dvija)ȱ becauseȱ theyȱ wereȱ allowedȱ toȱ undergo—likeȱ aȱ second birth—aȱ religiousȱ initiationȱ thatȱ givesȱ themȱ theȱ rightȱ toȱ carry outȱsacrificialȱacts.ȱTheȱfourthȱclass,ȱthatȱofȱtheȱshudra,ȱisȱmuch lowerȱritually,ȱbecauseȱforȱthoseȱwhoȱareȱmembersȱofȱthatȱclass suchȱanȱinitiationȱisȱnotȱpossible.ȱEvenȱmuchȱlowerȱinȱtheȱhierȬ archyȱ areȱ thoseȱ whoȱ becauseȱ ofȱ theirȱ casteȱ backgroundȱ cannot evenȱ claimȱ aȱ positionȱ withinȱ theȱ systemȱ ofȱ theȱ fourȱ classes. TheyȱareȱaȬvarna,ȱi.e.ȱtheyȱdoȱnotȱbelongȱwithinȱtheȱfourȱclasses, andȱ becauseȱ ofȱ thisȱ theirȱ positionȱ onȱ theȱ ladderȱ ofȱ purityȱ is completelyȱatȱtheȱbottom.ȱInȱtheȱeyesȱofȱorthodoxȱHindus,ȱthey areȱextremelyȱunclean,ȱsoȱmuchȱsoȱthatȱevenȱcontactȱwithȱthem willȱpolluteȱ“reborn”ȱHindus.ȱThisȱlowestȱlayerȱofȱsocietyȱconȬ sistsȱ ofȱtheȱ originalȱpopulationȱthatȱtheȱ Aryansȱencounteredȱin theirȱ invasionȱ ofȱ theȱ Indianȱ subcontinent.ȱ Theyȱ areȱ usually calledȱtheȱ“untouchables”ȱandȱinȱrecentȱdecadesȱhaveȱbeenȱcallȬ ingȱthemselvesȱdalit. Theȱ originalȱ meaningȱ ofȱ theȱ Sanskritȱ wordȱ dalitȱ isȱ “brokȬ en”;ȱ itȱ isȱ thereforeȱ alsoȱ aȱ designationȱ forȱ peopleȱ whoȱ areȱ opȬ pressed.ȱ Oneȱ ofȱ theȱ leadersȱ ofȱ theȱ untouchablesȱ inȱ theȱ nineȬ teenthȱcentury,ȱMahatmaȱPhule,ȱusedȱtheȱwordȱforȱtheȱfirstȱtime toȱ referȱ toȱ theȱ perilousȱ positionȱ ofȱ hisȱ people.ȱ Notȱ untilȱ the 1970sȱ didȱ itȱ comeȱ intoȱ useȱ asȱ aȱ sobriquetȱ assumedȱ byȱ theȱ unȬ touchablesȱinȱaȱnewȱandȱmilitantȱselfȬawarenessȱ.ȱSinceȱthenȱdalȬ itsȱhasȱbecomeȱtheȱgeneralȱnameȱforȱpeopleȱinȱthoseȱcastesȱwho areȱexcludedȱfromȱtheȱsystemȱofȱreligiousȱpurityȱasȱusedȱbyȱthe traditionalȱHindus.ȱTheȱnumberȱofȱdalitsȱinȱIndiaȱatȱthisȱtimeȱis moreȱ thanȱ 150ȱ millionȱ (aboutȱ 15%ȱ ofȱ theȱ population).ȱ Evenȱ in theȱ Indiaȱ ofȱ todayȱ theyȱ liveȱ inȱ aȱ oppressedȱ situation.ȱ Dalitsȱ alȬ waysȱ liveȱ inȱ aȱ separateȱ districtȱ inȱ theȱ villages.ȱ Theyȱ carryȱ out theȱ lowliestȱ manualȱ labour,ȱ amongȱ whichȱ serfdomȱ isȱ notȱ unȬ common.ȱAlthoughȱmanyȱearlierȱrestrictionsȱareȱnowȱforbidden byȱlaw,ȱtheyȱareȱoftenȱbannedȱfromȱusingȱtheȱvillageȱwell,ȱthey haveȱlimitedȱaccessȱtoȱschools,ȱtemplesȱandȱgovernmentȱinstituȬ tions.ȱ Dalitsȱ areȱ oftenȱ theȱ victimȱ ofȱ publicȱ violence:ȱ maltreatȬ mentȱandȱrapeȱbyȱhighȬcasteȱHindusȱfrequentlyȱoccurs. Thusȱtheȱdalitsȱoccupyȱaȱveryȱsubservientȱpositionȱbutȱthey areȱ partȱ ofȱ theȱ socioȬeconomicȱ structure.ȱ Sinceȱ ancientȱ times theyȱhaveȱhadȱaȱfixed,ȱessentialȱposition.ȱJobsȱthatȱinȱtheȱeyesȱof theȱ highȬcasteȱ Hindusȱ areȱ veryȱ uncleanȱ wereȱ alwaysȱ assigned

238

JESUSȱASȱGURU

toȱ them:ȱ handlingȱ deadȱ peopleȱ andȱ animals,ȱ cleaningȱ toilets, sweepingȱ theȱ streets,ȱ workingȱ leather,ȱ etc.ȱ Traditionalȱ village lifeȱwouldȱbeȱturnedȱcompletelyȱupsideȱdownȱifȱtheȱdalitsȱrefuse toȱdoȱtheirȱwork. Thereȱareȱalsoȱgroupsȱlowȱonȱtheȱscaleȱthatȱhaveȱtheirȱplace outsideȱ ofȱ theȱ usualȱ socioȬeconomicȱ structure.ȱ Theseȱ areȱ the peopleȱ whoȱ liveȱ remotelyȱ inȱ inaccessibleȱ areasȱ inȱ tribes.ȱ From theȱperspectiveȱofȱtheȱcasteȱsystem,ȱtheyȱhaveȱaȱpositionȱthatȱis similarȱtoȱdalits.ȱInȱtheirȱownȱcirclesȱtheyȱformȱmoreȱorȱlessȱauȬ tonomousȱ societiesȱ thatȱ haveȱ littleȱ socialȱ differentiation.ȱ Their untouchabilityȱisȱlessȱnoticeableȱthatȱway:ȱtheyȱdoȱnotȱcomeȱinto contactȱ withȱ theȱ usualȱ casteȱ society.ȱ Theȱ membersȱ ofȱ such tribesȱ haveȱ chosenȱ theirȱ ownȱ name,ȱ reflectingȱ selfȬawareness. Theyȱcallȱthemselvesȱtheȱadivasi,ȱi.e,ȱoriginalȱinhabitantsȱofȱthis land. Throughoutȱ theȱ centuriesȱ theȱ Christianȱ missionȱ hasȱ been ableȱtoȱreachȱtheȱdalitsȱinȱparticular—andȱtheȱadivasisȱtoȱaȱlesser degree.ȱThatȱisȱdueȱtoȱtwoȱreasons.ȱFirst,ȱthereȱisȱtheȱsocioȬecoȬ nomicȱreason:ȱtheȱdalitsȱcanȱexpect,ȱorȱatȱleastȱassume,ȱthatȱthey willȱ moveȱ upȱ whenȱ theyȱ convertȱ toȱ theȱ Christianȱ faith—to moveȱdownȱanyȱlowerȱthanȱwhereȱtheyȱwereȱisȱinȱanyȱcaseȱimȬ possible.ȱ Butȱ thereȱ wasȱ alsoȱ aȱ reasonȱ relatingȱ toȱ contentȱ ofȱ the proclamationȱ forȱ theȱ attractionȱ ofȱ Christianȱ preaching.ȱ Theȱ atȬ tentionȱpaidȱtoȱtheȱleastȱinȱtheȱGospelȱisȱwhatȱattractedȱtheȱdaȬ lits,ȱalthoughȱtheȱpreachingȱrarelyȱappliedȱtheȱGospelȱtoȱtheȱsoȬ cialȱrealityȱinȱwhichȱtheyȱlived. Forȱthatȱmatter,ȱshouldȱtheȱdalitsȱhaveȱthoughtȱtheyȱwould beȱableȱtoȱretreatȱcompletelyȱfromȱtheȱcasteȱsystemȱbyȱconvertȬ ing,ȱ theyȱ wereȱ deceived.ȱ Theȱ hierarchalȱ thinkingȱ inȱ categories ofȱinheritedȱpurityȱisȱsoȱdeeplyȱanchoredȱinȱIndianȱsocietyȱthat itȱhasȱalsoȱdeterminedȱchurchȱlifeȱtoȱaȱlargerȱdegree.ȱDalitsȱwere addressedȱ asȱ peopleȱ whoȱ wereȱ permittedȱ toȱ joinȱ theȱ church, andȱ thatȱ undoubtedlyȱ didȱ themȱ good.ȱ Butȱ theyȱ wereȱ usually permittedȱ toȱ belongȱ toȱ theȱ ecclesiasticalȱ communitiesȱ onlyȱ as untouchables.ȱItȱwasȱveryȱimportantȱforȱtheȱmissionariesȱofȱvarȬ iousȱconfessionsȱnotȱtoȱendangerȱtheȱcontactsȱwithȱtheȱinfluenȬ tialȱbrahmansȱinȱparticular.ȱWithinȱtheȱchurchȱasȱwellȱtheȱbelieȬ versȱ whoȱ wereȱ ofȱ brahmanȱ descentȱ carriedȱ muchȱ moreȱ weight thanȱ thoseȱ ofȱ lowȱ caste.ȱ Thus,ȱ thereȱ wereȱ divisionsȱ among groupsȱofȱChristiansȱonȱtheȱbasisȱofȱtheȱHinduȱrulesȱofȱpurity.

JESUSȱASȱLIBERATORȱINȱTHEȱTHEOLOGYȱOFȱTHEȱDALITS

239

Inȱ certainȱ periodsȱ theȱ Romanȱ Catholicȱ missionȱ wentȱ the furthestȱ inȱ this.ȱ Oneȱ ofȱ theȱ firstȱ preachersȱ inȱ India,ȱ Robertoȱ de Nobili,ȱonlyȱattemptedȱtheȱconversionȱofȱtheȱbrahmansȱandȱreȬ fusedȱallȱcontactȱwithȱthoseȱofȱtheȱlowerȱcastes.ȱOtherȱmissionȬ ariesȱworkedȱalongsideȱhimȱamongȱtheȱnonȬbrahmanicȱcastesȱin theȱshudraȱclassȱandȱthereȱwasȱalsoȱtheȱseparateȱmissionȱforȱthe untouchables.2ȱInȱsomeȱpartsȱofȱIndiaȱthisȱsegregationȱintoȱthree parishȱ categoriesȱ wasȱ maintainedȱ untilȱ farȱ intoȱ theȱ twentieth century.ȱInȱKeralaȱRomanȱCatholicȱpriestsȱwhoȱworkedȱamong theȱ shudrasȱ wasȱ notȱ evenȱ permittedȱ toȱ enterȱ aȱ Romanȱ Catholic churchȱforȱthoseȱofȱtheȱhighȱcaste!3ȱAlthoughȱtheȱProtestantȱmisȬ sionariesȱ wereȱ farȱ moreȱ inclinedȱ toȱ challengeȱ theȱ casteȱ wayȱ of thinking,ȱ theyȱ oftenȱ succumbedȱ toȱ theȱ pressureȱ ofȱ theȱ high castes,ȱwithinȱandȱoutsideȱtheȱchurch.ȱPanditaȱRamabaiȱnoticed inȱtheȱchurchȱofȱMadrasȱthatȱtheȱpreachersȱusedȱdifferentȱcups inȱtheȱsameȱHolyȱCommunionȱserviceȱforȱtheȱchurchȱmembers ofȱ differentȱ Hinduȱ backgrounds.4ȱ Andȱ thereȱ areȱ storiesȱ ofȱ disȬ criminationȱagainstȱdalitsȱinȱearlierȱtimesȱfromȱallȱregions:ȱthey hadȱ toȱ sitȱ inȱ aȱ separateȱ enclosedȱ partȱ ofȱ theȱ church,ȱ buryȱ their deadȱinȱaȱseparateȱcemetery,ȱwereȱnotȱpermittedȱtoȱfillȱtheȱfuncȬ tionȱofȱreaderȱorȱacolyte,ȱandȱsoȱon.5ȱAndȱexamplesȱofȱsuchȱdisȬ criminationȱcanȱstillȱbeȱfoundȱtoday.ȱForȱthatȱmatter,ȱtheȱChrisȬ tianȱdalitsȱhaveȱanȱextraȱproblemȱinȱcurrentȱsociety.ȱTheȱIndian governmentȱ hasȱ anȱ activeȱ policyȱ ofȱ positiveȱ discriminationȱ for theȱ benefitȱ ofȱ underdevelopedȱ groups,ȱ whoȱ areȱ registeredȱ for thatȱpurposeȱasȱ“ScheduledȱCastesȱandȱTribes.”ȱTheȱHinduȱand Buddhistȱ dalitsȱ areȱ included,ȱ butȱ notȱ theȱ Christianȱ dalits.ȱ They

2 ȱV.ȱDevasahayam,ȱ“TheȱNormsȱofȱDalitȱTheology,”ȱin:ȱV.ȱDevaȬ sahayamȱ (ed.),ȱ Frontiersȱ ofȱ Dalitȱ Theologyȱ (Delhi/Madras:ȱ I.S.P.C.K./ Gurukul,ȱ1997),ȱpp.ȱ45Ȭ46.ȱHeȱmakesȱaȱgoodȱcomparisonȱofȱthisȱwithȱthe threeȱtentsȱinȱtheȱGospelȱstoryȱofȱtheȱTransfigurationȱonȱtheȱmountain.

ȱCharlieȱPyeȬSmith,ȱRebelsȱandȱOutcasts:ȱAȱJourneyȱThroughȱChristian Indiaȱ(Harmondsworth:ȱViking,ȱ1997),ȱp.ȱ139 3

ȱPanditaȱRamabaiȱSarasvati,ȱTheȱHighȬCasteȱHinduȱWomanȱ(London: GeorgeȱBellȱandȱSons,ȱ1888),ȱp.ȱ6. 4

5 ȱSeeȱe.g.ȱJebamalaiȱRaja,ȱ“TheȱProblemȱofȱCasteȱwithinȱtheȱChurch,” JournalȱofȱDharmaȱXXIVȱ(1999):ȱȱ28Ȭ39.

JESUSȱASȱGURU

240

areȱseenȱasȱreceivingȱenoughȱsupportȱfromȱtheirȱreligiousȱcomȬ munity.ȱUnfortunately,ȱthatȱisȱusuallyȱnotȱtheȱcase. Inȱ general,ȱ theȱ dalitsȱ wereȱ marginalizedȱ inȱ theȱ Christian church.ȱ Littleȱattentionȱ wasȱpaidȱtoȱtheirȱ poorȱ positionȱinȱ sociȬ etyȱ andȱ othersȱ didȱ notȱ seeȱ theirȱ culturalȬreligiousȱ background. Dialogueȱ withȱ Hinduismȱ wasȱ stillȱ alwaysȱ dialogueȱ withȱ the brahmansȱ andȱ theirȱ Greatȱ Tradition.ȱ Inculturationȱ always meantȱ theȱ translationȱ ofȱ theȱ Christianȱ faithȱ withȱ theȱ aidȱ ofȱ the conceptsȱ andȱ ritualsȱ fromȱ theȱ holyȱ literatureȱ inȱ Sanskrit.ȱ Itȱ did notȱappearȱtoȱdawnȱonȱmoreȱthanȱaȱveryȱfewȱthatȱalmostȱthree quartersȱofȱIndianȱChristiansȱdidȱnotȱdescendȱfromȱtheȱpopulaȬ tionȱ whoȱ followedȱ thatȱ religion.ȱ Butȱ aȱ changeȱ wasȱ signalled aroundȱ 1980,ȱandȱ oneȱmayȱ nowȱ speakȱ ofȱaȱ reversalȱ inȱ theȱ attiȬ tudeȱwithȱregardȱtoȱdalitsȱinȱtheȱIndianȱchurches. Theȱfirstȱsignȱofȱaȱchangedȱunderstandingȱwasȱtheȱaddress thatȱ Arvindȱ P.ȱ Nirmalȱ (1936Ȭ1995)ȱ gaveȱ inȱ 1981ȱ atȱ theȱ United Theologicalȱ Collegeȱ inȱ Bangalore.ȱ Theȱ remarkableȱ titleȱ ofȱ this speechȱwasȱ“TowardsȱaȱShudraȱTheology.”6ȱNirmalȱaskedȱthat attentionȱbeȱpaidȱtoȱtheȱrenewedȱselfȬconsciousnessȱamongȱthe peopleȱofȱtheȱlowerȱcastesȱandȱheȱsawȱitȱasȱtheȱtaskȱofȱChristian theologyȱtoȱpursueȱthis.ȱAlthoughȱNirmalȱhimselfȱcameȱfromȱa dalitȱ caste,ȱ heȱ wasȱ notȱ concernedȱ primarilyȱ withȱ theȱ untouchaȬ bles.ȱ Heȱ wantedȱ toȱ breakȱ throughȱ theȱ monopolyȱ ofȱ theȱ brahȬ manȬorientedȱ thoughtȱ inȱ theȱ churches—thusȱ theȱ termȱ “shudra theology.”ȱSimilarly,ȱtheȱJesuitȱLancyȱLoboȱarguedȱthatȱtheȱclerȬ gyȱ shouldȱ becomeȱ acquaintedȱ withȱ theȱ “nonȬSanskritic”ȱ tradiȬ tion.7ȱHere,ȱtoo,ȱitȱinvolvedȱresistanceȱagainstȱtheȱdominantȱinȬ fluenceȱofȱtheȱbrahmanȱthinking. Theȱ namesȱ citedȱ aboveȱ immediatelyȱ giveȱ anȱ indicationȱ as toȱtheȱorientationȱofȱdalitȱtheology.ȱTheologicalȱtrainingȱplayed aȱmajorȱroleȱinȱtheȱsouthernȱstatesȱasȱfarȱasȱtheȱProtestantsȱwere ȱSeeȱJesudasȱM.ȱAthyal,ȱ“NewȱChallengesȱforȱDalitȱTheology,”ȱhttp: //jmathyal.tripod.com/.ȱAȱrevisedȱversionȱofȱNirmal’sȱfamousȱlectureȱapȬ pearedȱlaterȱwithȱtheȱtitle:ȱ“TowardsȱaȱChristianȱDalitȱTheology,”ȱin:ȱArȬ vindȱP.ȱNirmal,ȱAȱReaderȱinȱDalitȱTheologyȱ(MadrasȱGurukulȱLutheran TheologicalȱInstituteȱandȱResearchȱInstitute,ȱn.y),ȱpp.ȱ53Ȭ70.ȱTheȱchanging ofȱtheȱtitleȱisȱtypical! 6

7 ȱLancyȱLobo,ȱ“TowardsȱanȱInculturationȱinȱtheȱNonȬSanskriticȱTraȬ dition,”ȱVidyajyotiȱ49ȱ(1985):ȱ16Ȭ28.

JESUSȱASȱLIBERATORȱINȱTHEȱTHEOLOGYȱOFȱTHEȱDALITS

241

concerned.ȱThereȱwas,ȱinȱtheȱfirstȱplace,ȱUnitedȱTheologicalȱColȬ legeȱ inȱ Bangalore,ȱ butȱ thereȱ wasȱ alsoȱ theȱ Gurukulȱ Lutheran TheologicalȱCollegeȱinȱMadras,ȱwhereȱNirmalȱwasȱpermittedȱto setȱupȱaȱseparateȱdepartmentȱforȱdalitȱtheology.8ȱInȱRomanȱCaȬ tholicȱcirclesȱitȱisȱespeciallyȱtheȱJesuitsȱwhoȱareȱleadingȱtheȱway inȱ draftingȱ aȱ dalitȱ theology.9ȱ Inȱ recentȱ years,ȱ aȱ newȱ ecumenical structureȱofȱdalitȱtheologyȱwasȱachievedȱwithȱtheȱCentreȱofȱDalit Studiesȱ(Theology),ȱwhichȱopenedȱinȱNewȱDelhiȱinȱ2001ȱunder theȱsupervisionȱofȱJamesȱMassey. Itȱ wasȱ notȱ forȱ nothingȱ thatȱ thisȱ separateȱ dalitȱ theology aroseȱinȱtheȱ1980s.ȱInȱtheȱpreviousȱdecadeȱinȱIndia,ȱparticularly inȱ theȱ stateȱ ofȱ Maharashtra,ȱ aȱ broadȱ dalitȱ emancipationȱ moveȬ mentȱarose.ȱForȱtheȱfirstȱtimeȱliteratureȱfromȱtheȱdalitsȱwasȱpubȬ lished,ȱ attractingȱ aȱ greatȱ dealȱ ofȱ attention.10ȱ Andȱ moreȱ radical dalitsȱ unitedȱ inȱ aȱ militantȱ protestȱ movementȱ withȱ theȱ threatenȬ ingȱnameȱofȱDalitȱPanthers.ȱTheȱcentralȱthemeȱinȱmuchȱofȱChrisȬ tianȱtheologyȱinȱthatȱperiod,ȱi.e.ȱtheȱ1970s,ȱwasȱ“liberation.”ȱThe “blackȱtheology”ȱthatȱhadȱarisenȱsomewhatȱearlierȱhadȱbecome popularȱamongȱblackȱtheologiansȱinȱNorthȱAmericaȱandȱinȱLatȬ inȱAmericaȱmanyȱtheologiansȱhadȱbeenȱcaptivatedȱbyȱliberation theology,ȱlinkingȱupȱ withȱ aȱbroaderȱ revolutionaryȱ revival.ȱThe Indianȱ theologiansȱ devotedȱ toȱ theȱ dalitsȱ fellȱ backȱ onȱ thisȱ longȬ establishedȱ liberationȱ theology.ȱ Theȱ blackȱ theologianȱ James Cone11ȱ wasȱ thusȱ primarilyȱ quotedȱ extensivelyȱ inȱ theirȱ works, ȱ Amongȱ theȱ theologiansȱ ofȱ theȱ UTCȱ whoȱ areȱ researchingȱ dalit theology:ȱM.E.ȱPrabhakar,ȱAbrahamȱAyrookuzhiel,ȱS.K.ȱChatterji,ȱJohn C.B.ȱWebsterȱandȱF.J.ȱBalasundaram.ȱAtȱGurukulȱinȱMadrasȱV.ȱDevasaȬ hayamȱandȱJesudasȱM.ȱAthyalȱshouldȱbeȱmentioned. 8

ȱȱInȱadditionȱtoȱLobo,ȱthereȱareȱalsoȱAnthonyȱRaj,ȱP.ȱArokiadoss,ȱJeȬ bamalaiȱRaja,ȱSebastianȱKappen,ȱA.ȱMariaȱArulȱRajaȱandȱtheȱeconomist M.R.ȱArulraja,ȱwhoȱstudiedȱwithȱtheȱJesuits. 9

ȱForȱexample,ȱMadhauȱKondvilker,ȱDagboekȱvanȱeenȱonaanraakbare [Diaryȱ ofȱ anȱ Untouchable]ȱ (’sȬHertogenbosch:ȱ Stichtingȱ Gezamenlijke Missiepubliciteit,ȱ1986),ȱaȱbookȱwrittenȱinȱMarathi,ȱwhichȱwasȱevenȱtransȬ latedȱfromȱFrenchȱintoȱDutch. 10

ȱM.E.ȱPrabhakar,ȱ“ChristologyȱinȱDalitȱPerspective,”ȱin:ȱDevasahaȬ yam,ȱFrontiersȱofȱDalitȱTheology,ȱpp.ȱ415,ȱ422;ȱM.E.ȱPrabhakar,ȱ“TheȱSearch forȱaȱDalitȱTheology,”ȱin:ȱNirmal,ȱAȱReaderȱinȱDalitȱTheology,ȱp.ȱ47;ȱWilȬ liamȱMadtha,ȱ“DalitȱTheology,”ȱJournalȱofȱDharmaȱXVIȱ(1991):ȱ76;ȱJohn 11

JESUSȱASȱGURU

242

butȱ aȱ largeȱ numberȱ ofȱ Latinȱ Americanȱ revolutionariesȱ ofȱ variȬ ousȱ disciplinesȱ areȱ quotedȱ asȱ well,ȱ suchȱ asȱ Gustavoȱ Gutierrez, PaoloȱFreire,ȱLeonardoȱBoffȱandȱOscarȱRomero.12ȱWhereȱȱLatin Americanȱ liberationȱ theologyȱ andȱ dalitȱ theologyȱ areȱ inȱ agreeȬ mentȱ isȱ theȱ greatȱ significanceȱ attributedȱ toȱ theȱ exodusȱ motif. Butȱ thereȱ areȱ differencesȱ asȱ well:ȱ theȱ casteȱ issueȱ isȱ soȱ specific thatȱIndianȱtheologyȱisȱforcedȱtoȱgoȱitsȱownȱway.13 InȱlineȱwithȱAmericanȱliberationȱtheology,ȱdalitȱtheologians sawȱ theirȱ workȱ asȱ aȱ counterȬmovement.ȱ Theyȱ reactedȱ against theȱprevailingȱtheologicalȱinsightsȱinȱtheirȱcountryȱandȱofferedȱa revolutionaryȱalternative,ȱlinkingȱupȱwithȱtheȱstruggleȱforȱliberȬ ationȱofȱtheȱoppressed.ȱBecauseȱofȱtheȱdalitȱtheologians,ȱcharacȬ terizationsȱsuchȱasȱ“counterȬtheology”ȱ(Nirmal),ȱ“counterȱideoȬ logy”ȱ (Devasahayam)ȱ orȱ conflictȱ modelȱ (Webster)ȱ wereȱ used. Thus,ȱ inȱ theȱ 1990sȱ thisȱ theologicalȱ movementȱ wasȱ stronglyȱ exȬ periencedȱ asȱ beingȱ opposedȱ toȱ theȱ interestsȱ ofȱ establishedȱ ecȬ clesiasticalȱ interestsȱ andȱ traditionalȱ theologicalȱ rangeȱ ofȱ ideas. NowȱthatȱdalitȱtheologiansȱareȱslowlyȱgainingȱincreasingȱrecogȬ nition,ȱalsoȱinternationally,ȱaȱshiftȱisȱvisible.ȱTypicalȱofȱthisȱshift isȱAthyal’sȱargumentȱforȱaȱmoveȱfromȱaȱ“dialecticȱmethod”ȱtoȱa “moreȱ dialogicalȱ approach.”14ȱ Moreover,ȱ inȱ additionȱ toȱ theȱ acȬ tualȱdalitȱtheology,ȱaȱseparateȱtypeȱofȱtheologyȱhasȱarisenȱinȱthe tribalȱcommunitiesȱȱinȱrecentȱyears.15ȱThisȱadivasiȱtheologyȱisȱalȬ soȱ aȱ counterȬmovementȱ butȱ isȱ lessȱ concernedȱ withȱ socioȬpolitȬ C.B.ȱWebster,ȱ“FromȱIndianȱChurchȱtoȱIndianȱTheology,”ȱin:ȱNirmal,ȱA ReaderȱinȱDalitȱTheology,ȱpp.ȱ118Ȭ19;ȱM.ȱGnanavaram,ȱ“SomeȱReflections onȱDalitȱHermenuetics,”ȱin:ȱDevasahayam,ȱFrontiersȱofȱDalitȱTheology,ȱp. 332. 12 ȱMadtha,ȱ“DalitȱTheology,”ȱpp.ȱ76ȱ(Romero),ȱ77ȱ(Freire),ȱ78Ȭ80ȱ(GuȬ tierrez),ȱ85ȱ(Boff);ȱA.P.ȱNirmal,ȱ“DoingȱTheologyȱfromȱaȱDalitȱPerspecȬ tive,”ȱ in:ȱ Nirmal,ȱ Aȱ Readerȱ inȱ Dalitȱ Theology,ȱ p.ȱ 141ȱ (Boff);ȱ Prabhakar, “ChristologyȱinȱDalitȱPerspective,”ȱp.ȱ412ȱ(Boff);ȱGnanavaram,ȱ“SomeȱReȬ flectionsȱ onȱ Dalitȱ Hermeneutics,”ȱ pp.ȱ 329ȱ (Boff)ȱ andȱ 330ȱ (Gutierrez); Athyal,ȱ“NewȱChallengesȱforȱDalitȱTheology,”ȱp.ȱ8/26ȱ(Gutierrez).

ȱNirmal,ȱ“TowardsȱaȱChristianȱDalitȱTheology,”ȱp.ȱ56.

13

ȱAthyal,ȱ“NewȱChallengesȱforȱDalitȱTheology,”ȱp.ȱ13/26.

14

15 ȱȱDieterȱHecker,ȱ“AdivasiȬTheologie,”ȱGossnerȱMissionȱInformation (2003):ȱ4.

JESUSȱASȱLIBERATORȱINȱTHEȱTHEOLOGYȱOFȱTHEȱDALITS

243

icalȱissuesȱthanȱitȱisȱwithȱtheȱissuesȱofȱtheȱrelationshipȱbetween humansȱandȱnatureȱandȱtheȱpreservationȱofȱcreation. Oneȱfixedȱpointȱinȱdalitȱtheologyȱisȱtheȱmajorȱroleȱgivenȱto biblicalȱ reflection.16ȱ Aȱ balanceȱ betweenȱ Scriptureȱ andȱ tradition asȱaȱsourceȱofȱknowledgeȱofȱrevelationȱwas,ȱofȱcourse,ȱnotȱtoȱbe expected.ȱDalitsȱappealȱtoȱtheȱBibleȱinȱaȱsuccinctȱprotestȱagainst traditionalȱ representationsȱ inȱ churchȱ andȱ theology.ȱ Byȱ reading theȱ Scripturesȱ fromȱ theȱ perspectiveȱ ofȱ one’sȱ ownȱ experience withȱoppression,ȱtheȱgoodȱmessageȱwouldȱacquireȱaȱshapeȱinȱa newȱ way.ȱ Forȱ allȱ dalitȱ theologians,ȱ theȱ figureȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ is central.ȱ Aȱ numberȱ ofȱ aspectsȱ canȱ beȱ distinguishedȱ inȱ thisȱ new understandingȱofȱChrist. FaithȱinȱJesusȱLiberates Theȱ startingȱ pointȱ ofȱ allȱ dalitȱ theologyȱ isȱ thatȱ faithȱ inȱ Jesus Christȱ hasȱliberatingȱpower.ȱInȱ connectionȱ withȱthis,ȱ particular attentionȱ isȱ paidȱ toȱ theȱ positionȱ ofȱ dalitsȱ inȱ societyȱ andȱ theȱ cirȬ cumstancesȱthatȱwereȱplacedȱonȱtheirȱshouldersȱasȱaȱyokeȱdurȬ ingȱsoȱmanyȱcenturies.ȱPrabhakarȱformulatesȱthisȱinȱaȱwayȱthat everyȱdalitȱtheologianȱwouldȱapprove:ȱ“ForȱtheȱIndianȱChristian Dalits,ȱ toȱ knowȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ isȱ toȱ realiseȱ thatȱ theȱ Godȱ ofȱ Jesus Christȱwillȱsaveȱthemȱfromȱinhumanity,ȱsocialȱoppression,ȱecoȬ nomicȱ exploitationȱ andȱ culturalȱ subjugation.”17ȱ Beliefȱ inȱ Christ isȱdirectlyȱlinkedȱhereȱtoȱtheȱbattleȱforȱanȱimprovedȱexistenceȱfor theȱ oppressedȱ inȱ society.ȱ Inȱ Indianȱ relationships,ȱ thisȱ isȱ aȱ new pointȱofȱview,ȱasȱcanȱbeȱdemonstratedȱbyȱaȱglanceȱbackȱinȱhisȬ tory. Inȱtheȱnineteenthȱcentury,ȱwhenȱtheȱuntouchablesȱwereȱstill calledȱpariah,ȱtheyȱcameȱintoȱcontactȱwithȱChristianȱpreachers.ȱIt wasȱunusualȱinȱtheȱcircumstancesȱatȱtheȱtimeȱthatȱthereȱwould beȱaȱmessageȱatȱallȱforȱ theȱpariahs.ȱAȱmessageȱofȱsalvationȱwas addressedȱtoȱpeopleȱwhoȱfeltȱcompletelyȱexcluded.ȱInȱaddition, thereȱ wasȱ practicalȱ helpȱ inȱ theȱ formȱ ofȱ educationȱ andȱ medical care,ȱ providedȱ byȱ theȱ missionaries.ȱ Largeȱ numbersȱ ofȱ pariah ȱM.R.ȱArulraja,ȱJesusȱtheȱDalit:ȱLiberationȱTheologyȱbyȱVictimsȱofȱUnȬ touchability.ȱAnȱIndianȱVersionȱofȱApartheidȱ(Ameerpet:ȱpublishedȱbyȱthe author,ȱ1996),ȱp.ȱ57. 16

ȱPrabhakar,ȱ“ChristologyȱinȱDalitȱPerspective,”ȱp.ȱ409.

17

244

JESUSȱASȱGURU

communitiesȱ convertedȱ enȱ masseȱ toȱ Christianity.ȱ Itȱ wasȱ clear thatȱnotȱmuchȱwouldȱchangeȱinȱtheirȱpositionȱinȱrelationȱtoȱthe highȬcasteȱ Hindus.ȱ Butȱ itȱ wasȱ alreadyȱ progressȱ toȱ beȱ allowed withinȱtheȱChristianȱchurch.ȱInȱtheȱtwentiethȱcentury,ȱtheȱpariah graduallyȱbecameȱharijan.ȱThisȱterm,ȱwhichȱmeansȱ“theȱchildȱof God,”ȱwasȱgivenȱtoȱtheȱuntouchablesȱbyȱMahatmaȱGandhi.ȱApȬ parently,ȱ theyȱ wereȱ allowedȱ toȱ takeȱ aȱ legitimateȱ placeȱ within theȱ Hinduȱ casteȱ societyȱ asȱ well.ȱ Gandhiȱ appliedȱ himselfȱ to changingȱtheȱmentalityȱofȱtheȱhighȬcasteȱHindus,ȱbyȱwhichȱthe situationȱofȱtheȱuntouchablesȱwouldȱslowlyȱimprove.ȱEcclesiasȬ ticalȱ leadersȱ adoptedȱ hisȱ ideas:ȱ Christianȱ untouchablesȱ should alsoȱ graduallyȱ receiveȱ moreȱ recognitionȱ fromȱ otherȱ church members.ȱ Butȱ whenȱ itȱ provedȱ thatȱ thisȱ changeȱ wasȱ occurring muchȱslowerȱthanȱexpected,ȱtheȱharijanȱbecameȱaȱdalit.ȱSinceȱthe 1970sȱanȱawarenessȱhasȱbeenȱgrowingȱamongȱtheȱuntouchables thatȱtheyȱcanȱobtainȱaȱlegitimateȱpositionȱinȱsocietyȱonlyȱifȱthey takeȱ it.ȱ Thisȱ requiredȱ aȱ differentȱ theology,ȱ andȱ aȱ differentȱ conȬ ceptionȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ Christ.ȱ Inȱ nineteenthȬcenturyȱ missions,ȱ theȱ reȬ demptionȱ ofȱ theȱ sinnerȱ wasȱ central,ȱ byȱ whichȱ salvationȱ wasȱ to beȱ expectedȱ afterȱ theȱ earthlyȱ life:ȱ Christȱ wasȱ primarilyȱ aȱ reȬ deemerȱ forȱ later.ȱ Inȱ theȱ twentiethȱ centuryȱ theȱ churchȱ inȱ India paidȱmuchȱmoreȱattentionȱtoȱsocialȱcircumstances.ȱLendingȱhelp andȱ careȱ stoodȱ highȱ onȱ theȱ list.ȱ Christȱ wasȱ theȱ oneȱ whoȱ was thereȱforȱallȱpeopleȱandȱlinkedȱthemȱtoȱoneȱanother.ȱNow,ȱinȱthe presentȱdalitȱmovement,ȱtheȱcentralȱissueȱisȱrestoringȱrightsȱthat haveȱbeenȱviolatedȱforȱcenturies.ȱChristȱchoseȱaȱside:ȱheȱhasȱbeȬ comeȱtheȱallyȱofȱtheȱoppressed. Theseȱ newȱ insightsȱ foundȱ theirȱ wayȱ intoȱ theȱ liturgyȱ and preachingȱ ofȱ theȱ ecclesialȱ communities.ȱ Newȱ liturgicalȱ texts wereȱwrittenȱthatȱwereȱintendedȱtoȱappealȱtoȱtheȱdalitsȱinȱparticȬ ularȱ duringȱ theȱ gatheringȱ ofȱ theȱ community.ȱ Thusȱ aȱ prayer, basedȱonȱtheȱLord’sȱprayer,ȱreadsȱasȱfollows: OurȱGod,ȱwhoȱisȱnearȱtoȱandȱfarȱawayȱfromȱus,ȱglorifiedȱbe yourȱ nameȱ inȱ ourȱ everydayȱ living.ȱ Yourȱ plansȱ beȱ executed inȱallȱourȱstrugglesȱasȱtheyȱwereȱcarriedȱoutȱinȱtheȱexodusȬ event.ȱHelpȱusȱsatisfyȱthisȱdayȱallȱourȱneeds.ȱForgiveȱusȱour beingȱpassiveȱandȱindifferentȱmembersȱofȱthisȱunjustȱsocial order.ȱAllowȱusȱnotȱintoȱbondageȱofȱanyȱsort,ȱbutȱsetȱusȱfree

JESUSȱASȱLIBERATORȱINȱTHEȱTHEOLOGYȱOFȱTHEȱDALITS

245

fromȱtheȱstateȱofȱbeingȱoppressedȱandȱexploited.ȱForȱyours isȱtheȱuniverse,ȱallȱourȱlives,ȱstrugglesȱandȱservices.ȱAmen.18

AndȱaȱnewȱliturgyȱforȱtheȱcelebrationȱofȱtheȱLord’sȱSupperȱdeȬ scribesȱ howȱ Christȱ isȱ activeȱ inȱ theȱ sacramentȱ inȱ theȱ following way: Theȱ brokenȱ bread,ȱ theȱ brokenȱ bodyȱ ofȱ Jesus,ȱ drawsȱ usȱ toȬ wardsȱ theȱ rejected,ȱ theȱ hurtȱ andȱ theȱ poor.ȱ Inȱ them,ȱ and throughȱthemȱtoo,ȱourȱheartsȱareȱfed,ȱoftenȱinȱaȱpainfulȱway. Letȱ usȱ alsoȱ shareȱ inȱ theȱ painȱ ofȱ ourȱ crucifiedȱ Saviorȱ and Lord.19

If,ȱaccordingȱtoȱtheȱoldȱadage,ȱtheȱreligiousȱdoctrineȱcanȱbeȱdeȬ ducedȱ fromȱ theȱ contentsȱ ofȱ theȱ prayerȱ (lexȱ orandiȱ lexȱ credendi), thenȱtheseȱliturgicalȱtextsȱfromȱtheȱdalitȱcircleȱareȱgoodȱwitnesȬ sesȱtoȱdalitȱtheology. JesusȱisȱaȱDalit WhyȱdoȱdalitsȱexperienceȱfaithȱinȱJesusȱChristȱasȱliberating?ȱOne ofȱ theirȱ answersȱ toȱ thisȱ questionȱ wouldȱ be:ȱ becauseȱ heȱ canȱ be characterizedȱ asȱ aȱ dalit.ȱ Dalitȱ theologiansȱ stressȱ thatȱ inȱ Jesus Christȱ Godȱ isȱ connectedȱ inȱ aȱ specialȱ wayȱ withȱ theȱ oppressed, andȱ thereforeȱ withȱ theȱ dalits.ȱ Thisȱ isȱ expressedȱ veryȱ succinctly inȱtheȱpositionȱthatȱsomeȱdalitȱtheologiansȱtake—thatȱJesusȱhimȬ selfȱwasȱaȱdalit. Theȱidentificationȱofȱone’sȱownȱlifeȱwithȱJesus’ȱgoesȱunusuȬ allyȱfarȱhere.ȱItȱisȱnotȱenoughȱforȱdalitȱtheologiansȱtoȱpresentȱan analogyȱ alongȱ theȱ followingȱ lines:ȱ justȱ asȱ Jesusȱ soughtȱ outȱ the poorȱinȱhisȱday,ȱsoȱhisȱmessageȱcomesȱtoȱtheȱdalitsȱtodayȱasȱwell. Butȱ theyȱ explicitlyȱ putȱ Jesusȱ historicallyȱ onȱ theȱ sameȱ levelȱ as dalits.ȱ Thus,ȱ someȱ dalitȱ theologiansȱ fallȱ backȱ onȱ Jesus’ȱ genealoȬ gy,ȱwithȱwhichȱMatthewȱbeginsȱhisȱgospel.20ȱAsȱisȱwellȱknown, inȱ theȱ longȱ seriesȱ ofȱ namesȱ ofȱ Jewishȱ ancestors,ȱ thereȱ areȱ also ȱTextȱfromȱPaulȱS.ȱElisa,ȱin:ȱJohnȱC.B.ȱWebster,ȱTheȱPastorȱtoȱDalits, ISPCKȱ Contextualȱ Theologicalȱ Educationȱ Seriesȱ 8ȱ (Delhi:ȱ I.S.P.C.K., 1995),ȱp.ȱ123. 18

ȱȱWebster,ȱTheȱPastorȱtoȱDalits,ȱp.ȱ121.

19

20 ȱNirmal,ȱ“TowardsȱaȱChristianȱDalitȱTheology,”ȱpp.ȱ65Ȭ66;ȱPrabhaȬ kar,ȱ“ChristologyȱinȱDalitȱPerspective,”ȱp.ȱ415.

JESUSȱASȱGURU

246

fourȱ namesȱ ofȱ nonȬJewishȱ womenȱ included:ȱ Tamar,ȱ Rachab, Ruthȱandȱ“theȱwifeȱofȱUriah”ȱ(Bathsheba).ȱDalitȱtheologiansȱdeȬ duceȱfromȱthisȱthatȱJesusȱdidȱnotȱhaveȱaȱpurelyȱJewishȱlineage. Andȱ beingȱ ofȱ “mixedȱ caste”ȱ isȱ oneȱ ofȱ theȱ characteristicsȱ ofȱ the dalitsȱ(Prabhakar).ȱTheȱstoriesȱaboutȱlicentiousȱsexualȱbehaviour thatȱ areȱ linkedȱ toȱ allȱ theseȱ womenȱ addȱ toȱ theȱ suggestionȱ that Jesus’ȱlineageȱbearsȱdalitȱcharacteristicsȱ(Nirmal).ȱJesusȱcanȱthus beȱ reproached,ȱ justȱ asȱ dalitsȱ regularlyȱ are,ȱ forȱ theȱ factȱ thatȱ his ancestorsȱdidȱnotȱobserveȱregulationsȱforȱpurity.ȱOneȱmayȱcerȬ tainlyȱ doubtȱ whetherȱ thisȱ isȱ whatȱ Matthewȱ intendedȱ withȱ the prologueȱtoȱhisȱgospel. Itȱ isȱ notȱ onlyȱ theȱ openingȱ ofȱ theȱ gospelȱ accordingȱ toȱ MatȬ thewȱ thatȱ isȱ usedȱ hereȱ asȱ evidence.ȱ Theȱ birthȱ ofȱ Jesus,ȱ asȱ deȬ scribedȱbyȱLukeȱatȱtheȱbeginningȱofȱhisȱgospel,ȱisȱalsoȱveryȱsigȬ nificantȱ forȱ dalitȱ theologians.ȱ Researchȱ showsȱ thatȱ Christmas sermonsȱ onȱ Lukeȱ 2ȱ byȱ dalitȱ preachersȱ haveȱ theȱ tendencyȱ to makeȱ aȱ clearȱ linkȱ betweenȱ Jesus’ȱ originsȱ andȱ theȱ dalitsȱ ofȱ toȬ day.21ȱJesus’ȱparentsȱwereȱpoorȱwanderersȱandȱitȱisȱtypicalȱthat theirȱ childȱ wasȱ bornȱ inȱ aȱ filthyȱ stall.ȱ Theȱ firstȱ witnessesȱ toȱ the birthȱ wereȱ simpleȱ shepherds,ȱ andȱ theȱ childȱ subsequentlyȱ grew upȱinȱtheȱ“backwardȱarea”ȱofȱGalileaȱ(aȱtypicalȱtermȱinȱconnecȬ tionȱwithȱtheȱsocialȱcircumstancesȱofȱdalits).ȱFromȱtheseȱfewȱexȬ amplesȱ itȱ becomesȱ clearȱ thatȱ theȱ preachersȱ wereȱ apparently searchingȱforȱelementsȱthatȱwouldȱmakeȱJesusȱaȱdalit.ȱJesus’ȱdeȬ scentȱfromȱKingȱDavidȱandȱtheȱheavenlyȱmessageȱthatȱtheȱbirth wouldȱwouldȱbringȱjoyȱtoȱ“allȱtheȱpeople”ȱisȱnotȱcited.ȱWebster commentsȱ ironicallyȱ thatȱ ifȱ Jesusȱ hadȱ beenȱ bornȱ rich,ȱ asȱ GauȬ tamaȱBuddhaȱwas,ȱitȱwouldȱhaveȱbeenȱbadȱnews. Theȱfirstȱandȱmostȱfamousȱdalitȱtheologian,ȱArvindȱNirmal, goesȱ farthestȱ inȱ identifyingȱ Jesusȱ withȱ theȱ dalits.ȱ Toȱ himȱ the meaningȱofȱtheȱincarnationȱbecomesȱclearȱonlyȱinȱtheȱfactȱofȱJeȬ sus’ȱbeingȱaȱdalit:ȱ“Hisȱdalitnessȱisȱtheȱkeyȱtoȱtheȱmysteryȱofȱhis divineȱ humanȱ unity.”22ȱ Nirmalȱ isȱ thinkingȱ inȱ particularȱ ofȱ the wayȱ inȱ whichȱ theȱ Sonȱ ofȱ Man,ȱ alongȱ hisȱ pathȱ ofȱ suffering,ȱ beȬ comesȱ theȱ victimȱ ofȱ rejection,ȱ ridiculeȱ andȱ scorn.ȱ Becauseȱ the sufferingȱandȱdeathȱareȱdoneȱtoȱhimȱbyȱtheȱestablishedȱreligious ȱWebsterȱanalysedȱaȱnumberȱofȱsermonsȱfromȱtheȱdalitȱperspective; see:ȱWebster,ȱTheȱPastorȱtoȱDalits,ȱi.e.ȱpp.ȱ64Ȭ66. 21

ȱNirmal,ȱ“TowardsȱaȱChristianȱDalitȱTheology,”ȱp.ȱ65.

22

JESUSȱASȱLIBERATORȱINȱTHEȱTHEOLOGYȱOFȱTHEȱDALITS

247

power,ȱChristȱbecomes,ȱonȱhisȱpathȱofȱsuffering,ȱtheȱ“prototype ofȱallȱdalits.”23 Thusȱ theȱ symbolȱ ofȱ Jesus’ȱ beingȱ dalitȱ isȱ theȱ cross.ȱ Thisȱ is howȱNirmalȱarticulatedȱitȱinȱhisȱpioneeringȱexplanationȱofȱ“shuȬ draȱtheology”ȱandȱitȱisȱthatȱideaȱthatȱweȱoftenȱencounterȱinȱthe writingsȱ ofȱ dalitȱ theologians.24ȱ Itȱ isȱ indeedȱ aȱ principalȱ ideaȱ of Christianȱ faith:ȱ theȱ Godȱ ofȱtheȱ peopleȱ doesȱnotȱshunȱ suffering. AndȱitȱisȱveryȱunderstandableȱthatȱChrist,ȱasȱtheȱsufferingȱone, appealsȱpreciselyȱtoȱthisȱpopulationȱgroupȱwhichȱhasȱhadȱtrauȬ maticȱexperiencesȱofȱoppression,ȱaccumulatedȱoverȱcenturiesȱof injustice.ȱ Inȱ thisȱ way,ȱ Godȱ comesȱ veryȱ closeȱ toȱ theȱ people,ȱ esȬ peciallyȱ theȱ dalit.ȱ Incidentally,ȱ forȱ mostȱ dalitȱ theologians,ȱ the meaningȱ ofȱ theȱ sufferingȱ ofȱ Christȱ seemsȱ toȱ beȱ theȱ mostȱ proȬ foundȱhere.ȱTraditionalȱideasȱasȱtoȱtheȱeffectȱofȱChrist’sȱcrucifiȬ xionȱhasȱbroughtȱaboutȱhaveȱlittleȱmeaningȱinȱthisȱtheology. JesusȱProclaimsȱLiberation Accordingȱtoȱdalitȱtheologians,ȱtheȱsourceȱofȱtheȱeffectȱthatȱJesus hasȱ onȱ peopleȱ isȱ hisȱ ownȱ words.ȱ Itȱ isȱ aȱ messageȱ ofȱ liberation thatȱisȱdirectedȱespeciallyȱtowardȱtheȱpoorȱandȱoppressed.ȱUsuȬ allyȱtheȱmostȱimportantȱexampleȱthatȱdalitȱtheologiansȱgraspȱis theȱaccountȱofȱJesus’ȱfirstȱappearanceȱinȱtheȱsynagogueȱofȱNazaȬ rethȱ(Lukeȱ4:14Ȭ30).ȱUsingȱaȱfashionableȱterm,ȱtheyȱreferȱtoȱwhat Jesusȱ saysȱ hereȱ asȱ “theȱ Nazarethȱ Manifesto.”25ȱ Itȱ allȱ centresȱ on theȱtextȱfromȱtheȱbookȱofȱIsaiah,ȱwhichȱJesusȱreadsȱinȱtheȱsynaȬ gogueȱ andȱ proceedsȱ toȱ applyȱ itȱ toȱ himself.ȱ Thoseȱ prophetic wordsȱ speakȱ ofȱ theȱ Spiritȱ thatȱ restsȱ onȱ himȱ andȱ theȱ chargeȱ enȬ trustedȱtoȱhimȱbyȱtheȱSpirit.ȱTheȱchargeȱopensȱwithȱtheȱwords: ȱNirmal,ȱ“TowardsȱaȱChristianȱDalitȱTheology,”ȱpp.ȱ66Ȭ67.

23

ȱE.g.ȱPrabhakar,ȱ“ChristologyȱinȱDalitȱPerspective,”ȱpp.ȱ414Ȭ16;ȱV. DevasahayamȱinȱaȱBiblicalȱstudyȱonȱ“TheȱCrossȱasȱCounteringȱtheȱCaste Consciousness,”ȱin:ȱV.ȱDevasahayam,ȱFrontiersȱofȱDalitȱTheology,ȱpp.ȱ53Ȭ 67;ȱMadtha,ȱ“DalitȱTheology,”ȱp.ȱ83. 24

ȱNirmal,ȱ“TowardsȱaȱChristianȱDalitȱTheology,”ȱp.ȱ67;ȱPrabhakar, “ChristologyȱinȱDalitȱPerspective,”ȱpp.ȱ414Ȭ15;ȱD.ȱMonikaraj,ȱ“Mission, EvangelismȱandȱConversion,”ȱin:ȱDevasahayam,ȱFrontiersȱofȱDalitȱTheoȬ logy,ȱp.ȱ463;ȱcf.ȱAbrahamȱP.ȱAthyal,ȱ“LiberativeȱInsightsȱintoȱtheȱNew Testament,”ȱin:ȱDevasahayam,ȱFrontiersȱofȱDalitȱTheology,ȱpp.ȱ321Ȭ25. 25

JESUSȱASȱGURU

248

“toȱ preachȱ goodȱ newsȱ toȱ theȱ poor”ȱ andȱ continuesȱ somewhat laterȱ withȱ “toȱ releaseȱ theȱ oppressed.”ȱ Understandablyȱ and correctly,ȱ dalitȱ theologiansȱ haveȱ attachedȱ aȱ particularȱ meaning toȱ theseȱ words.ȱ Theȱ messageȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ encompassesȱ goodȱ news forȱtheȱpoorȱandȱoppressed.ȱApplyingȱthisȱtoȱtoday,ȱtheȱdalits,ȱof course,ȱcomeȱintoȱview. TheȱimportanceȱofȱthisȱpartȱofȱtheȱBibleȱforȱtheȱdalitsȱisȱilluȬ stratedȱ inȱ anȱ articleȱ byȱ theȱ prominentȱ dalitȱ theologianȱ James Massey.26ȱTheȱarticleȱbeginsȱwithȱtheȱaforementionedȱtextȱonȱthe oppressedȱwhoȱreceiveȱfreedom,ȱbutȱthisȱtextȱisȱcitedȱinȱHindi: “Dalitonȱkoȱswatantrataȱpradanȱkarun.”ȱTheȱauthorȱdoesȱso,ȱof course,ȱsoȱthatȱtheȱemphasisȱfallsȱonȱtheȱwordȱdalit.ȱInȱthisȱway theȱ chargeȱ thatȱ Jesusȱ takesȱ uponȱ himselfȱ isȱ connectedȱ even moreȱ closelyȱ toȱ theȱ dalitsȱ thatȱ Masseyȱ wishesȱ toȱ serveȱ withȱ his theology.ȱ Inȱ theȱ Hindiȱ translationȱ ofȱ theȱ Bibleȱ theȱ Greekȱ word forȱ “oppressed”ȱ (tethrausmenoi)ȱ isȱ translatedȱ byȱ dalit.ȱ Butȱ there isȱanotherȱexplanationȱforȱlinkingȱtheseȱpropheticȱtextsȱwithȱthe lotȱ ofȱ contemporaryȱ dalitsȱ inȱ India:ȱ theyȱ are,ȱ afterȱ all,ȱ notȱ only oppressedȱ butȱ alsoȱ poor.ȱ Theȱ wordȱ “poor”ȱ atȱ theȱ beginningȱ of theȱquotationȱfromȱIsaiahȱcouldȱalsoȱreferȱtoȱtheȱdalits.ȱWilliam Madtha,ȱstronglyȱinfluencedȱbyȱLatinȱAmericanȱliberationȱtheoȬ logy,ȱdoesȱjustȱthatȱwhenȱheȱwrites:ȱ“Dalitsȱareȱtheȱanawim:ȱthe alienated,ȱ marginated,ȱ wretchedȱ ofȱ theȱ earth.”27ȱ Byȱ usingȱ the Hebrewȱwordȱanawim,ȱtheȱentireȱOldȱTestamentȱbackgroundȱon doingȱ justiceȱ toȱ theȱ poorȱ resounds.ȱ Itȱ isȱ veryȱ convincingȱ when Jesus’ȱ preachingȱ isȱ placedȱ withinȱ theȱ entiretyȱ ofȱ theȱ biblical message.ȱForȱthatȱmatter,ȱnotȱallȱdalitȱtheologiansȱareȱasȱstrongȬ lyȱinclinedȱtoȱdrawȱonȱtheȱOldȱTestamentȱinȱtheirȱtheology. ThereȱisȱnoȱdoubtȱthatȱJesus’ȱmessageȱisȱintendedȱforȱdalits. Butȱ isȱ thatȱ allȱ Jesusȱ wantsȱ toȱ say?ȱ Forȱ someȱ dalitȱ theologians, thisȱ isȱ indeedȱ theȱ case.ȱ Theȱ radicalȱ Nirmalȱ inȱ particularȱ writes straightforwardlyȱthatȱtheȱliberationȱofȱwhichȱJesusȱspeaksȱisȱinȬ tendedȱ forȱ dalitsȱ andȱ notȱ forȱ nonȬdalits.28ȱ Likeȱ Jamesȱ Cone’s ȱJamesȱMassey,ȱ“IngredientsȱforȱaȱDalitȱTheology,”ȱin:ȱNirmal,ȱA ReaderȱinȱDalitȱTheology,ȱpp.ȱ145Ȭ50. 26

ȱMadtha,ȱ“DalitȱTheology,”ȱp.ȱ74.

27

28 ȱȱNirmal,ȱ“TowardsȱaȱChristianȱDalitȱTheology,”ȱp.ȱ67.ȱCf.ȱȱPrabhaȬ kar,ȱ“ChristologyȱinȱDalitȱPerspective,”ȱpp.ȱ414Ȭ15.

JESUSȱASȱLIBERATORȱINȱTHEȱTHEOLOGYȱOFȱTHEȱDALITS

249

“blackȱ theology”ȱ inȱ relationȱ toȱ nonȬblacks,ȱ theȱ onlyȱ possibility thisȱapproachȱoffersȱtoȱnonȬdalitsȱisȱthatȱtheȱliberationȱofȱtheȱopȬ pressedȱmakesȱitȱimpossibleȱforȱtheȱnonȬdalitsȱtoȱcontinueȱtoȱopȬ pressȱthem.ȱTheȱradicalȱdalitȱtheologiansȱhaveȱnotȱalwaysȱmade themselvesȱpopular. Butȱtheirȱmostȱimportantȱachievementȱhasȱbeenȱtheȱgeneral acceptanceȱofȱtheȱpositionȱthatȱtheȱproclamationȱofȱJesusȱChrist hasȱ toȱ doȱ withȱ theȱ concreteȱ conditionsȱ inȱ whichȱ peopleȱ live. Andȱifȱthatȱproclamationȱisȱaboutȱliberation,ȱthenȱtheȱproblems ofȱtheȱdalits,ȱofȱcourse,ȱcomeȱintoȱview.ȱInȱthisȱrespect,ȱtheȱdalit theologiansȱ areȱ concernedȱ primarilyȱ withȱ theȱ liberationȱ from injusticeȱ inȱ theȱ socioȬeconomicȱ area.ȱ Theȱ exploitationȱ andȱ opȬ pressionȱ thatȱ theȱ dalitsȱ haveȱ experiencedȱ haveȱ givenȱ occasion forȱsearchingȱforȱtheȱwordsȱinȱtheȱGospelȱespeciallyȱinȱwhichȱJeȬ susȱturnsȱagainstȱinjustice.ȱButȱtheȱdalitȱtheologiansȱareȱalsoȱconȬ cernedȱ withȱ liberationȱ fromȱ theȱ wrongȱ formsȱ ofȱ religion.ȱ The storyȱ aboutȱ theȱ cleansingȱ ofȱ theȱ templeȱ isȱ particularlyȱ appealȬ ing.29ȱ Forȱ dalits,ȱ whoseȱ ancestorsȱ wereȱ neverȱ permittedȱ inȱ the highȬcasteȱHinduȱtemples,ȱtheȱ imageȱofȱJesusȱtakingȱ aȱwhipȱto restoreȱorderȱinȱtheȱtempleȱisȱnaturallyȱanȱattractiveȱpicture. JesusȱOpposesȱUntouchability OverȱagainstȱtheȱtempleȱtraditionȱofȱtheȱhighȬcasteȱHindus,ȱthe dalitsȱhadȱalwaysȱheldȱtheirȱownȱreligionȱinȱhonour.ȱItȱwasȱaȱreȬ ligiousȱsubcultureȱwithȱitsȱownȱholyȱplaces,ȱitsȱownȱritualsȱand, forȱtheȱmostȱpart,ȱitsȱownȱgods.ȱForȱtheȱdalits,ȱthisȱreligiousȬculȬ turalȱ uniquenessȱ wasȱ alsoȱ veryȱ importantȱ socially.ȱ Inȱ normal life,ȱespeciallyȱwithȱregardȱtoȱlabour,ȱtheyȱwereȱcontinuallyȱconȬ frontedȱ withȱ theirȱ untouchability.ȱ Theyȱ didȱ notȱ participateȱ in lifeȱinȱtheȱvillageȱproperȱwhereȱtheȱhighȬcasteȱHindusȱlived,ȱand theyȱ certainlyȱ didȱ notȱ participateȱ inȱ theȱ worldȱ ofȱ theȱ sacred, whichȱtheȱbrahmansȱanxiouslyȱguarded.ȱButȱthisȱuntouchability wasȱnotȱfeltȱinȱtheirȱownȱcircles.ȱHereȱtheȱdalitsȱwereȱamongȱdaȬ litsȱandȱtheyȱcouldȱexperienceȱritualsȱinȱtheirȱownȱwayȱwithout anyȱ restrictions.ȱ Itȱ isȱ understandableȱ that,ȱ forȱ theȱ mostȱ part, theseȱritualsȱwereȱofȱaȱcommunalȱnature.ȱTheȱtogethernessȱwas

29 ȱNirmal,ȱ“TowardsȱaȱChristianȱDalitȱTheology,”ȱpp.ȱ68Ȭ69;ȱArulȬ raja,ȱJesusȱtheȱDalit,ȱpp.ȱ82Ȭ84.

JESUSȱASȱGURU

250

importantȱinȱorderȱ toȱdefineȱ themselvesȱ overȱ againstȱ theȱ domȬ inantȱreligiousȱcultureȱofȱtheȱhighȬcasteȱHindus. Aȱ fineȱ exampleȱ areȱ theȱ ritualsȱ ofȱ theȱ pulayasȱ inȱ Kerala.30 Thisȱisȱaȱveryȱlowȱcasteȱthatȱalsoȱdisplaysȱtribalȱcharacteristics. Theyȱ wereȱ seenȱ asȱ extraordinarilyȱ impureȱ andȱ treatedȱ asȱ such byȱtheȱmembersȱofȱtheȱhighȱcastes.ȱAȱpulayaȱhadȱtoȱmoveȱaside ifȱ aȱ brahmanȱ approachedȱ andȱ wasȱ notȱ toȱ comeȱ closerȱ than twentyȱmeters.ȱOfȱcourse,ȱtheȱpulayasȱdidȱnotȱparticipateȱinȱthe templeȱ cultȱ andȱ otherȱ highȬcasteȱ ritualsȱ inȱ anyȱ way.ȱ Butȱ they hadȱtheirȱownȱreligiousȱgatheringsȱcalledȱtheyyam.ȱDrumȱmusic andȱ danceȱ playedȱ anȱ importantȱ partȱ inȱ theseȱ celebrations, whichȱ lastedȱ atȱ leastȱ twentyȬfourȱ hours.ȱ Theȱ theyyamȱ wasȱ priȬ marilyȱ aȱ communallyȱ experiencedȱ ecstasy.ȱ Theȱ dancersȱ would fallȱ intoȱ aȱ tranceȱ andȱ theȱ godsȱ andȱ spiritsȱ wereȱ thoughtȱ toȱ be presentȱ throughȱ them.ȱ Theȱ fastȬpacedȱ musicȱ andȱ lackȱ ofȱ sleep enthralledȱ theȱ entireȱ communityȱ and,ȱ asȱ itȱ were,ȱ raisedȱ itȱ toȱ a higherȱplane. Withȱthisȱreligiousȱbackground,ȱitȱisȱobviousȱthatȱtheȱcomȬ munalȱ ritualsȱ ofȱ theȱ churchȱ haveȱ aȱ specialȱ meaningȱ forȱ dalits whoȱhadȱbecomeȱChristians.ȱTheȱcelebrationȱofȱtheȱLord’sȱSupȬ perȱ isȱ particularlyȱ importantȱ forȱ them.31ȱ Hereȱ theyȱ experience theȱcommunalityȱthatȱtheyȱexperiencedȱearlierȱinȱtheirȱownȱreliȬ giousȱ subculture.ȱ Andȱ hereȱ isȱ whereȱ theȱ untouchabilityȱ isȱ broȬ kenȱ throughȱ inȱ aȱ mostȱ penetratingȱ way.ȱ Afterȱ all,ȱ thereȱ isȱ no strongerȱproofȱofȱritualȱequalityȱandȱmutualȱacknowledgement inȱIndianȱcultureȱthanȱinȱeatingȱandȱdrinkingȱtogether. Ifȱ dalitsȱ formȱ anȱ imageȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ Christ,ȱ thenȱ anȱ important aspectȱofȱitȱwillȱbeȱhisȱstruggleȱagainstȱuntouchability.ȱNumerȬ ousȱ storiesȱ inȱ theȱ Gospelȱ haveȱ convincedȱ theȱ dalitsȱ thatȱ Jesus continuallyȱopposedȱtheȱsameȱpurityȱlawsȱusedȱtoȱdiscriminate againstȱthem.ȱTheȱcommunalȱmealȱisȱthereforeȱtheȱmostȱstriking symbol.ȱDalitȱtheologiansȱreferȱagainȱandȱagainȱtoȱtheȱmealsȱin theȱ Bibleȱ storiesȱ thatȱ Jesusȱ sharedȱ withȱ “taxȱ collectorsȱ andȱ sinȬ

ȱSeeȱJ.J.ȱPallath,ȱ“SubalternȱChristianȱGroupsȱandȱtheȱCrisisȱofȱCulȬ turalȱIdentity,”ȱJournalȱofȱDharmaȱXXIVȱ(1991):ȱ51Ȭ66. 30

ȱSeeȱalso:ȱGeorgeȱSoaresȬPrabhu,ȱ“TheȱTableȱFellowshipȱofȱJesus: Itsȱ Significanceȱ forȱ Dalitȱ Christiansȱ inȱ Indiaȱ Today,”ȱ Jeevadharaȱ XXII (1992):ȱ140Ȭ59. 31

JESUSȱASȱLIBERATORȱINȱTHEȱTHEOLOGYȱOFȱTHEȱDALITS

251

ners.”32ȱAndȱtheȱfinalȱ“Lord’sȱSupper,”ȱasȱtheȱfirstȱoccurrenceȱof theȱ onȬgoingȱ celebrationȱ ofȱ breadȱ andȱ wineȱ inȱ theȱ churches,ȱ is viewedȱ asȱ beingȱ ofȱ theȱ sameȱ natureȱ asȱ theseȱ revolutionary meals. Perhapsȱ theȱ dalitȱ theologiansȱ haveȱ anȱ evenȱ strongerȱ point inȱ twoȱ otherȱ aspectsȱ ofȱ Jesus’ȱ lifeȱ andȱ workȱ thatȱ areȱ favourites amongȱthem.ȱItȱconcernsȱtheȱattitudeȱofȱJesusȱtowardȱtheȱlepers andȱhisȱcontactȱwithȱtheȱSamaritans.ȱItȱisȱindeedȱstrikingȱinȱthe gospelsȱthatȱJesusȱconsciouslyȱbreaksȱtheȱpurityȱlawsȱinȱdealing withȱlepers.ȱTheȱdalitsȱseeȱaȱgreatȱdealȱofȱthemselvesȱinȱtheȱposiȬ tionȱofȱtheȱlepers.ȱAfterȱall,ȱlepersȱwereȱforcedȱtoȱliveȱoutsideȱof theȱ citiesȱ andȱ villagesȱ andȱ wereȱ notȱ allowedȱ toȱ approachȱ healȬ thyȱ peopleȱ (Lukeȱ 17:12),ȱ letȱ aloneȱ haveȱ physicalȱ contactȱ with them.ȱTheirȱexclusionȱhadȱanȱemphaticȱculticȱaspect;ȱaccording toȱMosaicȱlaw,ȱaȱleperȱwasȱevenȱtoȱwarnȱthoseȱheȱencountered byȱ callingȱ out:ȱ “Unclean!ȱ Unclean!”ȱ (Leviticusȱ 13:45).ȱ Butȱ the GospelȱnowȱrelatesȱhowȱJesusȱvoluntarilyȱtouchesȱaȱleperȱ(MatȬ thewȱ8:3).ȱAȱdalitȱtheologianȱconcludes:ȱ“Thatȱisȱdefinitelyȱgood newsȱtoȱtheȱDalits.”33 Theȱ Gospelȱ storiesȱ aboutȱ Jesusȱ andȱ theȱ Samaritansȱ simiȬ larlyȱ appealȱ toȱ theȱ dalits—andȱ rightlyȱ so.ȱ Theȱ Samaritansȱ were excludedȱ fromȱ Israelȱ becauseȱ ofȱ theirȱ impureȱ descentȱ which madeȱthemȱrituallyȱunclean.ȱTheyȱwereȱnotȱallowedȱtoȱtakeȱpart inȱ theȱ templeȱ cultȱ either.ȱ Jesusȱ holdsȱ theȱ Samaritansȱ upȱ asȱ an exampleȱ forȱ hisȱ listenersȱ aȱ numberȱ ofȱ timesȱ (Lukeȱ 10:25Ȭ67; 17:11Ȭ19).ȱThisȱfactȱalreadyȱisȱstrikingȱasȱfarȱasȱtheȱdalitsȱareȱconȬ cerned,ȱbutȱwhatȱtheyȱfindȱveryȱspecialȱisȱtheȱstoryȱofȱJesus’ȱenȬ counterȱ withȱ theȱ Samaritanȱ womanȱ (Johnȱ 4:1Ȭ42).ȱ Hereȱ Jesus asksȱ aȱSamaritanȱ womanȱifȱ sheȱwillȱdrawȱsomeȱ waterȱ forȱ him. TheȱdalitsȱcanȱimagineȱonlyȱtooȱwellȱwhyȱthisȱsurprisesȱtheȱwoȬ man:ȱthisȱquestionȱasȱtoȱtheȱpersonȱfromȱwhomȱoneȱmayȱaccept waterȱ isȱ stillȱ aȱ veryȱ sensitiveȱ pointȱ todayȱ inȱ theȱ relationship betweenȱ thoseȱ ofȱ highȱ andȱ lowȱ caste.ȱ Dalitȱ theologiansȱ regard

ȱNirmal,ȱ“TowardsȱaȱChristianȱDalitȱTheology,”ȱp.ȱ67;ȱPrabhakar, “ChristologyȱinȱDalitȱPerspective,”ȱp.ȱ415;ȱArulraja,ȱJesusȱtheȱDalit,ȱp.ȱ59. 32

ȱArulraja,ȱJesusȱtheȱDalit,ȱp.ȱ68.

33

JESUSȱASȱGURU

252

thisȱ actȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ asȱ aȱ crownȱ witnessȱ forȱ theȱ thesisȱ thatȱ heȱ opȬ posesȱuntouchability.34 JesusȱisȱaȱRevolutionary Thereȱisȱanȱobjectionȱtoȱequatingȱtheȱdalits’ȱcauseȱwithȱtheȱinterȬ estsȱ ofȱ thoseȱ whoȱ wereȱ discriminatedȱ againstȱ inȱ Jesus’ȱ time, suchȱasȱlepersȱandȱSamaritans.ȱSomeȱdalitȱtheologiansȱhaveȱthe tendencyȱ toȱ placeȱ Jesusȱ inȱ oppositionȱ toȱ hisȱ ownȱ peopleȱ inȱ a questionableȱ way.ȱ Theyȱ wantȱ toȱ presentȱ Jesusȱ asȱ aȱ revolutionȬ aryȱ whoȱ leadsȱ theȱ wayȱ inȱ uncompromisingȱ resistanceȱ toȱ social injusticeȱandȱoppressiveȱformsȱofȱreligion.ȱTheȱGospelȱdoesȱgive occasionȱtoȱlinkȱJesusȱwithȱworkingȱonȱbehalfȱofȱtheȱoppressed andȱexcludedȱpeople.ȱAnd,ȱjustȱlikeȱotherȱliberationȱtheologians, dalitȱ theologiansȱ areȱ rightȱ whenȱ theyȱ claimȱ thatȱ littleȱ attention hasȱbeenȱpaidȱtoȱthisȱinȱchurchȱandȱtheology. ButȱlepersȱandȱSamaritansȱcannotȱbeȱequatedȱwithȱdalitsȱin allȱrespectsȱandȱtheȱorthodoxȱJewsȱofȱJesus’ȱtimeȱcannotȱbeȱidenȬ tifiedȱ withȱ brahmans,ȱ howeverȱ muchȱ oneȱ canȱ pointȱ toȱ similar characteristics.ȱArulraja,ȱinȱparticular,ȱarguesȱcontinallyȱthatȱJeȬ susȱtakesȱupȱaȱpositionȱdiametricallyȱoppositeȱtoȱ“theȱJews”ȱand rejectsȱ theirȱ entireȱ tradition.35ȱ Jesusȱ wouldȱ haveȱ initiallyȱ folȬ lowedȱ theȱ Oldȱ Testamentȱ writingsȱ but,ȱ dueȱ toȱ hisȱ growingȱ exȬ perienceȱinȱlifeȱasȱaȱlabourerȱ(!),ȱwouldȱhaveȱincreasinglyȱbegun toȱ thinkȱ forȱ himself.ȱ Arulrajaȱ canȱ thusȱ doȱ littleȱ withȱ Jesus’ statementȱthatȱheȱhadȱnotȱcomeȱ toȱabolishȱtheȱ Lawȱ orȱ theȱProȬ phetsȱbutȱtoȱfulfilȱthemȱ(Matthewȱ5:17).ȱForȱArulraja,ȱthisȱfulfilȬ mentȱ thenȱ meansȱ thatȱ Jesusȱ givesȱ anȱ entirelyȱ newȱ directionȱ to theȱ Oldȱ Testamentȱ tradition:ȱ “Jesusȱ preachedȱ revolutionary ideasȱgoingȱcontraryȱtoȱtheȱdictatesȱandȱinterpretationȱofȱtheȱBiȬ ble.”36ȱ Hereȱ aȱ narrowȱ Marxistȱ worldviewȱ emergesȱ inȱ combinaȬ tionȱ withȱ aȱ misunderstandingȱ ofȱ theȱ Oldȱ Testamentȱ tradition thatȱoneȱseesȱmoreȱoftenȱinȱRomanȱCatholicsȱwritersȱinȱIndia.ȱA betterȱ understandingȱ forȱ rootingȱ Jesusȱ inȱ theȱ Jewishȱ prophetic ȱPrabhakar,ȱ“ChristologyȱinȱDalitȱPerspective,”ȱp.ȱ415;ȱArulraja,ȱJeȬ susȱtheȱDalit,ȱpp.ȱ58,ȱ117;ȱNirmal,ȱ“TowardsȱaȱChristianȱDalitȱTheology,” p.ȱ53. 34

ȱArulraja,ȱJesusȱtheȱDalit,ȱparticularlyȱchapterȱVI.

35

ȱArulraja,ȱJesusȱtheȱDalit,ȱp.ȱ96.

36

JESUSȱASȱLIBERATORȱINȱTHEȱTHEOLOGYȱOFȱTHEȱDALITS

253

traditionȱofȱtheȱOldȱTestamentȱjustȱmightȱsharpenȱJesus’ȱrevoluȬ tionaryȱcharacteristics! JesusȱBelongsȱinȱtheȱVillage AȱfinalȱaspectȱofȱtheȱconceptionȱofȱJesusȱinȱdalitȱtheologyȱisȱconȬ nectedȱwithȱtheȱcontrastȱbetweenȱcityȱandȱcountry.ȱTheȱheartȱof churchȱlifeȱandȱtheȱpracticeȱofȱtheologyȱinȱIndiaȱusuallyȱliesȱin theȱurbanȱenvironment.ȱTheȱcityȱwasȱtheȱplaceȱwhereȱtheȱEuroȬ peansȱhadȱcontrol.ȱTheȱeducationalȱinstitutionsȱofȱtheȱmissions areȱ toȱ beȱ foundȱ inȱ theȱ cities,ȱ andȱ theȱ cityȱ isȱ inȱ theȱ foreground withȱ regardȱ toȱ theȱ developmentȱ ofȱ society,ȱ asȱ wellȱ asȱ withȱ reȬ gardȱtoȱtheologicalȱissuesȱofȱinculturationȱandȱdialogue. Butȱforȱdalits—andȱtoȱaȱgreaterȱdegreeȱforȱadivasis—lifeȱocȬ cursȱ inȱ theȱ villages.ȱ “Ruralȱ Indiaȱ isȱ theȱ heartlandȱ ofȱ casteism andȱ theȱ primaryȱ contextȱ ofȱ theȱ dehumanisationȱ thatȱ Dalitsȱ exȬ perience.”37ȱWhenȱdalitsȱimagineȱJesus,ȱtheyȱpreferȱtoȱseeȱhimȱon hisȱtravelsȱthroughȱtheȱcountrysideȱofȱIsrael.ȱAndȱthenȱaȱname comesȱ upȱ thatȱ atȱ leastȱ inȱ dalitȱ theologyȱ hasȱ acquiredȱ aȱ special meaning:ȱGalilee. Theȱdalitsȱrecognizeȱsomethingȱinȱtheȱregionȱwhere,ȱaccordȬ ingȱ toȱ theȱ gospels,ȱ Jesusȱ beganȱ hisȱ preaching:ȱ “Galileeȱ ofȱ the Gentiles”ȱ (Matthewȱ 4:15).ȱ Apparently,ȱ theȱ inhabitantsȱ ofȱ the areaȱ wereȱ poorlyȱ thoughtȱ of.ȱ Andȱ itȱ isȱ preciselyȱ thereȱ thatȱ the messageȱofȱliberationȱsoundsȱforȱtheȱfirstȱtime.ȱDalitȱtheologians areȱ devotedȱ toȱ theȱ ideaȱ ofȱ portrayingȱ Jesusȱ asȱ theȱ preacherȱ in “theȱmarginalizedȱGalilee.”ȱTheyȱpresentȱthemselvesȱasȱhisȱauȬ dience,ȱasȱtheȱruralȱpeopleȱwhoȱareȱdespisedȱbyȱtheȱurbanȱelite ofȱJudea.ȱHereȱtheyȱcanȱrightlyȱappealȱtoȱtheȱJewishȱcustomȱof referringȱ toȱ theȱ illiterateȱ asȱ “theȱ amȬhaȬarez—theȱ peopleȱ ofȱ the land.”38 InȱthisȱwayȱJesusȱentersȱtheȱprivateȱlifeȱofȱtheȱdalit.ȱApparȬ entlyȱheȱdoesȱnotȱbelongȱtoȱtheȱunknownȱandȱfearedȱurbanȱenȬ vironmentȱ butȱ isȱ atȱ homeȱ inȱ theȱ villages.ȱ Inȱ recentȱ yearsȱ espeȬ ciallyȱthisȱnotionȱhasȱbecomeȱmoreȱsignificant.ȱAfterȱaȱdecadeȱof militantȱdalitȱtheologyȱwithȱitsȱaccentȱonȱsocioȬpoliticalȱchange, ȱAthyal,ȱ“NewȱChallengesȱforȱDalitȱTheology,”ȱp.ȱ21/26.

37

38 ȱM.ȱGnanavaram,ȱ“EschatologyȱInȱDalitȱPerspective,”ȱin:ȱȱDevasaȬ hayam,ȱFrontiersȱofȱDalitȱTheology,ȱp.ȱ480.

JESUSȱASȱGURU

254

aȱcertainȱchangeȱinȱthinkingȱcouldȱbeȱobservedȱaroundȱtheȱyear 2000.ȱThereȱisȱlessȱthinkingȱinȱtermsȱofȱabsoluteȱconflictsȱofȱinȬ terestsȱandȱmoreȱofȱaȱsearchȱforȱthatȱwhereȱbridgesȱcanȱbeȱconȬ structed.ȱ Andȱ asȱ farȱ asȱ theȱ dalitsȱ areȱ concerned,ȱ itȱ isȱ noȱ longer onlyȱ theirȱ historyȱ ofȱ sufferingȱ andȱ oppressionȱ thatȱ isȱ recalled butȱtheȱvaluesȱofȱtheirȱownȱsubcultureȱasȱwell. Villageȱ lifeȱ seemsȱ toȱ haveȱ somethingȱ positiveȱ toȱ offerȱ as wellȱfromȱwhichȱtheȱentireȱchurchȱinȱIndiaȱcanȱprofit.ȱThisȱidea isȱ alsoȱ stronglyȱ supportedȱ byȱ theȱ newȱ inputȱ fromȱ theȱ tribal communities,ȱ whichȱ hasȱ becomeȱ noticeableȱ inȱ theologyȱ inȱ reȬ centȱyears.39ȱTheȱadivasisȱalsoȱhaveȱexperienceȱwithȱneglect,ȱconȬ temptȱ andȱ oppression,ȱ butȱ theyȱ wantȱ toȱ contributeȱ primarily positiveȱ elementsȱ forȱ theologicalȱ reflectionȱ fromȱ theirȱ specific culturalȱ background.ȱ Theȱ connectionȱ withȱ natureȱ isȱ central here,ȱbutȱtheȱcommunalȱawarenessȱthatȱsoȱqualifiesȱlifeȱforȱadiȬ vasisȱalsoȱplaysȱanȱimportantȱrole.ȱFurthermore,ȱtheȱbiblicalȱnarȬ rativesȱ areȱ viewedȱ inȱ aȱ distinctȱ wayȱ fromȱ theȱ perspectiveȱ of theirȱownȱreligiousȱbackgroundȱinȱwhichȱtheȱworldȱofȱtheȱspirȬ itsȱisȱalwaysȱnear.ȱAndȱitȱisȱalsoȱimportantȱforȱtheȱconceptionȱof Christȱthatȱtheȱadivasisȱletȱtheirȱvoiceȱbeȱheard. Whenȱaȱnewȱpopeȱwasȱinauguratedȱinȱ2005,ȱaȱJesuitȱfather fromȱ Indiaȱ wroteȱ anȱ openȱ letter.ȱ Heȱ pleadedȱ inȱ particularȱ for theȱ interestsȱ ofȱ theȱ Christianȱ dalitsȱ andȱ adivasis.ȱ Heȱ explained howȱtheseȱsectionsȱofȱtheȱpopulationȱsawȱJesusȱasȱoneȱofȱthem, someoneȱwhoȱcriedȱwithȱthemȱandȱalsoȱdancedȱwithȱthem.40ȱThese wordsȱ takeȱ usȱ intoȱ theȱ privateȱ livesȱ ofȱ theȱ villagers,ȱ especially thoseȱ inȱ theȱ tribalȱ areas.ȱ Hereȱ isȱ whereȱ thisȱ mostȱ recentȱ influȬ enceȱ onȱ theologicalȱ issuesȱ isȱ mostȱ clearlyȱ toȱ beȱ seen.ȱ Theȱ conȬ ceptionȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ inȱ Indiaȱ continuesȱ toȱ beȱ filledȱ inȱ againȱ and againȱinȱnewȱways. ȱHecker,ȱ“AdivasiȬTheologie.”

39

ȱFrancisȱGonsalves,ȱ“Wilkommen,ȱWelcome,ȱSwagatham!”ȱNationȬ alȱCatholicȱReporterȱ3ȱ(2005):ȱ5. 40

INTERMEZZO

SusheilaȱWilliams Underȱ theȱ influenceȱ ofȱ dalitȱ theologyȱ weȱ seeȱ anotherȱ represenȬ tationȱofȱJesusȱemergingȱinȱrecentȱyears.ȱInȱadditionȱtoȱwhatȱhas nowȱ becomeȱ theȱ traditionalȱ depictionȱ ofȱ anȱ exaltedȱ teacherȱ of wisdomȱ orȱ aȱ cosmicȱ divineȱ figure,ȱ weȱ nowȱ seeȱ himȱ inȱ theȱ vilȬ lages,ȱassociatedȱwithȱtheȱcultureȱofȱtheȱlowȬcasteȱpeople.ȱJyoti Sahi,ȱ forȱ instance,ȱ paintedȱ Christȱ inȱ hisȱ laterȱ workȱ asȱ aȱ dancer whoȱimpassionsȱpeopleȱwithȱaȱlargeȱhandȱdrum. Forȱme,ȱoneȱofȱtheȱmostȱforcefulȱdepictionsȱofȱJesusȱinȱvilȬ lageȱlifeȱisȱaȱpaintingȱofȱtheȱcrucifixionȱbyȱSusheilaȱWilliams,ȱan artistȱwhoȱhasȱonlyȱrecentlyȱbecomeȱknownȱinȱChristianȱIndia. Sheȱhasȱaȱstrongȱaffinityȱforȱtheȱcultureȱofȱtheȱvillageȱsocietiesȱin Southȱ India.ȱ Forȱ manyȱ yearsȱ sheȱ workedȱ asȱ aȱ volunteerȱ inȱ orȬ ganizingȱcampaignsȱforȱsocialȱawareness,ȱeliminatingȱilliteracy, andȱ healthȱ careȱ inȱ aȱ dozenȱ villages.ȱ Herȱ professionalȱ backȬ groundȱ wasȱ inȱ aȱ differentȱ area:ȱ sheȱ studiedȱ Englishȱ literature and,ȱinȱaddition,ȱwasȱtrainedȱasȱanȱinteriorȱdesigner.ȱForȱtwelve yearsȱsheȱwasȱtheȱdirectorȱofȱaȱcentreȱforȱvocationalȱtrainingȱrun byȱ theȱ Protestantȱ Churchȱ ofȱ Southȱ India.ȱ Atȱ theȱ momentȱ she worksȱ asȱ anȱ interiorȱ designerȱ whileȱ doingȱ secretarialȱ workȱ for theȱBishopȱAppasamyȱCollegeȱofȱArtsȱandȱSciencesȱinȱCoimbaȬ tore,ȱalsoȱanȱinstitutionȱofȱtheȱChurchȱofȱSouthȱIndia. Inȱtheȱareaȱofȱart,ȱWilliamsȱisȱknownȱprimarilyȱforȱherȱlarge oilȱpaintings,ȱbutȱthisȱisȱnotȱherȱonlyȱtechnique—sheȱalsoȱmakes terrocottaȱstatues.ȱHerȱpaintingsȱoftenȱhaveȱbiblicalȱthemes,ȱand theȱsufferingȱofȱChristȱisȱprominentȱhere.ȱTheȱmostȱwellȬknown paintingȱ inȱ herȱ oeuvreȱ isȱ calledȱ Thirtyȱ Silverȱ Coins,ȱ whichȱ deȬ pictsȱtheȱbottomȱpartȱofȱtheȱcrossȱwithȱtheȱfeetȱofȱJesusȱand,ȱunȬ derneathȱ them,ȱ theȱ moneyȱ bagȱ withȱ Judas’ȱ silverȱ coinsȱ onȱ the ground.ȱ Thisȱ paintingȱ wasȱ awardedȱ aȱ prizeȱ asȱ partȱ ofȱ “ChrisȬ tianȱCommunicationȱthroughȱArt.”ȱWilliams’ȱworkȱhasȱbeenȱexȬ hibitedȱinȱseveralȱplacesȱinȱIndia,ȱofȱcourse,ȱbutȱitȱisȱalsoȱsomeȬ timesȱ shownȱ outsideȱ ofȱ India.ȱ Oneȱ ofȱ herȱ paintings,ȱ Girlȱ Child, wasȱincludedȱinȱtheȱtravellingȱexhibitionȱthatȱwasȱsetȱupȱinȱGerȬ manyȱ inȱ 2006ȱ byȱ theȱ Evangelischesȱ Missionswerkȱ inȱ SüdȬ

255

256

JESUSȱASȱGURU

SUSHEILAȱWILLIAMS

257

westdeutschlandȱ (Protestantȱ Missionȱ Workȱ inȱ Southwestȱ GerȬ many). TheȱpaintingȱreproducedȱinȱthisȱbookȱisȱcalledȱTheȱManȱonȱa VillageȱTree.ȱWhatȱisȱfascinatingȱaboutȱthisȱworkȱisȱthatȱtheȱartist hasȱ connectedȱ theȱ sufferingȱ ofȱ Christȱ withȱ theȱ lifeȱ ofȱ theȱ poor, lowȬcasteȱvillagersȱinȱtheȱruralȱareasȱofȱIndia.ȱTheȱcrucifixionȱis placedȱinȱaȱvillageȱinȱSouthȱIndia:ȱweȱseeȱtheȱcharacteristicȱpalm treesȱimmediately.ȱButȱitȱisȱalsoȱimmediatelyȱclearȱthatȱthisȱisȱa poorȱvillageȱorȱtheȱpoorȱdistrictȱofȱaȱvillage.ȱTheȱalmostȱroughly sketchedȱhutȱisȱtheȱhomeȱofȱaȱdalitȱfamily.ȱSuchȱhutsȱareȱfound inȱ theȱ districtsȱ whereȱ theȱ “untouchables”ȱ live,ȱ carefullyȱ separȬ atedȱ fromȱ theȱ centreȱ ofȱ theȱ villageȱ whereȱ highȬcasteȱ Hindus haveȱtheirȱsturdyȱhomesȱbuiltȱaroundȱtheȱwell. Christȱhasȱapparentlyȱfoundȱhisȱplaceȱamongȱtheȱdespised dalits.ȱThisȱisȱwhereȱheȱsuffers,ȱofȱwhichȱtheȱdropsȱofȱbloodȱon hisȱ arms—asȱ soȱ oftenȱ inȱ herȱ work—areȱ aȱ symbol.ȱ Itȱ isȱ very strikingȱthatȱChristȱisȱnotȱhangingȱonȱaȱcrossȱbutȱonȱaȱtree,ȱthus depictingȱ howȱ fruitfulȱ hisȱ sufferingȱ is.ȱ Hisȱ form,ȱ withȱ hisȱ eyes closed,ȱ expressesȱ calmȱ andȱ peace.ȱ Heȱ hasȱ almostȱ becomeȱ one withȱtheȱtree:ȱtheȱdistinctionȱbetweenȱhisȱarmsȱandȱtheȱbranches isȱ blurred.ȱ Theȱ intenseȱ connectednessȱ ofȱ theȱ sufferingȱ Christ withȱtheȱdalitsȱisȱexpressedȱinȱthisȱway.ȱAndȱthusȱtheȱpaintingȱis anȱexpressionȱofȱtheȱsameȱGospelȱthatȱtheȱdalitȱtheologiansȱhave broughtȱtoȱtheȱforeground.ȱȱȱ

CHAPTERȱ11

Postscript HindusȱonȱJesus TheȱfirstȱimportantȱcontributionȱtoȱtheȱIndianȱconceptionȱofȱJeȬ susȱcameȱfromȱaȱHindu.ȱAtȱtheȱbeginningȱofȱtheȱnineteenthȱcenȬ tury,ȱ Rammohanȱ Royȱ studiedȱ Christ’sȱ teachings,ȱ publishedȱ a bookȱ onȱ themȱ andȱ becameȱ involvedȱ inȱ aȱ keenȱ debateȱ with Christianȱ missionaries.ȱ Heȱ presentedȱ Jesusȱ asȱ aȱ teacherȱ ofȱ wisȬ domȱwithȱaȱstrongȱpracticalȱbent:ȱinȱhisȱteachingȱheȱrefersȱtoȱthe wayȱtoȱpeaceȱandȱhappinessȱinȱlife.ȱJesusȱisȱaȱguru. Rammohanȱ Roy’sȱ influenceȱ wasȱ great.ȱ Theȱ newȱ formȱ of Hinduismȱ thatȱ heȱ propagatedȱ wasȱ ofȱ greatȱ influenceȱ throughȬ outȱ theȱ wholeȱ ofȱ theȱ nineteenthȱ centuryȱ amongȱ theȱ metropoliȬ tanȱ intelligentsia.ȱ Theȱ sympatheticȱ approachȱ toȱ Jesusȱ asȱ a teacherȱ ofȱ wisdom,ȱ likeȱ Easternȱ gurus,ȱ thusȱ becameȱ generally acceptedȱ withinȱ theseȱ circles,ȱ whichȱ constituted,ȱ ofȱ course, merelyȱaȱveryȱsmallȱsegmentȱofȱtheȱpopulation. WithinȱotherȱsectorsȱofȱHinduȱsocietyȱinterestȱinȱtheȱfigure ofȱJesusȱChristȱaroseȱasȱwell.ȱShriȱRamakrishnaȱattemptedȱtoȱfaȬ thomȱtheȱmeaningȱofȱChristȱthroughȱmeditation.ȱHeȱsawȱinȱhim theȱmysticȱwhoȱthroughȱmethodicalȱpracticeȱwasȱableȱtoȱrealize theȱdivineȱinȱhisȱlife.ȱForȱhim,ȱtheȱguruȱJesusȱhadȱbecomeȱaȱyoga master.ȱ Ramakrishnaȱ passedȱ onȱ hisȱ respectȱ forȱ Jesusȱ toȱ hisȱ diȬ sciples.ȱTheȱmovementȱthatȱaroseȱaroundȱhimȱhasȱalwaysȱbeen characterizedȱbyȱaȱgreatȱrespectȱforȱJesus’ȱspiritualȱpath.ȱUpȱunȬ tilȱ farȱ intoȱ theȱ twentiethȱ century,ȱ monksȱ ofȱ theȱ Ramakrishna Missionȱhaveȱplayedȱanȱimportantȱroleȱinȱtheȱdialogueȱbetween HindusȱandȱChristians.ȱForȱthemȱChristȱisȱaȱdivineȱincarnation, inȱlineȱwithȱtheȱmodelȱofȱtheȱHinduȱavatara. Whereasȱ Ramakrishnaȱ andȱ hisȱ followersȱ wereȱ concerned withȱ theȱ mysticȱ pathȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ Christ,ȱ Mahatmaȱ Gandhiȱ was moreȱ concernedȱ withȱ Jesus’ȱ moralȱ teachings.ȱ Followingȱ inȱ the footstepsȱofȱRammohanȱRoy,ȱheȱwasȱfascinatedȱinȱtheȱfirstȱplace byȱtheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMountȱmostlyȱbecauseȱofȱitsȱemphasisȱon nonȬviolence.ȱ Forȱ Gandhi,ȱ itȱ isȱ essentialȱ that,ȱ asȱ aȱ guru,ȱ Jesus notȱ onlyȱ preachedȱ aȱ certainȱ ethicȱ butȱ alsoȱ livedȱ inȱ accordance withȱhisȱownȱprinciplesȱtoȱtheȱveryȱend.ȱForȱthatȱreason,ȱJesus’ 259

JESUSȱASȱGURU

260

sufferingȱandȱdyingȱacquiredȱaȱspecialȱmeaningȱforȱtheȱMahatȬ ma.ȱ Howeverȱ muchȱ theȱ Gandhianȱ movementȱ wasȱ markedȱ by Hinduȱ values,ȱ theȱ greatȱ importanceȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ asȱ aȱ preacherȱ of nonȬviolenceȱhasȱalwaysȱbeenȱundisputed. Hindusȱhaveȱthusȱplayedȱanȱimportantȱroleȱinȱmanyȱways inȱtheȱreflectionȱonȱtheȱmeaningȱofȱChristȱinȱtheȱIndianȱcontext. Butȱ itȱ isȱ remarkableȱ thatȱ inȱ theȱ pastȱ quarterȱ ofȱ aȱ centuryȱ the voiceȱ ofȱ Hindusȱ inȱ theȱ dialogueȱ hasȱ grownȱ silent.ȱ Bothȱ inȱ reliȬ giousȱ schoolsȱ andȱ inȱ moreȱ sociallyȱ orientedȱ movements,ȱ attenȬ tionȱforȱtheȱpersonȱofȱJesusȱChristȱisȱfading.ȱAndȱthereȱisȱhardly anyȱ responseȱ whenȱ theȱ ecclesiasticalȱ worldȱ inȱ Indiaȱ callsȱ on Hindusȱtoȱcontinueȱtheȱdialogue.ȱAlmostȱallȱofȱtheȱIndianȱChrisȬ tiansȱwhoȱhaveȱappliedȱthemselvesȱtoȱtheȱdiscussionȱwithȱHinȬ dusȱareȱdisappointedȱbyȱtheȱlackȱofȱresponse.ȱTheȱconclusionȱby theȱJesuitȱIgnatiusȱPuthiadam,ȱwhoȱhadȱworkedȱforȱtheȱpurpose ofȱ mutualȱ understandingȱ forȱ manyȱ years,ȱ isȱ typical:ȱ “Dialogue isȱmostlyȱaȱChristianȱthing.”1 Usually,ȱ theȱ lackȱ ofȱ interestȱ inȱ dialogueȱ byȱ Hindusȱ isȱ exȬ plainedȱbyȱtheirȱfundamentalȱattitudeȱthatȱdifferencesȱbetween religionsȱcanȱneverȱbeȱfoundational.ȱAfterȱall,ȱthereȱisȱonlyȱone divineȱ truth.ȱ Butȱ aȱ suspicionȱ thatȱ alwaysȱ liesȱ justȱ beneathȱ the surfaceȱcertainlyȱplaysȱaȱroleȱhere:ȱIsȱitȱnotȱtheȱneedȱtoȱconvert othersȱ thatȱ ultimatelyȱ drivesȱ Christiansȱ inȱ theirȱ friendlyȱ dialoȬ gicalȱapproach?2ȱThisȱsuspicionȱhasȱbeenȱstrengthenedȱinȱrecent decadesȱ becauseȱ ofȱ aȱ renewedȱ selfȬconsciousnessȱ amongȱ HinȬ dus.ȱSinceȱtheȱ1980sȱthereȱhasȱbeenȱaȱmilitantȱHinduismȱonȱthe rise,ȱwhichȱisȱfightingȱbothȱpoliticallyȱandȱreligiouslyȱforȱhindutȬ va,ȱtheȱidealȱofȱanȱallȬpowerfulȱHinduismȱasȱtheȱoneȱreligionȱof

ȱInȱanȱinterviewȱwithȱCharlotteȱVenema;ȱsee:ȱC.ȱVenema,ȱLiving ApartȱTogether:ȱInterȬfaithȱDialogueȱinȱIndiaȱ(Master’sȱThesis,ȱTheology, Universityȱ ofȱ Amsterdam,ȱ 1993),ȱ p.ȱ 27.ȱ Inȱ theȱ 1970sȱ Paterȱ Puthiadam publishedȱaȱcollectionȱofȱHinduȱtextsȱforȱChristiansȱtoȱuseȱwhenȱmedȬ itating:ȱIgnatiusȱPuthiadam,ȱMartinȱKämpchen,ȱEndlosȱistȱdieȱZeitȱinȱDeinȬ enȱHänden:ȱMitȱdenȱHindusȱbetenȱ(Kevelaer:ȱButzonȱ&ȱBercker,1978).ȱIn 1980ȱheȱsettledȱinȱVaranasiȱinȱorderȱtoȱliveȱinȱdialogueȱwithȱHindusȱand Muslimsȱonȱaȱgrassrootsȱlevel. 1

ȱSeeȱRichardȱW.ȱTaylor,ȱ“CurrentȱHinduȬChristianȱDialogueȱinȱInȬ dia,”ȱin:ȱH.ȱCowardȱ(ed.),ȱHinduȬChristianȱDialogue:ȱPerspectivesȱandȱEnȬ countersȱ(Maryknoll:ȱOrbisȱBooks,ȱ1990),ȱp.ȱ123. 2

POSTSCRIPT

261

India.ȱ Christianȱ missionsȱ are,ȱ ofȱ course,ȱ stronglyȱ opposedȱ and initiativesȱforȱdialogueȱareȱmetȱwithȱgreatȱsuspicion. PublicationsȱonȱJesusȱandȱChristianityȱstillȱappearȱinȱthese circles,ȱbutȱtheyȱcanȱhardlyȱbeȱregardedȱasȱaȱcontributionȱtoȱdiaȬ logue.ȱ Typicalȱ isȱ aȱ publicationȱ byȱ Ramȱ Swarupȱ (1920Ȭ1998),ȱ in whichȱ bothȱ Islamȱ andȱ Christianityȱ areȱ challengedȱ stronglyȱ beȬ causeȱofȱtheirȱclaimȱtoȱuniversalȱtruth.ȱSwarupȱsaysȱthatȱChrisȬ tianȱ theologyȱ “derivesȱ fromȱ aȱ mindȱ prejudiced,ȱ selfȬcentered andȱselfȬrighteous,ȱaȱmindȱcontentiousȱandȱcantankerous,ȱoutȱto proveȱtheȱotherȱfellowȱinȱtheȱwrong.”3ȱInȱthisȱcornerȱofȱHinduȬ ismȱ thereȱ isȱ absolutelyȱ noȱ respectȱ forȱ theȱ figureȱ ofȱ Christȱ anyȬ more.ȱ Sitaȱ Ramȱ Goelȱ (1921Ȭ2003),ȱ Ramȱ Swarup’sȱ student,ȱ even entersȱaȱ“pleaȱforȱrejectingȱJesusȱasȱjunk.”4 ItȱisȱcuriousȱthatȱbothȱfundamentalistȱauthorsȱhaveȱaȱbackȬ groundȱ inȱ whichȱinterreligiousȱdialogueȱ hasȱgreatȱ value.ȱȱRam SwarupȱwasȱactiveȱinȱtheȱGandhianȱmovement,ȱandȱheȱandȱone ofȱtheȱmostȱfamousȱChristianȱfollowersȱofȱtheȱMahatma,ȱMadeȬ leineȱSladeȱ(aliasȱMirabehn),ȱ wereȱcloseȱ forȱ aȱnumberȱ ofȱyears. SitaȱRamȱGoelȱwasȱoneȱofȱtheȱHindusȱwhoȱbecameȱinvolvedȱin interreligiousȱdialogueȱ throughȱ theȱ Christianȱ ashrams.ȱ Heȱ was theȱ treasurerȱ ofȱ theȱ Abhishiktanandaȱ Societyȱ forȱ manyȱ years butȱ finallyȱ brokeȱ withȱ theȱ Christianȱ swamiȱ becauseȱ ofȱ theȱ latȬ ter’sȱ “obstinateȱ obsessionȱ withȱ Jesusȱ andȱ theȱ Church.”5ȱ Itȱ is certainlyȱnotȱtheȱcaseȱthatȱthisȱcombatingȱofȱtheȱChristianȱfaith isȱ commonȱ inȱ theȱ Gandhianȱ movementȱ orȱ amongȱ theȱ Hindus aroundȱ theȱ Christianȱ ashrams.ȱ Butȱ itȱ isȱ remarkableȱ thatȱ such ideasȱ areȱ expressedȱ whereȱ sharedȱ reflectionȱ onȱ theȱ messageȱ of Christȱusedȱtoȱbeȱsoȱimportant.ȱAndȱitȱisȱsignificantȱthatȱscarceȬ lyȱanythingȱelseȱisȱheardȱfromȱtheȱHindus.ȱTheȱgreatȱ contribuȬ tionȱbyȱHindusȱinȱtheȱdiscussionȱonȱtheȱ“IndianȱJesus”ȱhasȱapȬ parentlyȱbecomeȱsomethingȱofȱtheȱpast.

ȱRamȱSwarup,ȱHinduismȱvisȬàȬvisȱChristianityȱandȱIslam,ȱ3rdȱed. (NewȱDelhi:ȱVoiceȱofȱIndia,ȱ1992),ȱp.ȱ63. 3

ȱSitaȱRamȱGoel,ȱCatholicȱAshrams:ȱSannyasinsȱorȱSwindlers?ȱ2ndȱed. (NewȱDelhi:ȱVoiceȱofȱIndia,ȱ1994),ȱch.ȱ22. 4

ȱGoel,ȱCatholicȱAshrams,ȱp.ȱ64.

5

262

JESUSȱASȱGURU

ChristiansȱonȱJesus Rammohanȱ Roy’sȱ descriptionȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ asȱ anȱ Easternȱ guruȱ and claimȱ thatȱ heȱ wasȱ aȱ fellowȱ Asianȱ didȱ notȱ meetȱ withȱ anyȱ apȬ provalȱ amongȱ Christiansȱ inȱ Indiaȱ atȱ thatȱ time.ȱ Howeverȱ much theȱWesternȱmissionariesȱhadȱdoneȱtoȱunderstandȱtheȱcultureȱin whichȱ theyȱ hadȱ endedȱ up,ȱ theirȱ faithȱ remainedȱ Western.ȱ And theȱnewȱChristiansȱinȱIndiaȱbecameȱacquaintedȱwithȱJesusȱasȱa Europeanȱ figure,ȱ whoȱ hadȱ noȱ connectionȱ atȱ allȱ withȱ theirȱ own culturalȱbackground. Butȱ inȱ theȱ secondȱ halfȱ ofȱ theȱ nineteenthȱ centuryȱ someȱ InȬ dianȱ Christiansȱ graduallyȱ beganȱ toȱ reflectȱ onȱ theȱ relationship betweenȱChristȱandȱtheȱEasternȱreligiousȱworld.ȱTwoȱChristians whoȱ knewȱ theȱ Hinduȱ cultureȱ veryȱ wellȱ wereȱ theȱ instigatorsȱ of thisȱdevelopmentȱandȱbothȱhadȱboreȱtheȱtitleȱofȱpandit:ȱNehemiȬ ahȱ Gorehȱ andȱ Ramabai.ȱ Butȱ bothȱ wereȱ stronglyȱ influencedȱ by Westernȱ theologyȱ andȱ spiritualityȱ and,ȱ consequently,ȱ wereȱ exȬ tremelyȱ frightenedȱ ofȱ includingȱ “heathen”ȱ elementsȱ inȱ their Christology.ȱAndȱyetȱboth,ȱeachȱinȱhisȱandȱherȱownȱway,ȱpaved theȱ wayȱ forȱ anȱ actualȱ inculturationȱ ofȱ theȱ Christianȱ faithȱ that wouldȱbeȱincreasinglyȱbetterȱrealizedȱafterȱthem. Nehemiahȱ Gorehȱ agreedȱ withȱ Rammohanȱ Royȱ thatȱ Jesus wasȱ anȱ Asianȱ andȱ thusȱ couldȱ neverȱ reallyȱ beȱ strangeȱ toȱ the Asians.ȱHeȱwasȱalsoȱtheȱfirstȱtoȱargueȱthatȱtheȱHinduȱbhaktiȱtraȬ ditionȱwasȱfertileȱgroundȱforȱtheȱmessageȱofȱtheȱGospel.ȱIfȱGorȬ ehȱwasȱtheȱfirstȱIndianȱsystematicȱtheologian,ȱPanditaȱRamabai wasȱ theȱ firstȱ practicalȱ theologian.ȱ Herȱ commitmentȱ toȱ opȬ pressedȱ girlsȱ andȱ womenȱ demonstratedȱ howȱ sheȱ understood Christȱ toȱ beȱ theȱ liberatorȱ ofȱ theȱ leastȱ ofȱ society.ȱ Andȱ herȱ cauȬ tiousȱ attemptsȱ toȱ developȱ anȱ Indianȱ liturgyȱ andȱ spirituality showedȱ howȱ theȱ Christianȱ faithȱ wasȱ slowlyȱ findingȱ itsȱ feetȱ in anotherȱculture. Itȱwasȱnotȱuntilȱtheȱbeginningȱofȱtheȱtwentiethȱcenturyȱthat theȱactualȱinculturationȱbegan.ȱTheologiansȱfromȱtheȱ“RethinkȬ ingȱ Christianity”ȱ groupȱ inȱ Madrasȱ playedȱ aȱ prominentȱ role here.ȱ Chakkaraiȱ inȱ particularȱ offeredȱ aȱ penetratingȱ theology, foundedȱentirelyȱonȱtheȱframeworkȱofȱHinduȱconcepts.ȱHeȱthus presentedȱtheȱChristianȱfaithȱtoȱhisȱfellowȱcountrymenȱinȱaȱterȬ minologyȱthatȱwasȱfamiliarȱtoȱthem.ȱJesusȱChristȱbecameȱanȱavaȬ tara,ȱ aȱ divineȱ descent,ȱ similarȱ toȱ numerousȱ figuresȱ inȱ Hindu mythology—KrishnaȱandȱRamaȱinȱparticular.

POSTSCRIPT

263

TheȱfirstȱChristianȱashramsȱwereȱfoundedȱduringȱtheȱsame period.ȱ Overȱ time,ȱ theseȱ littleȱ communitiesȱ centredȱ aroundȱ a masterȱwouldȱhaveȱaȱgreatȱinfluenceȱonȱtheȱformationȱofȱanȱInȬ dianȱ Christianity.ȱ Theȱ lifestyleȱ andȱ religiousȱ praxisȱ inȱ theȱ ashȬ ramsȱ wereȱ modelledȱ entirelyȱ onȱ Hinduȱ examples.ȱ Theȱ centres wereȱ alsoȱ veryȱ interestedȱ inȱ art.ȱ Forȱ theȱ firstȱ time,ȱ Christian sacredȱbuildingsȱwereȱdesignedȱinȱaȱHinduȱstyle.ȱAndȱpainters whoȱwereȱlookingȱforȱanȱIndianȱformȱforȱChristianȱworksȱofȱart receivedȱaȱwarmȱwelcomeȱinȱtheȱashrams. Jesusȱ wasȱ understandablyȱ depictedȱ inȱ theȱ ashramȱ moveȬ mentȱasȱaȱhomelessȱperson.ȱTheȱashramȱinhabitants,ȱwhoȱthemȬ selvesȱ hadȱ turnedȱ awayȱ fromȱ aȱ normalȱ lifeȱ inȱ society,ȱ sawȱ a greatȱ dealȱ inȱ theirȱ guruȱ Jesus’ȱ renunciationȱ ofȱ theȱ world.ȱ For them,ȱ heȱ wasȱ aȱ sadhu,ȱ aȱ wanderingȱ holyȱ manȱ whoȱ consciously rejectsȱanyȱplaceȱinȱorderedȱsociety.ȱInȱtheȱoldestȱashrams,ȱallȱof whichȱ haveȱ aȱ Protestantȱ background,ȱ thisȱ conceptionȱ ofȱ Christ isȱalsoȱveryȱcompatibleȱwithȱtheȱnotionȱofȱsocialȱworkȱthatȱwas alsoȱ aȱ goalȱ forȱ theȱ inhabitantsȱ ofȱ theȱ ashram.ȱ Afterȱ all,ȱ Christ couldȱ devoteȱ himselfȱ toȱ othersȱ because,ȱ asȱ aȱ homelessȱ person, heȱwasȱnotȱboundȱbyȱanyȱsocialȱstrictures. Theȱ spiritualityȱ inȱ theȱ Protestantȱ ashramsȱ wasȱ strongly markedȱbyȱtheȱbhaktiȱtraditionȱofȱHinduism.ȱTheȱinhabitantsȱof Christianȱ ashramsȱ recognizedȱ aȱ greatȱ dealȱ inȱ theȱ lovingȱ devoȬ tionȱtoȱtheȱdivineȱasȱexpressedȱbyȱmanyȱbhaktasȱthroughoutȱhisȬ toryȱ inȱ theirȱ poetryȱ andȱ music,.ȱ Thusȱ theȱ languageȱ andȱ devoȬ tionalȱ attitudeȱ wasȱ foundȱ byȱ whichȱ Christȱ couldȱ beȱ addressed inȱ anȱ Indianȱ way.ȱ Inȱ thisȱ formȱ ofȱ spirituality,ȱ Christȱ growsȱ far beyondȱtheȱhistoricalȱJesus.ȱHeȱisȱtheȱ“eternalȱChrist”ȱwhoȱwill alwaysȱ andȱ everywhereȱ manifestȱ himselfȱ whereȱ peopleȱ disȬ coverȱsomethingȱofȱtheȱdivineȱtruth. Thisȱ depictionȱ ofȱ aȱ universalȱ Christȱ emergesȱ evenȱ more stronglyȱinȱtheȱlaterȱRomanȱCatholicȱashrams.ȱMysticȱmoments inȱparticularȱareȱsingledȱoutȱinȱtheȱlifeȱofȱJesus.ȱHisȱstatement,ȱ“I andȱtheȱFatherȱareȱone”ȱ(Johnȱ10:30),ȱwasȱgivenȱcentralȱsignifiȬ cance.ȱ Theȱ mysticȱ experienceȱ behindȱ theseȱ wordsȱ isȱ equated withȱtheȱ“realizationȱofȱunity”ȱinȱlineȱwithȱtheȱmonisticȱmodel. Afterȱall,ȱtheȱgoalȱofȱtheȱHindusȱofȱtheȱadvaitaȱvedantaȱschoolȱhas alwaysȱ beenȱ toȱ experienceȱ theȱ ultimateȱ unityȱ ofȱ theirȱ ownȱ esȬ senceȱwithȱthatȱofȱtheȱsupremeȱReality.ȱJesusȱChristȱisȱthusȱfirst

264

JESUSȱASȱGURU

andȱforemostȱaȱjivanmukta,ȱaȱmysticȱwhoȱhadȱachievedȱredempȬ tionȱalreadyȱduringȱhisȱlifetime. Subsequently,ȱfromȱtheȱperspectiveȱofȱthisȱwayȱofȱthinking, oneȱ canȱ speakȱ ofȱ Christȱ inȱ aȱ mostȱ exaltedȱ way.ȱ Heȱ becomesȱ a cosmicȱfigure,ȱwhoȱinȱaȱcertainȱwayȱbecomesȱtheȱfaceȱofȱtheȱsuȬ premeȱ Reality.ȱ Thusȱ Christȱ canȱ beȱ referredȱ toȱ asȱ theȱ ConȬ sciousnessȱ (Cit)ȱ inȱ theȱ Allȱ (Sachidananda),ȱ whichȱ givesȱ theȱ diȬ vinityȱ ofȱ Christȱ anȱ allȬencompassingȱ emphasis.ȱ Historically, thereȱ isȱ stillȱ someȱ influenceȱ hereȱ fromȱ theȱ centuriesȬoldȱ tradiȬ tionȱofȱtheȱThomasȱChristiansȱwhoȱwhereȱinvolvedȱinȱoneȱofȱthe ashrams.ȱTheirȱEasternȱOrthodoxȱliturgyȱisȱstronglyȱmarkedȱby theȱ monophysitismȱ thatȱ emphasizesȱ thatȱ whichȱ isȱ divineȱ in Christ. TheȱmysticalȱorientationȱtoȱChristȱthatȱisȱexperiencedȱinȱthe ashramsȱ hasȱ beenȱ reflectedȱ uponȱ theologicallyȱ byȱ aȱ numberȱ of academicȱ theologiansȱ inȱ India.ȱ Raimundoȱ Panikkarȱ hasȱ atȬ temptedȱ toȱ explainȱ inȱ theȱ mostȱ profoundȱ wayȱ howȱ aȱ meeting placeȱforȱHindusȱandȱChristiansȱcanȱbeȱfoundȱinȱChrist.ȱHe,ȱtoo, isȱconcernedȱwithȱaȱ“cosmicȱChrist.”ȱInȱaȱHinduȱcontext,ȱthisȱdiȬ vineȱfigureȱcanȱbeȱdescribedȱasȱtheȱpersonalȱsideȱofȱtheȱAll,ȱthe Brahman.ȱInȱthisȱwayȱHinduȱphilosophyȱandȱChristianȱfaithȱare linked,ȱforȱitȱwouldȱbeȱunthinkableȱthatȱChrist,ȱasȱaȱcentralȱfigȬ ure,ȱwouldȱhaveȱnothingȱtoȱdoȱwithȱboth. ForȱotherȱmajorȱtheologiansȱinȱtheȱsecondȱhalfȱofȱtheȱtwenȬ tiethȱ centuryȱ asȱ well,ȱ everythingȱ centresȱ onȱ theȱ positionȱ of Christȱ inȱ theȱ worldȱ ofȱ theȱ religions,ȱ ofȱ whichȱ Hinduism,ȱ quite obviously,ȱisȱparadigmatic.ȱM.M.ȱThomasȱandȱStanleyȱSamartha inȱparticularȱhaveȱmadeȱimportantȱcontributionsȱtoȱtheȱdevelopȬ mentȱofȱanȱIndianȱChristologyȱandȱalsoȱpointȱtoȱtheȱpresenceȱof Christȱ inȱ Hinduism.ȱ Butȱ otherȱ thanȱ inȱ Panikkar,ȱ theyȱ areȱ not concernedȱ withȱ anȱ ontological,ȱ suprahistoricalȱ reality.ȱ Thomas seesȱ theȱ activityȱ ofȱ Christȱ inȱ theȱ developmentȱ ofȱ Hinduismȱ in theȱ colonialȱ period:ȱ theȱ effectȱ ofȱ theȱ Gospelȱ canȱ beȱ seenȱ inȱ the activityȱofȱtheȱHinduȱreformers.ȱChristȱisȱactivelyȱpresentȱinȱInȬ dia’sȱreligion.ȱSamarthaȱalsoȱsearchesȱforȱtheȱrelevanceȱofȱChrist forȱ Hindus.ȱ Fromȱ aȱ strongȱ preferenceȱ forȱ theȱ monisticȱ advaita, heȱoutlinesȱtheȱcosmicȱChristȱasȱtheȱallȬencompassingȱfigureȱin whomȱallȱofȱhumanityȱisȱincluded.ȱSuchȱanȱapproachȱallowsȱno roomȱforȱrivallingȱreligiousȱschools:ȱHinduismȱandȱChristianity belongȱ togetherȱ inȱ Christ.ȱ Later,ȱ however,ȱ Samarthaȱ reconsidȬ

POSTSCRIPT

265

eredȱtheȱviewȱofȱtheȱcosmicȱChristȱwhoȱlinksȱreligionsȱtogether; ultimately,ȱ heȱ sawȱ thisȱ asȱ tooȱ muchȱ ofȱ anȱ exclusiveȱ claimȱ to truthȱ onȱ theȱ partȱ ofȱ Christians.ȱ Whatȱ remainsȱ isȱ theȱ collective orientationȱ ofȱ Hindusȱ andȱ Christiansȱ toȱ God,ȱ wherebyȱ Christ hasȱaȱnormativeȱmeaningȱonlyȱforȱChristians. Inȱ theȱ 1980sȱ itȱ seemedȱ thatȱ aȱ certainȱ consensusȱ hadȱ deȬ velopedȱ regardingȱ Christologyȱ inȱ India.ȱ Theȱ imageȱ ofȱ theȱ cosȬ micȱChristȱwasȱtheȱmostȱsuitableȱforȱinspiringȱbothȱHindusȱand Christians.ȱ Inculturationȱ hadȱ ledȱ toȱ aȱ veryȱ elevatedȱ Christȱ figȬ ure:ȱasȱanȱavataraȱorȱasȱaȱpersonalȱaspectȱofȱtheȱBrahman,ȱChrist hadȱ foundȱ hisȱ placeȱ inȱ India.ȱ Itȱ seemedȱ thatȱ allȱ thatȱ couldȱ be saidȱaboutȱChristȱhadȱbeenȱsaid. Classicȱ brahmanȱ thinkingȱ wasȱ continuallyȱ viewedȱ asȱ the obviousȱsourceȱforȱprovidingȱtheȱframeworkȱforȱChristology.ȱIn theȱ 1980sȱ thisȱ obviousnessȱ andȱ theȱ leadingȱ theologyȱ changed radicallyȱ inȱ formȱ withinȱ aȱ shortȱ time.ȱ Theȱ churchesȱ inȱ India increasinglyȱfeltȱtheȱneedȱtoȱjoinȱtheȱmajorityȱofȱtheȱpopulation thatȱwasȱoutsideȱtheȱbrahmanȱculture,ȱandȱinȱparticularȱtheȱlowȬ estȱlayerȱinȱtheȱcasteȱsocietyȱ–ȱtheȱdalits.ȱWithȱtheȱriseȱofȱaȱnew selfȬconsciousnessȱ amongȱ theȱ dalits,ȱ Christianȱ orȱ not,ȱ aȱ new theologicalȱviewȱofȱChristȱalsoȱdeveloped. TheȱnewȱimageȱofȱJesusȱstoodȱdiametricallyȱopposedȱtoȱthe highlyȱelevatedȱ“cosmicȱChrist.”ȱHeȱwasȱtheȱcompanionȱofȱthe poorȱandȱoppressed,ȱtheȱrevolutionaryȱwhoȱbrokeȱthroughȱȱsoȬ cialȱboundaries.ȱGreatȱinterestȱinȱtheȱhistoricalȱJesus,ȱtheȱ“earthȬ lyȱJesus,”ȱcanȱbeȱobservedȱamongȱtheȱnewȱdalitȱtheologians.ȱHis attitudeȱ towardȱ Jewishȱ purificationȱ ritualsȱ andȱ hisȱ association withȱSamaritansȱandȱotherȱvictimsȱofȱdiscriminationȱacquiredȱa normativeȱ meaning.ȱ Heȱ isȱ stillȱ aȱ guru,ȱ butȱ heȱ isȱ nowȱ oneȱ who teachesȱpeopleȱreformȱandȱchange.ȱSuchȱaȱJesusȱfindsȱhisȱplace inȱIndiaȱnotȱinȱtheȱholyȱtemplesȱbutȱinȱtheȱhutsȱofȱtheȱpoor.ȱAnd theȱmostȱrecentȱdevelopmentȱofȱadivasiȱtheologyȱaddsȱtoȱthis:ȱhe isȱatȱhomeȱinȱtheȱvillages,ȱatȱoneȱwithȱtheȱpeopleȱinȱtheirȱjoyȱand inȱtheirȱsuffering. Academicȱ theologyȱ andȱ ecclesiasticalȱ policyȱ noȱ longerȱ set theȱ toneȱ forȱ everything.ȱ Forȱ manyȱ people,ȱ bothȱ Hinduȱ and Christian,ȱ Christȱ willȱ alwaysȱ haveȱ theȱ characteristicsȱ ofȱ theȱ diȬ vineȱ onȱ earth,ȱ theȱ avatara,ȱ or,ȱ atȱ anyȱ rate,ȱ theȱ classicȱ guru,ȱ the masterȱofȱwisdomȱandȱmysticism.ȱWeȱfindȱexpressionsȱofȱthisȱin visualȱart.ȱ Paintersȱportrayȱ himȱ accordingȱtoȱ Hinduȱ iconology.

JESUSȱASȱGURU

266

Asȱ aȱ child,ȱ heȱ resemblesȱ theȱ playfulȱ Krishnaȱ and,ȱ asȱ aȱ teacher, heȱdoesȱnotȱdifferȱ muchȱ fromȱtheȱ averageȱ wanderingȱguru.ȱ At timesȱheȱisȱgivenȱtheȱelevatedȱcharacteristicsȱofȱBuddhaȱandȱas theȱ Risenȱ Lordȱ heȱ isȱ aȱ deityȱ amongȱ theȱ gods.ȱ Inȱ anyȱ event, ChristȱisȱatȱhomeȱinȱtheȱpantheonȱofȱIndia. Thisȱisȱparticularlyȱstrikingȱinȱpopularȱculture.ȱInȱtheȱvery popularȱpostersȱandȱcalendarȱpicturesȱsoldȱinȱbazaarsȱandȱatȱthe temples,ȱ weȱ invariablyȱ findȱ illustrationsȱ ofȱ Christȱ nextȱ toȱ the usualȱ printsȱ ofȱ Ramaȱ andȱ Krishna,ȱ Hanumanȱ andȱ Shiva.ȱ The comicȱbooksȱwithȱstoriesȱfromȱHinduȱmythologyȱareȱespecially lovedȱbyȱchildrenȱinȱIndia,ȱandȱinȱtheȱimmenselyȱpopularȱseries “AmarȱChitraȱKatha,”ȱweȱfind,ȱinȱadditionȱtoȱtheȱcomicȱstories aboutȱtheȱavatarasȱandȱbhaktas,ȱaȱvolumeȱdevotedȱtoȱJesusȱChrist, whichȱjustȱlikeȱtheȱothersȱhasȱundergoneȱmanyȱreprints.6ȱInȱInȬ diaȱthreeȱfeatureȱfilmsȱwereȱalsoȱmadeȱonȱtheȱlifeȱofȱJesus,ȱfolȬ lowingȱtheȱexampleȱofȱtheȱpopularȱpageantȱfilmsȱonȱmythology. Althoughȱtheȱaccentȱinȱtheseȱartisticȱexpressionsȱliesȱonȱthe divinityȱofȱChrist,ȱneverthelessȱinȱtheȱpastȱyearsȱsomeȱinfluence ofȱ theȱ newȱ theologyȱ canȱ beȱ observed.ȱ Jesusȱ isȱ moreȱ oftenȱ typȬ ifiedȱasȱaȱsupporterȱofȱtheȱdalits;ȱweȱalsoȱseeȱhimȱinȱaȱclearȱvilȬ lageȱsituation,ȱsometimesȱevenȱinȱtheȱsettingȱofȱaȱtribalȱculture.7 Norȱ isȱ theȱ latestȱ movieȱ aboutȱ Jesus,ȱ fromȱ 2004,ȱ disconnected fromȱtheȱshiftȱinȱtheȱimageȱofȱJesusȱinȱtheȱnewȱtheologyȱofȱthe dalits.8ȱ Andȱ thusȱ inculturationȱ continues:ȱ newȱ theologicalȱ inȬ sightsȱandȱsocialȱmovementsȱadjustȱtheȱimageȱofȱChristȱinȱIndia. Andȱthis,ȱperhaps,ȱisȱtheȱbestȱproofȱofȱtheȱrelevanceȱofȱChristȱin Indianȱsocietyȱandȱculture.

ȱDrakshathotaȱAruliahȱandȱPratapȱMulick,ȱJesusȱChrist,ȱAmarȱChitȬ raȱ Katha,ȱ Specialȱ Issue,ȱ No.ȱ 3ȱ (Bombay:ȱ Indiaȱ Bookȱ Houseȱ Education Trust,ȱs.a.). 6

ȱInȱtheȱlaterȱworkȱofȱJyotiȱSahiȱandȱSusheilaȱWilliamsȱthereȱisȱa strongerȱorientationȱtowardsȱvillageȱcultureȱ(seeȱintermezzosȱ4ȱandȱ5). TheȱsituationȱofȱtheȱdalitsȱisȱdepictedȱclearlyȱinȱtheȱpaintingsȱbyȱSolomon Raj;ȱseeȱJojannekeȱDekker,ȱSolomonȱRaj,ȱPropheticȱArtistȱinȱIndia:ȱAȱReȬ searchȱonȱDr.ȱP.ȱSolomonȱRaj’sȱArtȱasȱaȱMediumȱofȱInculturationȱofȱtheȱGospel inȱIndiaȱ(Master’sȱThesisȱTheology,ȱUtrechtȱUniversity,ȱ2006). 7

ȱFreekȱL.ȱBakker,ȱ“ShantiȱSandesham:ȱAȱNewȱJesusȱFilmȱProduced inȱIndia.ȱIndianȱChristologyȱinȱPictures,”ȱExchangeȱ36ȱ(2007):ȱ41Ȭ64. 8

POSTSCRIPT

267

JesusȱasȱGuru IndiaȱhasȱcontributedȱaȱgreatȱdealȱtoȱenrichingȱtheȱimageȱofȱJeȬ susȱ Christ.ȱ Theȱ impressiveȱ religiousȱ inheritanceȱ ofȱ Hinduism canȱ serveȱ toȱ illuminateȱ Christȱ inȱ aȱ newȱ way.ȱ Itȱ appearsȱ toȱ be possibleȱtoȱspeakȱofȱwhatȱChristȱmeansȱinȱaȱwayȱdifferentȱfrom theȱ usualȱ wayȱ ofȱ speakingȱ aboutȱ himȱ inȱ theȱ West.ȱ Afterȱ all, Christologyȱ hasȱ notȱ beenȱ anȱ exclusiveȱ Europeanȱ enterpriseȱ for quiteȱ someȱ timeȱ now.ȱ Westernȱ theologiansȱ areȱ stillȱ notȱ always openȱtoȱthis—aȱveryȱdistressingȱexampleȱofȱthisȱcanȱbeȱseenȱin theȱChristologicalȱstudyȱbyȱH.M.ȱKuitertȱinȱ1998.ȱTheȱseriously scaledȬdownȱ imageȱ ofȱ Christȱ thatȱ isȱ introducedȱ hereȱ isȱ based entirelyȱ onȱ Westernȱ secularizedȱ thinking.ȱ Notȱ inappropriately, theȱbook’sȱcoverȱshowsȱaȱmapȱofȱEurope! India’sȱcontributionȱtoȱChristologyȱcouldȱhaveȱextraȱmeanȬ ingȱ forȱ churchȱ andȱ theologyȱ inȱ theȱ West.ȱ Itȱ isȱ inȱ Indiaȱ thatȱ the religionsȱareȱmarkedȱbyȱaȱlongȱhistoryȱinȱwhichȱmysticalȱexperȬ ienceȱandȱphilosophicalȱreflectionȱhasȱbeenȱrichlyȱdeveloped.ȱIt wouldȱcertainlyȱbeȱworthȱitȱtoȱdiscussȱtheȱfigureȱofȱJesusȱChrist fromȱ theȱ perspectiveȱ ofȱ thisȱ extraordinaryȱ background.ȱ Inȱ anȬ tiquity,ȱitȱwasȱGreekȱphilosophyȱthatȱprovidedȱtheȱmaterialȱfor clarifyingȱ theȱ meaningȱ ofȱ Christ,ȱ andȱ Christologyȱ wasȱ further developedȱoverȱtimeȱinȱEuropeȱonȱthisȱfoundation.ȱInȱourȱtime thereȱ has,ȱ onȱ theȱ oneȱ hand,ȱ beenȱ muchȱ moreȱ emphasisȱ onȱ the typicallyȱJewishȱbackgroundȱofȱtheȱGospel,ȱwhereas,ȱonȱtheȱothȬ er,ȱ theȱ Asian,ȱ Africanȱ andȱ Latinȱ Americanȱ cultures,ȱ eachȱ inȱ its ownȱ way,ȱ areȱ givingȱ theirȱ ownȱ contentȱ toȱ theȱ imageȱ ofȱ Christ. Christologyȱ isȱ slowlyȱ becomingȱ somethingȱ thatȱ belongsȱ toȱ the entireȱworld,ȱsomethingȱtoȱwhichȱallȱculturesȱandȱreligionsȱconȬ tribute. Asȱ farȱ asȱ Indiaȱ isȱ concerned,ȱ bothȱ Hindusȱ andȱ Christians participatedȱ inȱ theȱ formationȱ ofȱ anȱ imageȱ ofȱ Christȱ inȱ theȱ conȬ textȱofȱtheirȱownȱculture.ȱTheȱHinduȱcontributionȱmustȱcertainȬ lyȱnotȱbeȱthoughtȱofȱasȱslight.ȱSharpe’sȱassertionȱthatȱ“noȱHindu hasȱ everȱ producedȱ anȱ interpretationȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ thatȱ has everȱappealedȱinȱtheȱslightestȱtoȱChristiansȱinȱtheȱgeographical West”9ȱisȱentirelyȱincorrect.ȱGandhiȱisȱalreadyȱanȱexampleȱtoȱthe contrary:ȱhisȱviewȱofȱJesusȱasȱtheȱ“Princeȱofȱallȱpassiveȱresisters” ȱEricȱJ.ȱSharpe,ȱ“NeoȬHinduȱImagesȱofȱChristianity,”ȱin:ȱA.ȱSharma (ed.),ȱNeoȬHinduȱViewsȱofȱChristianityȱ(Leiden:ȱE.J.ȱBrill,ȱ1988),ȱp.ȱ15. 9

JESUSȱASȱGURU

268

hasȱ hadȱ anȱ astoundingȱ influenceȱ onȱ Christiansȱ inȱ Europeȱ and NorthȱAmerica.ȱMoreover,ȱmanyȱChristianȱtheologiansȱinȱIndia haveȱcontinuedȱtoȱbuildȱonȱtheȱinsightsȱofȱHindusȱonȱJesus. TheȱuniqueȱfeatureȱofȱtheȱIndianȱapproachȱcouldȱbeȱcharacȬ terizedȱbyȱsomeȱtermsȱderivedȱfromȱHinduism.ȱForȱHindusȱand Christiansȱ alike,ȱ Jesusȱ is,ȱ inȱ theȱ firstȱ place,ȱ aȱ guruȱ inȱ theȱ tradiȬ tionȱ ofȱ theȱ Indianȱ teachers.ȱ Noȱ otherȱ conceptȱ inȱ theȱ Hindu worldȱ hasȱ appealedȱ toȱ soȱ manyȱ asȱ aȱ fittingȱ characterizationȱ of Christ.ȱ Theȱ renownedȱ missionaryȱ Robertoȱ deȱ Nobiliȱ usedȱ the termȱguruȱtoȱreferȱtoȱJesusȱalreadyȱinȱtheȱseventeenthȱcentury,10 andȱ soȱ didȱ manyȱ missionariesȱ whoȱ followedȱ hisȱ example.ȱ But HindusȱalsoȱsometimesȱsawȱJesusȱChristȱasȱaȱguruȱinȱlineȱwith theirȱ ownȱ tradition.ȱ Inȱ theȱ earlyȱ nineteenthȱ century,ȱ Raja Rammohanȱ Royȱ urgentlyȱ calledȱ theȱ attentionȱ ofȱ hisȱ fellow countrymenȱtoȱJesusȱChrist’sȱteachings.ȱHeȱpresentedȱJesusȱasȱa guruȱandȱalsoȱemphasizedȱthatȱJesusȱwasȱAsian.ȱTheȱnotionȱthat Jesus’ȱ activitiesȱ asȱ aȱ teacherȱ fitȱ withinȱ theȱ frameworkȱ ofȱ the Easternȱtraditionȱhasȱsinceȱthenȱbecomeȱwidelyȱacceptedȱamong Hindusȱ andȱ alsoȱ amongȱ Christiansȱ inȱ India.ȱ Neufeldtȱ rightly concludes:ȱ “Jesusȱ asȱ Orientalȱ orȱ Hinduȱ inȱ hisȱ teachingȱ isȱ a notionȱthatȱisȱmaintained,ȱifȱnotȱexplicitly,ȱatȱleastȱimplicitly.”11 WhatȱdoesȱitȱnowȱmeanȱifȱpeopleȱinȱIndiaȱcallȱJesusȱaȱguru? Theyȱ payȱ carefulȱ attention,ȱ ofȱ course,ȱ toȱ hisȱ teachings.ȱ Aȱ guru speaksȱ wordsȱ ofȱ wisdom,ȱ inȱ aȱ philosophicalȱ orȱ mysticalȱ sense, orȱ withȱ respectȱ toȱ practicalȱ lifeȱ andȱ deservesȱ toȱ beȱ listenedȱ to. Butȱ thisȱ doesȱ notȱ exhaustȱ theȱ meaningȱ ofȱ theȱ wordȱ guru.ȱ The termȱ alwaysȱ seemsȱ toȱ reflectȱ somethingȱ ofȱ aȱ divineȱ presence. Notȱ onlyȱ doȱ theȱ wordsȱ ofȱ aȱ guruȱ referȱ toȱ God,ȱ butȱ aȱ guruȱ is himselfȱperȱdefinitionȱthroughȱbeingȱaȱguruȱaȱpersonificationȱof theȱdivine.ȱThatȱisȱwhy,ȱaccordingȱtoȱtheȱancientȱwisdomȱbooks, oneȱmustȱpayȱdivineȱhonourȱtoȱaȱguru.ȱAndȱinȱIndiaȱtodayȱthe guruȱisȱstillȱveryȱmuchȱreveredȱbyȱanyoneȱinȱhisȱproximity. 10 ȱBrorȱTiliander,ȱChristianȱandȱHinduȱTerminology:ȱAȱStudyȱinȱTheir MutualȱRelationsȱwithȱSpecialȱReferenceȱtoȱtheȱTamilȱArea,ȱSkrifterȱutgivna avȱReligionshistoriskaȱȱInstitutionenȱiȱUppsalaȱ(FacultyȱofȱHumanities), 12ȱ(Uppsala:ȱAlmqvistȱ&ȱWiksell,ȱ1974),ȱp.ȱ107.

ȱRonaldȱNeufeldt,ȱ“HinduȱViewsȱofȱChrist,”ȱin:ȱH.ȱCowardȱ(ed.), HinduȬChristianȱDialogue:ȱPerspectivesȱandȱEncountersȱ(Maryknoll:ȱOrbis Books,ȱ1990)ȱ,ȱp.ȱ173. 11

POSTSCRIPT

269

Thus,ȱ aȱ guruȱ isȱ moreȱ thanȱ aȱ teacherȱ inȱ theȱ usualȱ senseȱ of theȱword.ȱHeȱnotȱonlyȱpassesȱonȱknowledgeȱbutȱembodiesȱthat knowledgeȱ himselfȱ asȱ well.ȱ Doctrineȱ andȱ lifeȱ areȱ linkedȱ very closely.ȱHeȱdoesȱnotȱpresentȱanyȱthesesȱforȱacademicȱdiscussion. Heȱ doesȱ notȱ standȱ alongsideȱ hisȱ studentsȱ inȱ orderȱ toȱ seekȱ out theȱtruthȱwithȱthem.ȱOnȱtheȱcontrary,ȱheȱteachesȱwithȱabsolute authority.ȱHeȱhasȱappropriatedȱtheȱmysticȱinsightȱaboutȱwhich heȱspeaks.ȱAndȱtheȱwayȱinȱwhichȱheȱtravelsȱtheȱpathwayȱofȱlife isȱinȱcompleteȱagreementȱwithȱhisȱmessage.ȱThatȱisȱwhyȱhisȱfolȬ lowersȱ canȱ entrustȱ themselvesȱ toȱ himȱ withoutȱ anyȱ hesitation. Thus,ȱ inȱ Hinduism,ȱ theȱ relationshipȱ betweenȱ aȱ guruȱ andȱ his studentsȱisȱofȱaȱparticularlyȱintenseȱnature.12ȱ Itȱisȱpreciselyȱthis specialȱrelationshipȱthatȱmakesȱtheȱconceptȱofȱ“guru”ȱusefulȱin Christology,ȱasȱThomasȱ Thangarajȱ arguedȱextensively.ȱ Starting withȱ theȱ traditionȱ ofȱ theȱ Shaivaȱ Siddhantaȱ heȱ showsȱ howȱ the guruȱ representedȱ Godȱ inȱ theȱ eyesȱ ofȱ theȱ student.ȱ Inȱ thatȱ way ChristȱcouldȱalsoȱbeȱpresentedȱasȱtheȱoneȱwhoȱrepresentedȱGod toȱhisȱdisciples:ȱ“Heȱisȱaȱhumanȱbeing;ȱyetȱtheȱdisciplesȱseeȱhim functioningȱasȱGodȱtoȱthemȱinȱwhatȱheȱdoesȱandȱteaches.”13 Inȱ orderȱ toȱ indicateȱ theȱ guru’sȱ specialȱ importance,ȱ heȱ is givenȱtheȱhighestȱofȱtitles.ȱItȱisȱusualȱtoȱreferȱtoȱhimȱbyȱtheȱterm gurudeva,ȱ divineȱ guru.ȱ Whenȱ Hindusȱ andȱ Christiansȱ wantȱ to stressȱ theȱ greatȱ significanceȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ asȱ guru,ȱ theyȱ also useȱthisȱtypeȱofȱterminology.ȱRobertoȱdeȱNobiliȱcalledȱJesusȱthe sadguru,ȱ thatȱ is:ȱ theȱ trueȱ teacher.ȱ Itȱ isȱ anȱ exaltedȱ designation: someȱbhaktiȱschoolsȱuseȱthisȱwordȱtoȱaddressȱtheȱoneȱGod.14ȱJack Winslow,ȱ theȱ founderȱ ofȱ theȱ Christianȱ ashramȱ inȱ Pune,ȱ preȬ ferredȱ toȱ useȱ theȱ termȱ jagadguru,ȱ worldȱ teacher,ȱ forȱ Jesus.ȱ This titleȱisȱusedȱforȱtheȱmostȱinfluentialȱteachersȱinȱHinduism;ȱwhen usedȱofȱJesus,ȱitȱstressesȱhisȱglobalȱimportance.ȱSuchȱtermsȱemȬ phasizeȱwhatȱbelongsȱinextricablyȱtoȱaȱguru:ȱthatȱheȱisȱaȱdivine figureȱandȱisȱthereforeȱcompletelyȱtrustworthy. ȱSeeȱRichardȱLannoy,ȱTheȱSpeakingȱTree:ȱAȱStudyȱofȱIndianȱCulture andȱSocietyȱ(London:ȱOxfordȱUniversityȱPress,ȱ1971),ȱpp.ȱ346Ȭ54. 12

ȱM.ȱThomasȱThangaraj,ȱTheȱCrucifiedȱGuru:ȱAnȱExperimentȱinȱCrossȬ CulturalȱChristologyȱ(Nashville:ȱAbingdonȱPress,ȱ1994),ȱp.ȱ94. 13

ȱInȱKabir,ȱforȱexample;ȱseeȱJanȱPeterȱSchouten,ȱGoddelijkeȱvergeȬ zichten:ȱMystiekȱuitȱIndiaȱvoorȱwesterseȱlezersȱ(Baarn:ȱTenȱHave,ȱ1996),ȱpp. 107Ȭ11. 14

JESUSȱASȱGURU

270

Butȱ opinionsȱ canȱ easilyȱ differȱ asȱ toȱ whatȱ theȱ mostȱ imporȬ tantȱ aspectȱ ofȱ theȱ teachingȱ isȱ thatȱ suchȱ aȱ teacherȱ gives.ȱ Thisȱ is alsoȱtheȱcaseȱwithȱtheȱguruȱJesus.ȱForȱGandhi,ȱallȱemphasisȱlay onȱ theȱ Sermonȱ onȱ theȱ Mount.ȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ taughtȱ peopleȱ to standȱupȱforȱtruthȱandȱjusticeȱinȱaȱcompletelyȱnonȬviolentȱway. Inȱ contrast,ȱ forȱ Shriȱ Ramakrishna,ȱ theȱ importanceȱ ofȱ Jesus’ teachingȱlayȱinȱtheȱareaȱofȱmysticism:ȱheȱtaughtȱtheȱpeopleȱhow toȱachieveȱunityȱwithȱGod.ȱButȱforȱboth,ȱtheȱmostȱconvincingȱasȬ pectȱofȱJesusȱasȱguruȱwasȱthatȱheȱpractisedȱwhatȱheȱpreached. ChristiansȱinȱIndiaȱhaveȱalsoȱdemonstratedȱextremelyȱvaryȬ ingȱemphasesȱconcerningȱJesus’ȱteachings.ȱForȱNehemiahȱGoreh andȱPanditaȱRamabaiȱtheȱmessageȱofȱreconciliationȱandȱeternal salvationȱwasȱmostȱimportant.ȱButȱforȱdalitȱtheologians,ȱitȱisȱthe socialȱ emancipationȱ andȱ liberationȱ fromȱ oppression.ȱ NonetheȬ less,ȱitȱobtainsȱforȱallȱthatȱJesusȱwasȱaȱguruȱbecauseȱheȱpractised whatȱheȱpreached.ȱHeȱwasȱwhatȱheȱsaidȱothersȱshouldȱbe. ItȱisȱstrikingȱthatȱitȱisȱJesusȱChrist’sȱteachingȱthatȱprovedȱinȬ spiringȱtoȱsoȱmanyȱpeople,ȱhoweverȱdifferentȱtheirȱbackgrounds andȱtheȱdirectionsȱtheyȱfollowedȱwere.ȱWithinȱtheȱbroaderȱconȬ textȱofȱinterreligiousȱdialogueȱasȱwell,ȱitȱcanȱbeȱstatedȱthatȱitȱis Jesus’sȱroleȱasȱteacherȱthatȱevokesȱrecognitionȱamongȱadherents ofȱ veryȱ differentȱ religiousȱ schools.ȱ Howeverȱ differentȱ opinions mayȱ beȱ withȱ regardȱ toȱ hisȱ divineȱ originȱ orȱ theȱ meaningȱ ofȱ his suffering,ȱmanyȱstillȱwantȱtoȱheedȱhisȱinstruction.15 WhenȱJesusȱisȱcalledȱaȱguru,ȱwhatȱheȱsaidȱtoȱhisȱfollowers andȱtheȱpeopleȱareȱprimary.ȱButȱdirectlyȱconnectedȱtoȱthatȱisȱhis wayȱ ofȱ lifeȱ andȱ hisȱ associationȱ withȱ Godȱ andȱ people.ȱ Inȱ that wayȱhisȱvoiceȱcarriesȱdivineȱauthority.ȱTheȱconceptȱofȱguru,ȱorȬ iginallyȱHindu,ȱisȱoutstandinglyȱsuitedȱtoȱilluminatingȱtheseȱasȬ pectsȱofȱtheȱimageȱofȱChrist. TheȱGuruȱasȱReformer Gurusȱcanȱhaveȱveryȱdifferentȱpositionsȱinȱ Hinduȱcultureȱwith respectȱtoȱsocialȱissues.ȱThereȱareȱgurusȱwhoȱareȱsolelyȱinterestȬ edȱ inȱ personalȱ spiritualȱ growthȱ andȱ mysticalȱ experience:ȱ they avoidȱsocialȱquestionsȱand,ȱconsequently,ȱinȱaȱcertainȱsenseȱtend ȱSeeȱalso:ȱJanȱPeterȱSchouten,ȱWieȱzeggenȱdeȱmensenȱdatȱIkȱben?ȱJezus Christusȱinȱdeȱdialoog,ȱOecumenischeȱbezinningȱ27ȱ(Amersfoort:ȱRaadȱvan KerkenȱinȱNederland,ȱ2004),ȱpp.ȱ8Ȭ10. 15

POSTSCRIPT

271

toȱpreserveȱtheȱstatusȱquo.ȱThereȱareȱalsoȱgurusȱwhoȱexplicitly emphasizeȱtheȱclassicȱvaluesȱofȱHinduȱcultureȱand,ȱforȱexample, defendȱtheȱunequalȱpositionȱofȱpeopleȱwithinȱtheȱcasteȱsystem. Butȱtheȱoppositeȱalsoȱoccurs. Inȱ theȱ bhaktiȱ movementsȱ inȱ particularȱ weȱ findȱ gurusȱ who introduceȱalternativeȱsocialȱethics.ȱInȱmanyȱofȱtheseȱmovements theȱtraditionalȱbrahmanȱpriestlyȱcultȱisȱrelativized.ȱItȱisȱnotȱthe properȱsacrificesȱandȱobservanceȱofȱcasteȱrulesȱthatȱbringȱanȱinȬ dividualȱfurtherȱspirituallyȱbutȱratherȱone’sȱpersonalȱlovingȱdeȬ votionȱ toȱ God.ȱ Ifȱ thisȱ religiousȱ attitudeȱ isȱ prominent,ȱ itȱ canȱ no longerȱbeȱmeaningfulȱtoȱmakeȱaȱdistinctionȱbetweenȱpeopleȱon theȱbasisȱofȱbirth.ȱInȱanyȱcase,ȱforȱtheȱbhaktasȱthemselvesȱtheȱdifȬ ferencesȱinȱstatusȱnoȱlongerȱapply,ȱforȱtheseȱdevoteesȱshareȱthe intenseȱ venerationȱ ofȱ theȱ sameȱ divinityȱ and,ȱ becauseȱ ofȱ that, feelȱconnectedȱwithȱoneȱanotherȱacrossȱtraditionalȱboundaries.16 Theȱ gurusȱ inȱ theseȱ movementsȱ thusȱ alsoȱ regularlyȱ defend farȬreachingȱ reformsȱ inȱ society.ȱ Itȱ canȱ beȱ theȱ questionȱ ofȱ an equalȱ positionȱ forȱ menȱ andȱ women,ȱ theȱ abolitionȱ orȱ atȱ leastȱ a strongȱ qualificationȱ ofȱ theȱ casteȱ hierarchy,ȱ socialȱ andȱ religious rightsȱ forȱ theȱ soȬcalledȱ untouchablesȱ andȱ such.ȱ Thereȱ areȱ reȬ markableȱexamplesȱofȱsuchȱemancipatoryȱmovementsȱfromȱthe farȱ past,ȱ suchȱ asȱ thatȱ ofȱ Basavaȱ (12thȱ century)ȱ orȱ theȱ circlesȱ inȬ spiredȱbyȱKabirȱ(15thȱcentury).ȱButȱinȱmodernȱHinduismȱasȱwell theȱcallȱtoȱlovingȱdevotionȱisȱoftenȱjoinedȱwithȱtheȱresistanceȱto theȱrigidȱpreservationȱofȱtraditionalȱsocialȱinequality. ItȱwasȱthusȱnotȱatȱallȱsurprisingȱtoȱHindusȱasȱsuchȱthatȱJeȬ sus’ȱpreachingȱalsoȱhadȱsocialȱimplications.ȱTheȱradicalityȱofȱthe moralityȱinȱtheȱGospelȱdidȱoftenȱhaveȱaȱshockȱeffect.ȱThisȱguru seemedȱ toȱ wantȱ toȱ breakȱ throughȱ allȱ socialȱ boundaries.ȱ Inȱ the closedȱ Hinduȱ societyȱ ofȱ theȱ earlyȱ nineteenthȱ centuryȱ inȱ particȬ ular,ȱcertainȱaspectsȱofȱJesus’ȱpreachingȱwereȱexperiencedȱasȱbeȬ ingȱ veryȱ extreme—theȱ viewȱ thatȱ allȱ peopleȱ wereȱ equalȱ before Godȱwasȱgoingȱquiteȱfar. Nevertheless,ȱ Christianȱ missionariesȱ inȱ generalȱ didȱ not toneȱ downȱ theȱ radicalȱ natureȱ ofȱ theȱ Gospel,ȱ andȱ Hinduȱ reȬ formersȱ couldȱ takeȱ advantageȱ ofȱ this.ȱ Thusȱ Rammohanȱ Roy couldȱbecomeȱtheȱallyȱofȱtheȱBaptistȱmissionariesȱinȱtheȱprotests ȱForȱtheȱbhaktiȱmovementsȱseeȱJanȱPeterȱSchouten,ȱBhakti:ȱSpirituȬ aliteitȱinȱhetȱhindoeïsme,ȱWegwijsȱ(Kampen:ȱKok,ȱ2005)ȱandȱSchouten,ȱGodȬ delijkeȱvergezichten. 16

272

JESUSȱASȱGURU

againstȱ theȱ burningȱ ofȱ widows,ȱ andȱ aȱ centuryȱ laterȱ Mahatma GandhiȱwouldȱbeȱinspiredȱbyȱtheȱnonȬviolenceȱheȱfoundȱinȱthe SermonȱonȱtheȱMount.ȱ ChristianȱtheologiansȱinȱIndiaȱasȱwell,ȱforȱwhomȱotherȱasȬ pectsȱofȱtheȱproclamationȱwereȱmoreȱcentral,ȱfeltȱaddressedȱby theȱ socialȱ idealsȱ ofȱ theȱ Gospel.ȱ Forȱ Nehemiahȱ Gorehȱ andȱ PanȬ ditaȱ Ramabai,ȱ theȱ messageȱ ofȱ redemptionȱ wasȱ primaryȱ inȱ the areaȱ ofȱ spirituality:ȱ eternalȱ blessednessȱ wasȱ attainableȱ through Christ’sȱ sacrificialȱdeath.ȱButȱ bothȱcrossedȱsocialȱboundariesȱ in imitationȱ ofȱ Jesus’ȱ example.ȱ Gorehȱ workedȱ asȱ aȱ brahmanȱ aȬ mongȱ theȱ untouchablesȱ andȱ Ramabaiȱ foughtȱ forcefullyȱ against theȱdiscriminationȱagainstȱwidows.ȱ Weȱalsoȱseeȱaȱcombinationȱofȱreligiousȱandȱsocialȱidealsȱin theȱfirstȱphaseȱofȱtheȱashramȱmovement.ȱThatȱJesusȱChristȱwasȱa guruȱinȱtheȱProtestantȱashramsȱdidȱnotȱmeanȱonlyȱlovingȱdevoȬ tionȱ toȱ himȱ inȱ theȱ spiritualityȱ ofȱ theȱ lifeȱ ofȱ theȱ community.ȱ It alsoȱmovedȱtheȱmembersȱofȱtheȱashramȱtoȱactiveȱserviceȱforȱthe sickȱandȱvulnerableȱinȱsociety.ȱ Finally,ȱofȱcourse,ȱinȱtheȱmoreȱrecentȱdalitȱtheology,ȱtheȱimȬ ageȱofȱJesusȱasȱtheȱsocialȱreformerȱwasȱgivenȱcompleteȱemphaȬ sis.ȱ Inȱ theȱ Gospelȱ storiesȱ theȱ “untouchables”ȱ sawȱ primarilyȱ JeȬ sus’ȱoverturesȱtoȱtheȱvictimsȱofȱdiscriminationȱofȱthatȱtime:ȱthe Samaritans,ȱtheȱpoorȱandȱoppressed,ȱandȱtheȱlepers.ȱȱIfȱJesusȱisȱa guruȱforȱdalits,ȱthen,ȱasȱguru,ȱheȱmustȱfirstȱbeȱaȱreformer.ȱThat JesusȱChristȱisȱgivenȱaȱcentralȱmeaningȱforȱpeopleȱinȱthisȱwayȱis valuableȱnotȱonlyȱinȱtheȱIndianȱcontext—itȱcouldȱalsoȱopenȱthe eyesȱ ofȱ Westernȱ Christiansȱ toȱ theȱ greatȱ transformativeȱ power thatȱpeopleȱcanȱexperienceȱinȱtheȱGospelȱofȱJesus. JesusȱasȱYogi Hindusȱ andȱ Christiansȱ whoȱ chooseȱ aȱ monasticȱ wayȱ ofȱ lifeȱ are interestedȱ primarilyȱ inȱ certainȱ aspectsȱ ofȱ Jesus’ȱ life.ȱ Theyȱ feel calledȱinȱparticularȱbyȱJesus’ȱpathȱofȱspiritualȱdevelopment.ȱThe storiesȱthatȱtellȱhowȱJesusȱwithdrewȱforȱreflectionȱandȱprayerȱin theȱ desertȱ orȱ mountainsȱ isȱ givenȱ specialȱ significanceȱ byȱ them. AndȱeverythingȱthatȱrefersȱtoȱtheȱmysticalȱunityȱbetweenȱJesus andȱhisȱheavenlyȱfatherȱisȱprimaryȱforȱthem.ȱ ItȱisȱremarkableȱthatȱthisȱobtainsȱbothȱforȱHinduȱmonksȱas wellȱasȱforȱmembersȱofȱChristianȱashrams.ȱSwamiȱVivekananda expressedȱ noȱ reservationȱ inȱ presentingȱ Jesusȱ asȱ aȱ sannyasi,ȱ an

POSTSCRIPT

273

asceticȱ whoȱ withdrewȱ fromȱ theȱ worldȱ inȱ orderȱ toȱ achieveȱ the highestȱunityȱwithȱGod.ȱButȱalsoȱJesudason,ȱtheȱfounderȱofȱthe firstȱ Protestantȱ ashram,ȱ seesȱ Jesusȱ asȱ aȱ sadhuȱ whoȱ deliberately choosesȱ againstȱ havingȱ aȱ normalȱ familyȱ lifeȱ inȱ society.ȱ Andȱ he citesȱ theȱ sameȱ textȱ thatȱ wasȱ decisiveȱ forȱ Vivekanandaȱ inȱ this context:ȱ “[T]heȱ Sonȱ ofȱ Manȱ hasȱ nowhereȱ toȱ layȱ hisȱ head” (Matthewȱ 8:20).ȱ Romanȱ Catholicȱ monksȱ likeȱ Julesȱ Monchanin andȱHenriȱleȱSauxȱelaborateȱonȱthisȱideaȱinȱanȱevenȱmoreȱradical way.ȱTheyȱholdȱthatȱtheȱHinduȱsannyasiȱisȱtheȱmostȱappropriate figureȱ withȱ whomȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ canȱ beȱ comparedȱ inȱ theȱ Indian context.ȱTheyȱseeȱhisȱpathȱasȱtheȱmostȱabsoluteȱformȱofȱrenunciȬ ationȱofȱtheȱworld. Itȱisȱcertainlyȱvaluableȱtoȱhaveȱanȱeyeȱforȱtheȱwayȱinȱwhich Jesusȱrelatedȱtoȱsociety.ȱAsȱanȱitinerantȱteacher,ȱheȱdidȱnotȱallow himselfȱ toȱ beȱ encapsulatedȱ inȱ anyȱ particularȱ groupȱ butȱ keptȱ a criticalȱ distanceȱ fromȱ society.ȱ Inȱ thatȱ respect,ȱ heȱ canȱ indeedȱ be comparedȱwithȱanȱitinerantȱsadhuȱinȱHinduȱIndia.ȱSomeȱqualifiȬ cationȱ isȱ neededȱ here,ȱ however.ȱ Theȱ reasoningȱ isȱ notȱ validȱ on theȱ pointȱ ofȱ asceticismȱ andȱ worldȱ renunciation.ȱ Inȱ theȱ gospels theȱmostȱprominentȱexampleȱofȱanȱasceticȱisȱnotȱJesusȱbutȱJohn theȱ Baptist,ȱ ofȱ whomȱ itȱ isȱ saidȱ thatȱ “heȱ didȱ notȱ eatȱ breadȱ or drinkȱ anyȱ wine,”ȱ whereasȱ itȱ wasȱ saidȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ preciselyȱ that “theȱSonȱofȱManȱhasȱcome,ȱeatingȱandȱdrinking”(Lukeȱ7:33Ȭ34).ȱ Theȱ comparisonȱ betweenȱ Jesusȱ andȱ theȱ Hinduȱ sadhuȱ is strongerȱ inȱ anotherȱ respect.ȱ Viaȱ thisȱ comparison,ȱ Hindusȱ and Christiansȱ oftenȱ wantȱ toȱ directȱ attentionȱ toȱ Jesus’ȱ spirituality. Heȱisȱthusȱpresentedȱasȱaȱyogi,ȱforȱexample.ȱInȱthisȱcontextȱreferȬ enceȱ isȱ madeȱ toȱ whatȱ hasȱ beenȱ passedȱ onȱ inȱ theȱ gospelsȱ conȬ cerningȱJesus’ȱprayerȱlife.ȱTheȱfactȱthatȱheȱsometimesȱspentȱthe nightȱ inȱ prayerȱ onȱ aȱ mountainȱ remindsȱ theȱ Indianȱ ofȱ theȱ very lengthyȱ meditationȱ exercisesȱ ofȱ aȱ yogi,ȱ alsoȱ oftenȱ doneȱ inȱ a mountainousȱ area.ȱ Andȱ theȱ textsȱ fromȱ theȱ gospelȱ accordingȱ to John,ȱinȱwhichȱJesusȱspeaksȱaboutȱhisȱunityȱwithȱtheȱFather,ȱare mostȱ likelyȱ associatedȱ withȱ aȱ highȱ formȱ ofȱ mysticalȱ transport thatȱaȱyogiȱcanȱexperience.ȱȱ Thus,ȱ alreadyȱ inȱ Shriȱ Ramakrishnaȱ weȱ findȱ theȱ conviction thatȱ Jesusȱ isȱ anȱ expertȱ inȱ yoga—heȱ isȱ aȱ yogaȱ master.ȱ Andȱ sucȬ ceedingȱ generationsȱ ofȱ monksȱ inȱ thisȱ traditionȱ haveȱ repeated this:ȱJesusȱwasȱaȱyogiȱwhoȱascendedȱthroughȱspiritualȱexercises untilȱ heȱ participatedȱ inȱ theȱ highestȱ enlightenment.ȱ Butȱ some

274

JESUSȱASȱGURU

ChristianȱtheologiansȱalsoȱseeȱJesusȱasȱaȱyogi.ȱChakkaraiȱwrites withȱ greatȱ respectȱ andȱ enthusiasmȱ aboutȱ Jesus’ȱ prayerȱ lifeȱ beȬ hindȱ whichȱ heȱ seesȱ theȱ spiritȱ ofȱ aȱ yogi.ȱ Inȱ theȱ Romanȱ Catholic ashramsȱaȱconnectionȱisȱoftenȱmadeȱbetweenȱJesus’ȱspiritualȱlife andȱyoga.ȱHeȱisȱseen,ȱforȱexample,ȱasȱaȱjivanmukta,ȱaȱholyȱman whoȱ hasȱ already,ȱ inȱ hisȱ lifetime,ȱ reachedȱ theȱ highestȱ levelȱ of consciousnessȱthroughȱgreatȱmysticalȱexercises. Justiceȱ isȱ notȱ alwaysȱ carefullyȱ doneȱ toȱ theȱ evidentȱ differȬ encesȱthatȱexistȱbetweenȱprayerȱasȱJesusȱpractisedȱitȱandȱHindu yoga.ȱ Theȱ yogaȱ ofȱ theȱ monisticȱ tradition,ȱ directedȱ asȱ itȱ isȱ toȬ wardsȱtheȱrealizationȱofȱtheȱcompleteȱunityȱbetweenȱtheȱhuman beingȱandȱtheȱAll,ȱcannotȱbeȱplacedȱstraightforwardlyȱonȱaȱpar withȱvaluesȱinȱtheȱGospel,ȱnotȱevenȱwithȱthoseȱinȱJohn’sȱgospel. Nevertheless,ȱthoseȱwhoȱcallȱJesusȱaȱyogiȱdoȱhaveȱaȱpoint:ȱthey directȱattentionȱtoȱsomethingȱthatȱhasȱbeenȱgrosslyȱundervalued inȱ Westernȱ theology,ȱ i.e.ȱ theȱ mysticalȱ connectionȱ thatȱ Jesusȱ exȬ periencedȱ withȱ theȱ Fatherȱ duringȱ hisȱ life.ȱ Butȱ itȱ isȱ inȱ lineȱ with Hinduȱ awarenessȱ toȱ payȱ attentionȱ preciselyȱ toȱ theseȱ aspectsȱ of Jesus’ȱlife.ȱThusȱbiblicalȱstoriesȱandȱstatementsȱbyȱJesusȱareȱseen inȱaȱnewȱlight.ȱInȱtheȱfootstepsȱofȱJesus,ȱsystematicȱandȱintense contactȱwithȱGodȱcanȱreceiveȱallȱattention.ȱ JesusȱasȱAvatara Theȱ characterizationȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ thatȱ speaksȱ theȱ mostȱ toȱ theȱ imȬ aginationȱ is,ȱ withoutȱ aȱ doubt,ȱ avatara.ȱ Thisȱ connectsȱ Jesusȱ toȱ a numberȱofȱveryȱreveredȱdivineȱfiguresȱinȱHinduism.ȱTheȱuseȱof suchȱaȱloadedȱtermȱimmediatelyȱraisesȱtheȱquestionȱasȱtoȱwheȬ therȱthisȱtermȱemphasizesȱJesusȱChrist’sȱuniquenessȱorȱcausesȱit toȱ disappearȱ entirelyȱ inȱ theȱ multiformityȱ ofȱ theȱ Hinduȱ panȬ theon.ȱ Theȱwordȱavataraȱliterallyȱmeansȱ“descent”ȱandȱisȱtheȱfixed termȱforȱanȱappearanceȱofȱaȱdivinityȱinȱhumanȱform.ȱWeȱshould keepȱ inȱ mindȱ thatȱ notȱ allȱ Hindusȱ attachȱ theȱ sameȱ contentȱ and valueȱ toȱ anȱ avatara.ȱ Inȱ theȱ Shivaȱ cult,ȱ theȱ conceptȱ ofȱ avatara playsȱonlyȱaȱsubordinateȱrole.ȱThereȱareȱmythologicalȱstoriesȱin whichȱShivaȱappearsȱinȱhumanȱform,ȱbutȱsuchȱappearancesȱare alwaysȱshortȱandȱfleeting.ȱAnyȱcomparisonȱtoȱJesus’ȱlifeȱisȱless obviousȱhere. Inȱ Vaishnavism,ȱ however,ȱ weȱ doȱ findȱ extensiveȱ mythsȱ on theȱ comingȱ ofȱ Godȱ toȱ earth,ȱ aroundȱ whichȱ anȱ elaborateȱ theoȬ

POSTSCRIPT

275

logyȱ hasȱ evenȱ developed.ȱ Accordingȱ toȱ theȱ mostȱ commonȱ sysȬ tematization,ȱ thereȱ areȱ tenȱ avatarasȱ ofȱ Vishnu.ȱ Theȱ firstȱ fewȱ of theseȱareȱnotȱsuitableȱeitherȱforȱcastingȱlightȱonȱtheȱincarnation inȱJesusȱChrist.ȱTheseȱareȱfancifulȱrepresentationsȱofȱaȱmythical primalȱ time,ȱ inȱ whichȱ Vishnuȱ appearsȱ onȱ earthȱ inȱ theȱ formȱ of, forȱexample,ȱaȱgiantȱturtleȱorȱwildȱboar.ȱButȱamongȱtheȱlaterȱavȬ atarasȱweȱdoȱfindȱtheȱfamousȱfiguresȱwhoȱareȱcentralȱtoȱtheȱreliȬ giousȱexperienceȱofȱmanyȱHindus:ȱRamaȱandȱKrishna.ȱȱ Ifȱ HindusȱandȱIndianȱ Christiansȱ callȱJesusȱ anȱ avatara,ȱthey thenȱusuallyȱassociateȱhimȱwithȱtheseȱtwoȱappearancesȱbyȱVishȬ nu.ȱGautamaȱBuddhaȱcanȱpossiblyȱbeȱaddedȱhere,ȱbecauseȱheȱis alsoȱviewedȱbyȱmostȱVaishnavasȱasȱoneȱofȱVishnu’sȱavataras.ȱFor mostȱHindus,ȱitȱisȱeasyȱtoȱincludeȱJesus.ȱJustȱlikeȱtheȱothers,ȱhe wasȱbornȱofȱanȱordinaryȱhumanȱmother.ȱThereȱareȱstoriesȱabout hisȱ wholeȱ life,ȱ fromȱ hisȱ youthȱ toȱ maturity.ȱ Fromȱ hisȱ workȱ and teachingȱitȱwasȱapparentȱthatȱheȱcameȱtoȱearthȱwithȱaȱmission. Andȱheȱisȱalsoȱrecognizedȱbyȱtheȱpeopleȱasȱaȱdivineȱfigure. Theȱ systemȱ inȱ whichȱ theȱ mythsȱ aboutȱ Vishnu’sȱ avataras haveȱbeenȱworkedȱoutȱtheologicallyȱisȱbasedȱonȱtheȱBhagavadȬ Gita.ȱTheȱkeyȱtextȱis:ȱ“‘Forȱtheȱprotectionȱofȱtheȱgood,ȱforȱtheȱdeȬ structionȱ ofȱ evildoers,ȱ forȱ theȱ settingȱ upȱ ofȱ theȱ lawȱ ofȱ righteȬ ousnessȱIȱcomeȱintoȱbeingȱageȱafterȱage”ȱ(BhagavadȬGitaȱ4:8).17 Itȱ thusȱ concernsȱ aȱ periodicalȱ appearanceȱ ofȱ Godȱ onȱ earth,ȱ and whatȱKrishnaȱsaysȱhereȱobtainsȱforȱallȱavataras:ȱtheȱpurposeȱisȱto fightȱevilȱandȱrestoreȱjusticeȱandȱharmony.ȱTheȱideaȱbehindȱthis isȱtheȱinvolvementȱofȱGodȱwithȱpeople:ȱheȱdescendsȱtoȱearthȱout ofȱmercyȱinȱorderȱtoȱinterveneȱbeforeȱhumankindȱisȱdestroyed.ȱ ManyȱmodernȱHindusȱbelieveȱthatȱJesusȱChristȱwasȱalsoȱan avataraȱofȱthisȱkind,ȱsimilarȱtoȱRamaȱandȱKrishna.ȱInȱtheȱstudies onȱ Christȱ byȱHindus—forȱ exampleȱ byȱ theȱ monksȱAkhilananda andȱPrabhavanandaȱofȱtheȱRamakrishnaȱMission—thisȱhasȱbeen workedȱ outȱ extensively.ȱ Butȱ itȱ isȱ alsoȱ apparentȱ fromȱ popular religiosityȱ howȱ Jesusȱ hasȱ receivedȱ aȱ placeȱ inȱ thisȱ wayȱ inȱ the Hinduȱpantheon:ȱheȱisȱdepictedȱonȱmanyȱbazarȱprintsȱasȱstandȬ ingȱtogetherȱwithȱmanyȱotherȱavataras.ȱȱ Christiansȱsawȱtheȱimportanceȱofȱtheȱavataraȱconceptȱquite early,ȱ whenȱ theyȱ wereȱ attemptingȱ toȱ explainȱ theirȱ religionȱ to Hindus.ȱTheȱseventeenthȬcenturyȱmissionaryȱRobertoȱdeȱNobili ȱR.C.ȱZaehnerȱ(ed.,ȱtransl.),ȱTheȱBhagavadȬGitaȱȱ(London:ȱOxford UniversityȱPress,ȱ1973),ȱp.ȱ184. 17

JESUSȱASȱGURU

276

wasȱtheȱfirstȱtoȱuseȱtheȱtermȱavataraȱtoȱreferȱtoȱChrist.18ȱHisȱopinȬ ionȱ wasȱ that,ȱ althoughȱ thereȱ wereȱ importantȱ differencesȱ from theȱappearancesȱofȱVishnuȱonȱearth,ȱthereȱwasȱsimplyȱnoȱother conceptȱavailableȱinȱHinduismȱforȱreferringȱtoȱChristȱasȱtheȱinȬ carnationȱofȱGod.ȱThisȱambivalentȱattitudeȱisȱalsoȱfoundȱinȱlater Christianȱtheologians.ȱTheȱwordȱavataraȱpresentsȱitselfȱasȱaȱterm forȱ describingȱ Christȱ inȱ relationȱ toȱ Godȱ butȱ alsoȱ includesȱ its ownȱcontent,ȱwhichȱisȱnotȱalwaysȱseenȱasȱsuitable. EvenȱaȱveryȱorthodoxȱtheologianȱlikeȱNehemiahȱGorehȱsaw anȱ overlappingȱ ofȱ theȱ avataraȱ conceptȱ withȱ theȱ Christianȱ docȬ trineȱofȱtheȱincarnation.ȱHeȱwasȱshockedȱbyȱtheȱeroticȱscenesȱin Krishna’sȱ life,ȱ butȱ theȱ fundamentalȱ ideaȱ thatȱ Vishnuȱ relinȬ quishedȱhisȱgloryȱinȱorderȱtoȱsaveȱpeopleȱseemedȱtoȱhimȱtoȱbeȱin completeȱ agreementȱ withȱ Christianȱ theology.ȱ Chakkaraiȱ even madeȱ theȱ avataraȱ conceptȱ centralȱ toȱ hisȱ Christology.ȱ Butȱ the god’sȱ periodicalȱ appearanceȱ onȱ earthȱ inȱ theȱ theologicalȱ system ofȱ theȱ Vaishnavasȱ remainedȱ aȱ stumblingȱ block.ȱ Forȱ Christian theologians,ȱthisȱisȱatȱoddsȱwithȱtheȱnotionȱofȱtheȱuniquenessȱof Christ.ȱ Theȱ solutionȱ isȱ toȱ callȱ Christȱ theȱ onlyȱ avataraȱ (AppaȬ samy),ȱ theȱ abidingȱ avataraȱ (Chakkarai)ȱ orȱ theȱ historicalȱ avatara (Griffiths).ȱOnlyȱSamarthaȱhadȱnoȱdifficultyȱwithȱtheȱtermȱinȱhis lastȱ periodȱ ofȱ theologizing:ȱ Christȱ wasȱ givenȱ aȱ placeȱ asȱ oneȱ of theȱ avataras,ȱ inȱ whichȱ caseȱ allȱ claimsȱ toȱ universalȱ truthȱ are dropped.ȱ Butȱ whatȱ allȱ thoseȱ whoȱ callȱ Jesusȱ anȱ avataraȱ haveȱ inȱ comȬ monȱisȱaȱrenewedȱunderstandingȱofȱhisȱdivinity.ȱThisȱisȱalsoȱthe outstandingȱ contributionȱ ofȱ Indianȱ thinkingȱ toȱ Christology. Hinduismȱ isȱ pervadedȱ withȱ respectȱ andȱ surpriseȱ atȱ theȱ divine reality.ȱIfȱJesusȱChristȱisȱdescribedȱbyȱconceptsȱfromȱtheȱHindu world,ȱ thenȱ theȱ divineȱ presenceȱ willȱ alsoȱ beȱ heavilyȱ accented. Thisȱcertainlyȱobtainsȱforȱtheȱconceptȱofȱavatara.ȱWhileȱthereȱhas beenȱaȱquestȱforȱtheȱhistoricalȱJesusȱforȱtheȱlastȱtwoȱcenturiesȱin theȱ West,ȱ inȱ theȱ Indianȱ understandingȱ Jesusȱ isȱ primarilyȱ aȱ diȬ vineȱappearance.ȱ TheȱmythsȱaboutȱRamaȱandȱKrishnaȱgiveȱfurtherȱcontentȱto theȱ appearanceȱ ofȱ theȱ divinity.ȱ Ifȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ isȱ anȱ avatara,ȱ he willȱalsoȱhaveȱsomethingȱinȱcommonȱwithȱtheȱotherȱavataras.ȱIs thereȱ thenȱ somethingȱ inȱ himȱ ofȱ theȱ artisticȱ andȱ theȱ eroticȱ that playsȱsuchȱaȱgreatȱroleȱinȱtheȱcultusȱofȱKrishna?ȱAndȱisȱthereȱalȬ ȱTiliander,ȱChristianȱandȱHinduȱTerminology,ȱpp.ȱ95Ȭ96.

18

POSTSCRIPT

277

soȱ somethingȱ inȱ himȱ toȱ beȱ seenȱ ofȱ theȱ strictȱ feelingȱ forȱ justice andȱtheȱidealȱofȱaȱperfectȱhumanȱsocietyȱasȱcontinuallyȱfoundȱin Rama?ȱTheseȱquestionsȱfromȱanȱIndianȱcontextȱcouldȱbringȱnew emphasesȱ inȱ theȱ Westȱ regardingȱ theȱ imageȱ ofȱ Christ.ȱ And,ȱ on theȱ otherȱ hand,ȱ Christiansȱ inȱ theȱ Westȱ andȱ Eastȱ willȱ certainly enrichȱ theȱ avataraȱ conceptȱ byȱ continuingȱ toȱ pointȱ toȱ whatȱ is uniqueȱinȱGod’sȱappearanceȱinȱChrist:ȱthatȱheȱevenȱsufferedȱand diedȱforȱtheȱsakeȱofȱhumankind.19 WhenȱJesusȱisȱdescribedȱasȱaȱguru,ȱthenȱitȱisȱhisȱ teachings thatȱ areȱ ofȱ primaryȱ concern;ȱ whenȱ heȱ isȱ describedȱ asȱ avatara, thenȱwhatȱheȱdidȱisȱtheȱfocus.ȱInȱhisȱinvolvementȱwithȱ people, helpingȱ andȱ healingȱ them,ȱ heȱ showsȱ nothingȱ lessȱ thanȱ God’s love.ȱ Orȱ rather:ȱ heȱ isȱ God’sȱ love.ȱ Usingȱ theȱ avataraȱ conceptȱ as theȱbackgroundȱmeansȱfashioningȱanȱimageȱofȱChristȱinȱwhich Godȱ comesȱ asȱ closeȱ asȱ possibleȱ toȱ theȱ humanȱ being.ȱ Thisȱ conȬ ceptȱhasȱrightlyȱreceivedȱaȱfixedȱplaceȱinȱreflectionȱonȱChristȱin India.ȱȱ TheȱCosmicȱChrist Itȱcanȱalwaysȱbeȱlarger.ȱIndianȱcultureȱisȱinclinedȱinȱitsȱmythoȬ logyȱ toȱ makeȱ theȱ largestȱ contextsȱ ofȱ all.ȱ Historyȱ occursȱ very quicklyȱinȱframeworksȱofȱaeonsȱandȱreligiousȱfiguresȱareȱblown upȱ toȱ cosmicȱ proportions.ȱ Thisȱ inclinationȱ isȱ alsoȱ detectableȱ in ChristianȱtheologyȱinȱIndia—andȱpreciselyȱinȱChristologyȱaȱsurȬ prisingȱimageȱarises. Chakkaraiȱ describesȱ Jesusȱ Christȱ as,ȱ amongȱ otherȱ things, theȱprototypeȱofȱtheȱhumanȱbeing:ȱChristȱisȱtheȱmodelȱforȱbeing human.ȱ Inȱ thatȱ contextȱ heȱ usesȱ theȱ oldȱ Vedicȱ terminology,ȱ in whichȱtheȱmythologicalȱPurusha,ȱtheȱprimalȱformȱofȱhumanȱlife, isȱcentral.ȱThus,ȱChristȱcanȱbeȱcanȱbeȱcalledȱtheȱSatȱPurusha,ȱthe trueȱ humanȱ being.ȱ Laterȱ theologiansȱ haveȱ elaboratedȱ onȱ this notion.ȱBedeȱGriffithsȱinȱparticularȱwasȱfascinatedȱbyȱtheȱideaȱof aȱ cosmicȱ primalȱ humanȱ being,ȱ suchȱ asȱ isȱ found—accordingȱ to him—inȱmanyȱcultures.ȱHeȱdoesȱstillȱholdȱtoȱtheȱhistoryȱofȱJesus Christȱ onȱ earth,ȱ butȱ heȱ seesȱ muchȱ moreȱ inȱ Christȱ thanȱ theȱ huȬ manȱbeingȱJesus—heȱseesȱtheȱrepresentativeȱofȱhumankind,ȱthe Humanȱ Being.ȱ Andȱ thisȱ cosmicȱ Humanȱ Beingȱ isȱ thenȱ theȱ perȬ ȱCassianȱR.ȱAgera,ȱ“AȱWoundedȱDivinity:ȱAnȱIndianȱPerspective onȱChrist,”ȱStudiesȱinȱInterreligiousȱDialogueȱ4ȱ(1994):ȱ117Ȭ32. 19

278

JESUSȱASȱGURU

ceptibleȱ sideȱ ofȱ God.ȱ Griffithsȱ linksȱ upȱ hereȱ withȱ theȱ famous hymnȱinȱtheȱletterȱtoȱtheȱColossians,ȱwhereȱitȱisȱsaidȱofȱChrist: Heȱ isȱ theȱ imageȱ ofȱ theȱ invisibleȱ God,ȱ theȱ firstbornȱ overȱ all creation.ȱ Forȱ byȱ himȱ allȱ thingsȱ wereȱ created:ȱ thingsȱ in heavenȱandȱonȱearth,ȱvisibleȱandȱinvisible,ȱwhetherȱthrones orȱpowersȱorȱrulersȱorȱauthorities;ȱallȱthingsȱwereȱcreatedȱby himȱ andȱ forȱ him.ȱ Heȱ isȱ beforeȱ allȱ things,ȱ andȱ inȱ himȱ all thingsȱholdȱtogether.ȱ(Colossiansȱ1:15Ȭ17)ȱȱ

ItȱisȱnotȱsurprisingȱthatȱthisȱimageȱofȱChristȱisȱmadeȱcentralȱpreȬ ciselyȱ byȱ aȱ theologianȱ inȱ theȱ ashramȱ movement.ȱ Theȱ experienȬ tialȱ worldȱ ofȱ theȱ Christianȱ ashrams,ȱ soȱ closelyȱ connectedȱ with theȱ Hinduȱ culture,ȱ requiredȱ veryȱ muchȱ allȬencompassingȱ conȬ ceptionsȱ thatȱ didȱ notȱ excludeȱ otherȱ religions.ȱ Andȱ practising meditationȱ madeȱ themȱ sensitiveȱ toȱ theȱ highestȱ andȱ largestȱ reȬ presentations.ȱ Alreadyȱ inȱ theȱ olderȱ Protestantȱ ashramsȱ people spokeȱ preferablyȱ ofȱ theȱ eternalȱ Christȱ whoȱ revealedȱ himselfȱ in allȱtheȱreligiousȱsearchingȱbyȱpeople.ȱThisȱlineȱwasȱcontinuedȱin theȱ laterȱ Romanȱ Catholicȱ ashrams.ȱ Christȱ becomesȱ aȱ termȱ for theȱsideȱofȱGodȱthatȱisȱturnedȱtowardsȱtheȱearth. Evenȱ theȱ mostȱ comprehensiveȱ conceptsȱ inȱ Hinduismȱ are broughtȱintoȱconnectionȱwithȱChrist.ȱBothȱPanikkarȱandȱSamarȬ thaȱ attemptedȱ toȱ outlineȱ aȱ Christologyȱ withȱ theȱ monisticȱ apȬ proach,ȱ theȱ advaita,ȱ asȱ theirȱ startingȱ point.ȱ Andȱ Henriȱ leȱ Saux alsoȱtriedȱtoȱascribeȱaȱplaceȱtoȱChristȱfromȱthisȱbackground.ȱThe reflectionsȱ onȱ theȱ unityȱ ofȱ allȱ thatȱ existsȱ seemsȱ toȱ leaveȱ little roomȱforȱaȱteachingȱaboutȱChrist.ȱNevertheless,ȱtheyȱall,ȱeachȱin theirȱownȱway,ȱsucceedȱinȱdevelopingȱanȱimageȱofȱChristȱwithin thisȱ framework.ȱ Howeverȱ muchȱ theȱ resultȱ differs,ȱ theȱ starting pointȱ isȱ alwaysȱ thatȱ Christȱ isȱ aȱ wayȱ ofȱ expressingȱ theȱ highest Reality.ȱ Andȱ thusȱ heȱ becomesȱ anȱ allȬencompassingȱ figure,ȱ in whomȱallȱthatȱexistsȱisȱincluded. TheȱimageȱofȱtheȱcosmicȱChristȱgainedȱaȱcertainȱpopularity duringȱtheȱAssemblyȱofȱtheȱWorldȱCouncilȱofȱChurchesȱinȱ1961 inȱNewȱDelhi.ȱButȱtwentyȬfiveȱyearsȱlaterȱaȱmajorȱshiftȱinȱtheoȬ logyȱbeganȱinȱIndia.ȱThroughȱtheȱriseȱofȱdalitȱtheology,ȱattention shiftedȱ toȱ theȱ historicalȱ Jesusȱ andȱ theȱ positionȱ heȱ choseȱ inȱ soȬ ciety.ȱInterestȱinȱconceptionsȱsuchȱasȱtheȱcosmicȱChristȱdied.ȱItȱis certainlyȱnotȱwithoutȱgoodȱreasonȱthatȱtheȱimageȱofȱChristȱthus cameȱ “downȱ toȱ earth”ȱ again.ȱ Nevertheless,ȱ theȱ highȱ concepȬ

POSTSCRIPT

279

tionsȱofȱanȱallȬencompassingȱimageȱofȱChristȱfromȱtheȱprevious periodȱ didȱ raiseȱ questionsȱ thatȱ haveȱ notȱ lostȱ theirȱ relevance. DidȱWesternȱtheologyȱnotȱtooȱeasilyȱcastȱoffȱtheȱcosmicȱviewȱof Christ—whichȱ also,ȱ apparently,ȱ inspiredȱ theȱ firstȱ Christians? Andȱ canȱ theȱ wisdomȱ andȱ spiritualityȱ ofȱ Hinduismȱ alsoȱ not teachȱusȱtoȱthinkȱ“moreȱlargely”ȱaboutȱChrist?

Bibliography A.ȱPrimaryȱSources RammohanȱRoy Theȱ Englishȱ Worksȱ ofȱ Rajaȱ Rammohunȱ Roy.ȱ Ed.ȱ Jogendraȱ Chunder Ghose.ȱ4ȱVols.ȱNewȱDelhi:ȱCosmoȱPublications,ȱ1982. TheȱPreceptsȱofȱJesus:ȱTheȱGuideȱtoȱPeaceȱandȱHappiness.ȱExtractedȱfromȱthe BooksȱofȱtheȱNewȱTestamentȱAscribedȱtoȱtheȱFourȱEvangelists.ȱCalcutȬ ta:ȱBaptistȱMissionȱPress,ȱ1820.ȱAlsoȱin:ȱTheȱEnglishȱWorksȱofȱRaja Rammohunȱ Roy.ȱ Ed.ȱ Jogendraȱ Chunderȱ Ghose.ȱ Newȱ Delhi:ȱ CosȬ moȱPublications,ȱ1982.ȱPp.ȱ481Ȭ543. NehemiahȱGoreh AsȱNilakantha.ȱShastratattvavinirnayaȱ(1844/5).ȱEd.ȱSadashivaȱLakshmiȬ dharaȱKatre.ȱUjjain:ȱScindiaȱOrientalȱInstitute,ȱ1951. AsȱNehemiahȱ(NilakanthaȱShastri)ȱGoreh.ȱAȱMirrorȱofȱtheȱHinduȱPhiloȬ sophicalȱ Systemsȱ [ShadȬdarshanaȬdarpana,ȱ 1860].ȱ Transl.ȱ from HindiȱbyȱFitzȬEdwardȱHall.ȱ3rdȱed.ȱLondon:ȱTheȱChristianȱLiteraȬ tureȱ Societyȱ forȱ India,ȱ 1911.ȱ Wasȱ publishedȱ earlierȱ (1862)ȱ as:ȱ A Rationalȱ Refutationȱ ofȱ theȱ Hinduȱ Philosophicalȱ Systems.ȱ Calcutta: CalcuttaȱChristianȱTractȱSociety;ȱ2ndȱed.ȱ1897.ȱMostȱrecentȱedition: Aȱ Christianȱ Responseȱ toȱ theȱ Hinduȱ Philosophicalȱ Systems.ȱ Ed.ȱ K.P. Aleaz.ȱKolkata:ȱPunthiȱPustak,ȱ2003). Aȱ Letterȱ toȱ theȱ Brahmosȱ Fromȱ aȱ Convertedȱ Brahmanȱ ofȱ Benares.ȱ 2ndȱ ed. Allahabad:ȱNorthȱIndiaȱTractȱSociety,ȱ1868ȱ[1867]. FourȱLecturesȱDeliveredȱinȱSubstanceȱtoȱtheȱBrahmosȱinȱBombayȱandȱPoona, inȱAprilȱandȱJulyȱ1875.ȱBombay:ȱEducationȱSociety’sȱPress,ȱ1875. ProofsȱofȱtheȱDivinityȱofȱOurȱLordȱStatedȱinȱAȱLetterȱtoȱaȱFriend:ȱInȱWhichȱit isȱ alsoȱ Shownȱ thatȱ neitherȱ Brahmoismȱ norȱ Prarthanasamajismȱ canȱ be Acceptedȱ asȱ aȱ Substituteȱ forȱ Christianity.ȱ Bombay:ȱ AngloȬVernacu larȱPress,ȱ1887. Ramabai Panditaȱ Ramabaiȱ Throughȱ Herȱ Ownȱ Words:ȱ Selectedȱ Works.ȱ Ed.ȱ Meera Kosambi.ȱNewȱDelhi:ȱOxfordȱUniversityȱPress,ȱ2000. Aȱ Testimonyȱ ofȱ Ourȱ Inexhaustibleȱ Treasure.ȱ 11thȱ ed.ȱ Kedgaon:ȱ Pandita RamabaiȱMuktiȱMission,ȱ1992ȱ[1907].

281

282

JESUSȱASȱGURU

Sanskritȱ Ode:ȱ Toȱ theȱ Congressȱ atȱ Berlin,ȱ Septemberȱ 1881ȱ byȱ theȱ Lady PanditȱRamabaiȱofȱSilchar,ȱKachar,ȱAssam.ȱWithȱaȱtranslationȱby SirȱMonierȬWilliamsȱ(1881).ȱIn:ȱPadminiȱSengupta.ȱPanditaȱRamaȬ baiȱSaraswati:ȱHerȱLifeȱandȱWork.ȱLondon:ȱAsiaȱPublishingȱHouse, 1970.ȱPp.ȱ340Ȭ47. Theȱ HighȬCasteȱ Hinduȱ Woman.ȱ London:ȱ Georgeȱ Bellȱ andȱ Sons,ȱ 1888 [1887]. RamakrishnaȱMission Gupta,ȱMahendranath.ȱTheȱGospelȱofȱSriȱRamakrishna.ȱTransl.ȱfromȱBenȬ galiȱ byȱ Swamiȱ Nikhilananda.ȱ 8thȱ ed.ȱ Mylapore:ȱ Sriȱ Ramakrishna Math,ȱ1985ȱ[1944]. Akhilananda.ȱHinduȱViewȱofȱChrist.ȱBoston:ȱBrandenȱPress,ȱ1971ȱ[1949]. Vivekananda.ȱ Theȱ Completeȱ Works:ȱ Mayavatiȱ Memorialȱ Edition.ȱ 8ȱ Vols. Calcutta:ȱAdvaitaȱAshrama,ȱ1971Ȭ1976. Ranganathananda.ȱ Theȱ Christȱ Weȱ Adore.ȱ Instituteȱ Bookletsȱ 1.ȱ 4thȱ ed. Calcutta:ȱRamakrishnaȱMissionȱInstituteȱofȱCulture,ȱ1969ȱ[1955]. Prabhavananda.ȱ Theȱ Sermonȱ onȱ theȱ Mountȱ accordingȱ toȱ Vedanta.ȱ New York:ȱNewȱAmericanȱLibrary,ȱ1972ȱ[1963]. ReligionȱinȱPractice.ȱ2ndȱed.ȱHollywood:ȱVedantaȱPress,ȱ1969. Chidbhavananda.ȱHolyȱBibleȱinȱtheȱLightȱofȱVedanta.ȱTiruppararaitturai: SriȱRamakrishnaȱTapovanam,ȱ1975. VengalȱChakkarai Chakkarai,ȱVengal.ȱVengalȱChakkarai.ȱVol.ȱI.ȱEd.ȱP.T.ȱThomas.ȱMadras: TheȱChristianȱLiteratureȱSociety,ȱ1981. M.K.ȱGandhi Myȱ Religion.ȱ Compiledȱ byȱ Bharatanȱ Kumarappa.ȱ 3rdȱ ed.ȱ Ahmedabad: NavajivanȱPublishingȱHouse,ȱ1996ȱ[1955]. Anȱ Autobiographyȱ or:ȱ Theȱ Storyȱ ofȱ Myȱ Experimentsȱ withȱ Truth.ȱ Transl. fromȱ Gujarati.ȱ Ahmedabad:ȱ Navajivanȱ Publishingȱ House,ȱ 1982 [1927]. TheȱCollectedȱWorksȱofȱMahatmaȱGandhi.ȱVol.ȱIȬXC.ȱDelhi:ȱMinistryȱofȱInȬ formationȱandȱBroadcasting,ȱ1958Ȭ1984. SatyagrahaȱinȱSouthȱAfrica.ȱTransl.ȱfromȱGujaratiȱbyȱValjiȱGovindjiȱDeȬ sai.ȱMadras:ȱGanesan,ȱ1928.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

283

AshramȱMovement Abhishiktananda.ȱSaccidananda:ȱAȱChristianȱApproachȱtoȱAdvaiticȱExperiȬ ence.ȱRev.ȱed.ȱDelhi:ȱISPCK,ȱ1984ȱ[ȱ1974]. Abhishiktananda.ȱPrayer.ȱ4thȱrev.ȱed.ȱDelhi:ȱISPCK,ȱ1975. Abhishiktananda.ȱTowardsȱtheȱRenewalȱofȱtheȱIndianȱChurch.ȱBangalore: DharmaramȱCollege,ȱ1970. ChristȱPremȱSevaȱAshram.ȱIndianȱSpiritualityȱinȱAction.ȱBombay:ȱAsian TradingȱCorporation,ȱ1973. Griffiths,ȱ Bede.ȱ Theȱ Marriageȱ ofȱ Eastȱ andȱ West.ȱ Tucson:ȱ Medioȱ Media Publ.,ȱ2003.ȱ[1976] Aȱ Newȱ Visionȱ ofȱ Reality:ȱ Westernȱ Science,ȱ Easternȱ Mysticismȱ and ChristianȱFaith.ȱEd.ȱFelicityȱEdwards.ȱLondon:ȱCollins,ȱ1989. ReturnȱtoȱtheȱCentre.ȱLondon:ȱFount,ȱ1981ȱ[1976] Christianȱ Ashram:ȱ Essaysȱ towardsȱ aȱ HinduȬChristianȱ Dialogue.ȱ LonȬ don:ȱDarton,ȱLongmanȱ&ȱTodd,ȱ1966. TheȱGoldenȱString.ȱLondon:ȱTheȱHarvillȱPress,ȱ1954. (transl.).ȱ Theȱ Bookȱ ofȱ Commonȱ Prayerȱ ofȱ theȱ Syrianȱ Church.ȱ VagaȬ mon:ȱKurisumalaȱAshram,ȱs.a. Jesudason,ȱ Savarirayan.ȱ Uniqueȱ Christȱ andȱ Indigenousȱ Christianity. Indianȱ Christianȱ Thoughtȱ Seriesȱ 4.ȱ Bangalore:ȱ Theȱ Christianȱ InȬ stituteȱforȱtheȱStudyȱofȱReligionȱandȱSociety,ȱ1966. Reminiscencesȱ ofȱ aȱ Pilgrimȱ ofȱ Life:ȱ Anȱ Autobiography.ȱ Rev.ȱ 2ndȱ ed. Vellore:ȱSriȱRamachandraȱPress,ȱ1959. Ashrams,ȱ Ancientȱ andȱ Modern:ȱ Theirȱ Aimsȱ andȱ Ideals.ȱ Vellore:ȱ Sri RamachandraȱPress,ȱ1937. Monchanin,ȱ J.,ȱ andȱ Henriȱ Leȱ Saux.ȱ Ermitesȱ duȱ Saccidânanda:ȱ Unȱ essai d’intégrationȱ chrétienneȱ deȱ laȱ traditionȱ monastiqueȱ deȱ l’Inde.ȱ (Église vivante).ȱ2ndȱed.ȱTournai/Paris:ȱCasterman,ȱ1957. Vandanaȱ (ed.).ȱ Swamiȱ Abhishiktananda:ȱ Theȱ Manȱ andȱ Hisȱ Teaching,ȱ By SomeȱofȱhisȱFriendsȱandȱDisciples.ȱDelhi:ȱISPCK,ȱ1986. Gurus,ȱ Ashramsȱ andȱ Christians.ȱ Madras:ȱ Theȱ Christianȱ Literature Society,ȱ1954. Winslow,ȱ Jackȱ C.ȱ Theȱ Eyelidsȱ ofȱ theȱ Dawn:ȱ Memories,ȱ Reflectionsȱ and Hopes.ȱLondon:ȱHodderȱandȱStoughton,ȱ1954. R.ȱPanikkar Panikkar,ȱRaimundo.ȱTheȱUnknownȱChristȱofȱHinduism:ȱTowardsȱanȱEcuȬ menicalȱ Christophany.ȱ Rev.ȱ ed.ȱ Maryknoll:ȱ Orbisȱ Books,ȱ 1981 [1964].

284

JESUSȱASȱGURU

TheȱVedicȱExperienceȱ(MantramañjarÎ):ȱAnȱAnthologyȱofȱtheȱVedasȱforȱModȬ ernȱManȱandȱContemporaryȱCelebration.ȱDelhi:ȱMotilalȱBanarsidass, 2006ȱ[1977]. ElȱsilencioȱdelȱBuddha:ȱUnaȱintroducciónȱalȱateísmoȱreligioso.ȱMadrid:ȱEdiȬ cionesȱSiruela,1996. M.M.ȱThomas TheȱAcknowledgedȱChristȱofȱtheȱIndianȱRenaissance.ȱLondon:ȱSCMȱPress, 1969. RiskingȱChristȱforȱChrist’sȱSake:ȱTowardsȱanȱEcumenicalȱTheologyȱofȱPluralȬ ism.ȱGeneva:ȱWCCȱPublicationsȱ(Indianȱedition),ȱ1999ȱ[1987]. TheȱChurch’sȱMissionȱandȱPostȬModernȱHumanism:ȱAȱCollectionȱofȱEssays andȱTalks.ȱTiruvalla:ȱCSS,ȱ1996. S.ȱJ.ȱSamartha TheȱHinduȱResponseȱtoȱtheȱUnboundȱChrist.ȱMadras:ȱTheȱChristianȱLiterȬ atureȱSociety,ȱ1974.ȱPublishedȱinȱGermanȱas.:ȱHindusȱvorȱdemȱuniȬ versalenȱ Christus:ȱ Beiträgeȱ zuȱ einerȱ Christologieȱ inȱ Indien.ȱ Stuttgart: EvangelischesȱVerlagswerk,ȱ1970. “Gangaȱ andȱ Galilee:ȱ Twoȱ Responsesȱ toȱ Truth.”ȱ In:ȱ S.J.ȱ Samartha. CourageȱforȱDialogue.ȱGeneva:ȱWCC,ȱ1981.ȱPp.ȱ142Ȭ57. “Dialogueȱ andȱ theȱ Politicizationȱ ofȱ Religionsȱ inȱ India.”ȱ International BulletinȱofȱMissionaryȱResearchȱ8ȱ(1984):ȱ104Ȭ07.ȱAlsoȱpublishedȱin Dutchȱas:ȱ“Deȱdialoogȱenȱdeȱpolitiseringȱvanȱdeȱreligies.”ȱIn:ȱReliȬ giesȱ inȱ nieuwȱ perspectief.ȱ Festschriftȱ D.C.ȱ Mulder.ȱ Kampen:ȱ J.H. Kok.ȱ1985.ȱPp.ȱ18Ȭ28. “OnȱLoveȱandȱTruth.”ȱCurrentȱDialogueȱ8ȱ(Juneȱ1985):ȱ3Ȭ4. “ReligiousȱIdentityȱinȱaȱMultiȬFaithȱSociety.”ȱCurrentȱDialogueȱ13ȱ(DeȬ cemberȱ1987):ȱ4Ȭ10. “AȱHinduȬChristianȱFuneral.”ȱTheologyȱTodayȱXLIVȱ(1988):ȱ480Ȭ83. OneȱChristȱ–ȱManyȱReligions:ȱTowardsȱaȱRevisedȱChristology.ȱFaithȱMeets Faithȱ Series.ȱ 3rdȱ ed.ȱ Maryknoll:ȱ Orbisȱ Books,ȱ 1995;ȱ Chapterȱ 6 (“Christȱ inȱ aȱ Multireligiousȱ Culture”)ȱ alsoȱ publishedȱ as:ȱ “The CrossȱandȱtheȱRainbow.”ȱIn:ȱR.S.ȱSugirtharajahȱ(ed.).ȱAsianȱFaces ofȱJesus.ȱFaithȱandȱCulturesȱSeries.ȱMaryknoll:ȱOrbisȱBooks,ȱ1993. Pp.ȱ104Ȭ23ȱ[1991].

BIBLIOGRAPHY

285

DalitȱTheology Arulraja,ȱ M.R.ȱ Jesusȱ theȱ Dalit:ȱ Liberationȱ Theologyȱ byȱ Victimsȱ ofȱ UnȬ touchability.ȱ Anȱ Indianȱ Versionȱ ofȱ Apartheid.ȱ Ameerpet:ȱ byȱ author, 1996. Athyal,ȱ Jesudasȱ M.ȱ “Newȱ Challengesȱ forȱ Dalitȱ Theology.”ȱ Paperȱ for Internationalȱ Consultationȱ onȱ “Dalitȱ Theologyȱ andȱ Aȱ Theology ofȱ theȱ Oppressed.”ȱ Chennai,ȱ Novemberȱ 2004.ȱ Fromȱ internet: http://jmathyal.tripod.com/. Devasahayam,ȱ V.ȱ (ed.).ȱ Frontiersȱ ofȱ Dalitȱ Theology.ȱ Delhi/Madras: ISPCK/Gurukul,ȱ1997. Madtha,ȱWilliam.ȱ“DalitȱTheology:ȱVoiceȱofȱtheȱOppressed.”ȱJournalȱof DharmaȱXVI/1ȱ(1991):ȱ74Ȭ92. Nirmal,ȱ Arvindȱ P.ȱ Aȱ Readerȱ inȱ Dalitȱ Theology.ȱ Madrasȱ Gurukulȱ LuȬ theranȱTheologicalȱInstituteȱandȱResearchȱInstitute,ȱs.a.ȱ[1991]. B.ȱSecondaryȱSources Agera,ȱ Cassianȱ R.ȱ “Aȱ Woundedȱ Divinity:ȱ Anȱ Indianȱ Perspectiveȱ on Christ.”ȱStudiesȱinȱInterreligiousȱDialogueȱ4/2ȱ(1994):ȱ117Ȭ32. Ali,ȱ Hafizȱ Md.ȱ Tahir.ȱ “Influenceȱ ofȱ Islamȱ andȱ Sufismȱ onȱ Prannath’s Religiousȱ Movement.”ȱ In:ȱ N.N.ȱ Bhattacharyyaȱ (ed.).ȱ Medieval BhaktiȱMovementsȱinȱIndia:ȱSriȱCaitanyaȱQuincentenaryȱCommemȬ orationȱ Volume.ȱ Newȱ Delhi:ȱ Munshiramȱ Manoharlal,ȱ 1989.ȱ Pp. 136Ȭ48. Anandam,ȱLourdu.ȱTheȱWesternȱLoverȱofȱtheȱEast:ȱAȱTheologicalȱEnquiry intoȱ Bedeȱ Griffiths’ȱ Contributionȱ toȱ Christology.ȱ Kodaikanal:ȱ Laȱ SaȬ letteȱPublications,ȱ1998. “Lebenȱ undȱ Werkȱ vonȱ Bedeȱ Griffiths:ȱ Seineȱ Bedeutungȱ fürȱ den interreligiösenȱDialog.”ȱTheologischeȱZeitschriftȱ52ȱ(1996):ȱ119Ȭ28. Appasamy,ȱA.J.ȱSundarȱSingh:ȱAȱBiography.ȱMadras:ȱTheȱChristianȱLitȬ eratureȱSociety,ȱ1966. Ariarajah,ȱ S.ȱ Wesley.ȱ Hindusȱ andȱ Christians:ȱ Aȱ Centuryȱ ofȱ Protestant Ecumenicalȱ Thought.ȱ Amsterdam/Grandȱ Rapids,ȱ Rodopi/William B.ȱEerdmans,ȱ1991. “Theȱ Riseȱ ofȱ Dalitȱ Consciousnessȱ andȱ HinduȬChristianȱ DiaȬ logue.”ȱStudiesȱinȱInterreligiousȱDialogueȱ2ȱ(1992):ȱ101Ȭ10.

286

JESUSȱASȱGURU

Arraj,ȱJames.ȱChristianityȱinȱtheȱCrucibleȱofȱEastȬWestȱDialogue:ȱAȱCritical LookȱatȱCatholicȱParticipation.ȱChiloquin:ȱInnerȱGrowthȱBooks,ȱ2001. Aruliah,ȱ Drakshathotaȱ andȱ Pratapȱ Mulick.ȱ Jesusȱ Christ.ȱ Amarȱ Chitra Katha,ȱSpecialȱIssueȱNo.ȱ3.ȱBombay:ȱIndiaȱBookȱHouseȱEducation Trust,ȱs.a. Athyal,ȱJesudasȱM.ȱ(ed.).ȱM.M.ȱThomas:ȱTheȱManȱandȱHisȱLegacy.ȱThiruȬ valla:ȱTheȱThiruvallaȱEcumenicalȱCharitableȱTrust,ȱ1997. Atmajnanananda.ȱ “Scandals,ȱ CoverȬUps,ȱ andȱ Otherȱ Imaginedȱ OccurȬ rencesȱinȱtheȱLifeȱofȱRamakrishna:ȱAnȱExaminationȱofȱJeffreyȱKriȬ pal’sȱ Kali’sȱ Child.”ȱ Internationalȱ Journalȱ ofȱ Hinduȱ Studiesȱ Iȱ (1997): 401Ȭ20. Attenborough,ȱ Richard.ȱ Inȱ Searchȱ ofȱ Gandhi.ȱ London:ȱ Theȱ Bodley Head,ȱ1982. andȱGeraldȱGold.ȱGandhi:ȱAȱPictorialȱBiography.ȱNewȱYork:ȱNewȬ marketȱPress,ȱ1983. Aufrecht,ȱTheodor.ȱ(ed.).ȱDieȱHymnenȱdesȱRigȬVeda.ȱWiesbaden.ȱ1968. Azariah,ȱM.ȱNewȱSpiritualityȱandȱtheȱMission.ȱMadras:ȱDiocesanȱOffice, 1995. Bakker,ȱ Freekȱ L.ȱ “Shantiȱ Sandesham,ȱ Aȱ Newȱ Jesusȱ Filmȱ Producedȱ in India:ȱIndianȱChristologyȱinȱPictures.”ȱExchangeȱ36ȱ(2007):ȱ41Ȭ64. Bapat,ȱRam.ȱ“PanditaȱRamabai:ȱFaithȱandȱReasonȱinȱtheȱShadowȱofȱthe Eastȱ andȱ West.”ȱ In:ȱ Vasudhaȱ Dalmiaȱ andȱ Heinrichȱ vonȱ StietenȬ cronȱ (eds.).ȱ Representingȱ Hinduism:ȱ Theȱ Constructionȱ ofȱ Religious TraditionsȱandȱNationalȱIdentity.ȱNewȱDelhi/London:ȱSageȱPublicaȬ tions,ȱ1995.ȱPp.ȱ224Ȭ52. Barlage,ȱHeinrich.ȱChristȱSaviourȱofȱMankind:ȱAȱChristianȱAppreciationȱof Swamiȱ Akhilananda.ȱ Veröffentlichungenȱ desȱ MissionspriesterȬ seminarsȱSt.ȱAugustinȱbeiȱBonnȱ27.ȱSt.ȱAugustin:ȱSteylerȱVerlag, 1977. Bawa,ȱ V.K.ȱ “Mahatmaȱ Gandhi,ȱ C.F.ȱ Andrews,ȱ Sundarȱ Singhȱ andȱ the OriginȱofȱChristianȱAshramsȱinȱIndia,ȱcircaȱ1900ȱtoȱ1935.”ȱIn:ȱRoȬ gerȱE.ȱHedlundȱ(ed.).ȱChristianityȱisȱIndian:ȱTheȱEmergenceȱofȱanȱInȬ digenousȱCommunity.ȱDelhi:ȱISPCK,ȱ2000.ȱPp.ȱ127Ȭ38. Belvalkar,ȱS.K.ȱ(ed.,ȱtransl.).ȱShrimadȬBhagvadgita.ȱHinduȱVishvavidyaȬ layaȱ Nepalȱ Rajyaȱ Sanskritȱ Seriesȱ 1.ȱ Varanasi:ȱ Hinduȱ VishvaȬ vidyalayaȱSanskritȱPublicationsȱBoard,ȱ1959.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

287

Biehl,ȱ Michael.ȱ Derȱ Fallȱ Sadhuȱ Sundarȱ Singh:ȱ Theologieȱ zwischenȱ den Kulturen.ȱ Studienȱ zurȱ interkulturellenȱ Geschichteȱ desȱ ChristenȬ tumsȱ66.ȱFrankfurtȱamȱMain:ȱPeterȱLang,ȱ1990. Birukoff,ȱ Paul.ȱ “Mahatmaȱ Gandhiȱ undȱ derȱ Tolstoiismus.”ȱ In:ȱ F.ȱ DietȬ trich,ȱ Dieȱ GandhiȬRevolution.ȱ Dresden:ȱ Wolfgangȱ Jess,ȱ 1930.ȱ Pp. 149Ȭ59. Blake,ȱWilliam.ȱMilton:ȱAȱPoemȱinȱ2ȱBooks.ȱLondon,ȱ1804. Boyd,ȱ R.H.S.ȱ Anȱ Introductionȱ toȱ Indianȱ Christianȱ Theology.ȱ 2ndȱ rev.ȱ ed. Madras:ȱTheȱChristianȱLiteratureȱSociety,ȱ1975. Brinkman,ȱMartienȱE.ȱTheȱNonȬWesternȱJesus:ȱJesusȱasȱBodhisattva,ȱAvaȬ tara,ȱ Guru,ȱ Prophet,ȱ Ancestorȱ orȱ Healer?ȱ Transl.ȱ Henryȱ andȱ Lucy Jansen.ȱCrossȱCulturalȱTheologies.ȱLondon:ȱEquinox,ȱ2008.ȱForthȬ coming. Brown,ȱ Judithȱ M.ȱ Gandhi:ȱ Prisonerȱ ofȱ Hope.ȱ Delhi:ȱ Oxfordȱ University Press,ȱ1990. Buchenel,ȱ Paul.ȱ Panditaȱ Ramabaï:ȱ Laȱ mèreȱ desȱ petitesȱ veuves.ȱ Lausanne: SecrétariatȱdeȱlaȱMissionȱsuisseȱauxȱIndes,ȱs.a. Camps,ȱ A.ȱ “Theȱ Personȱ andȱ Functionȱ ofȱ Christȱ inȱ Hinduismȱ andȱ in HinduȬChristianȱ Theology.”ȱ Bulletinȱ secretariatusȱ proȱ nonȱ chrisȬ tianisȱ6/3ȱ(1971):ȱ199Ȭ211. Chacko,ȱMohan.ȱȱInterpretingȱSociety:ȱAȱStudyȱofȱtheȱPoliticalȱTheologyȱof M.M.ȱ Thomasȱ andȱ itsȱ Implicationsȱ forȱ Mission.ȱ Amsterdam:ȱ Vrije Universiteit,ȱ2000. Chakravarti,ȱUma.ȱRewritingȱHistory:ȱTheȱLifeȱandȱTimesȱofȱPanditaȱRamȬ abai.ȱNewȱDelhi:ȱKaliȱforȱWomen,ȱ1998. Chatterjee,ȱMargaret.ȱGandhi’sȱReligiousȱThought.ȱNotreȱDame:ȱUniverȬ sityȱofȱNotreȱDameȱPress,ȱ1983. Chethimattam,ȱJohnȱB.ȱ“AtmanȱandȱVishnu:ȱHinduȱInsightsȱforȱInterȬ faithȱDialogue.”ȱIn:ȱThomasȱA.ȱAykara.ȱMeetingȱofȱReligions:ȱNew Orientationsȱ andȱ Perspectives.ȱ Bangalore:ȱ Dharmaram Publications,ȱ1978.ȱPp.ȱ135Ȭ55. Cooke,ȱ Geraldȱ B.ȱ Aȱ NeoȬHinduȱ Ashramaȱ inȱ Southȱ India.ȱ Bangalore: ChristianȱInstituteȱforȱtheȱStudyȱofȱReligionȱandȱSociety,ȱ1966. Crawford,ȱCromwell.ȱ“RajaȱRamȱMohanȱRoy’sȱAttitudeȱtowardȱChrisȬ tiansȱ andȱ Christianity.”ȱ In:ȱ Arvindȱ Sharmaȱ (ed.).ȱ NeoȬHindu ViewsȱofȱChristianity.ȱLeiden:ȱE.J.ȱBrill,ȱ1988.ȱPp.ȱ16Ȭ65.

288

JESUSȱASȱGURU

Dasgupta,ȱB.N.ȱTheȱLifeȱandȱTimesȱofȱRajahȱRammohunȱRoy.ȱNewȱDelhi: AmbikaȱPublications,ȱ1980. Dekker,ȱJojanneke.ȱSolomonȱRaj,ȱPropheticȱArtistȱinȱIndia:ȱAȱResearchȱon Dr.ȱP.ȱSolomonȱRaj’sȱArtȱasȱaȱMediumȱofȱInculturationȱofȱtheȱGospel inȱIndia.ȱMaster’sȱThesisȱTheology.ȱUtrechtȱUniversity,ȱ2006. Desai,ȱ Mahadevȱ H.ȱ DayȬtoȬDayȱ withȱ Gandhi:ȱ Secretary’sȱ Diary.ȱ Vol.ȱ 5. Varanasi:ȱSarvaȱSevaȱSanghȱPrakashan,ȱ1970. Deussen,ȱPaulȱ(ed.,ȱtransl.).ȱDieȱSûtra’sȱdesȱVedântaȱoderȱdieȱÇârîrakaȬMîȬ mânsâȱdesȱBâdarâyanaȱnebstȱdemȱvollständigenȱKommentareȱdesȱÇanȬ kara.ȱ Hildesheim:ȱ Georgȱ Olmsȱ Verlagsbuchhandlung,ȱ 1966 [1887]. Dhar,ȱSailendraȱNath.ȱAȱComprehensiveȱBiographyȱofȱSwamiȱVivekananda. 2ȱParts.ȱMadras:ȱVivekanandaȱPrakashanȱKendra,ȱ1975Ȭ1976. Diettrich,ȱ Fritzȱ (ed.).ȱ Dieȱ GandhiȬRevolution.ȱ Dresden:ȱ Wolfgangȱ Jess, 1930. Doniger,ȱWendyȱ(transl.).ȱTheȱLawsȱofȱManu.ȱLondon:ȱPenguinȱBooks, 1991. DonigerȱO’Flaherty,ȱWendy.ȱTheȱRigȱVeda:ȱAnȱAnthology.ȱLondon:ȱPenȬ guinȱBooks,ȱ1981. Dumont,ȱLouis.ȱHomoȱhierarchicus:ȱTheȱCasteȱSystemȱandȱItsȱImplications. Chicago/London:ȱUniversityȱofȱChicagoȱPress,ȱ1980. Dupuis,ȱJacques.ȱJesusȱChristȱatȱtheȱEncounterȱofȱWorldȱReligions.ȱMaryȬ knoll:ȱOrbisȱBooks,ȱ1991. Dyer,ȱHelenȱS.ȱPanditaȱRamabai:ȱTheȱStoryȱofȱHerȱLife.ȱLondon:ȱMorgan andȱScott,ȱs.a.ȱ[1900]. Ellsberg,ȱRobertȱ(ed.).ȱGandhiȱonȱChristianity.ȱMaryknoll:ȱOrbisȱBooks, 1991. Fischer,ȱ Louis.ȱ Theȱ Lifeȱ ofȱ Mahatmaȱ Gandhi.ȱ London:ȱ Harperȱ Collins Publications,ȱ1997. ForresterȬPaton,ȱ Ernest.ȱ “Dieȱ Ashrams:ȱ Evangelischeȱ Bruderschaften inȱIndien.”ȱQuatemberȱ17ȱ(1953):ȱ170Ȭ74. Foxe,ȱBarbara.ȱLongȱJourneyȱHome:ȱAȱBiographyȱofȱMargaretȱNobleȱ(NiveȬ dita).ȱLondon:ȱRiderȱandȱCompany,ȱ1975. French,ȱ Halȱ W.ȱ “Swamiȱ Vivekananda’sȱ Experiencesȱ andȱ InterpretaȬ tionsȱ ofȱ Christianity.”ȱ In:ȱ Arvindȱ Sharmaȱ (ed.).ȱ NeoȬHinduȱ Views ofȱChristianity.ȱLeiden:ȱE.J.ȱBrill,ȱ1988.ȱPp.ȱ82Ȭ105.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

289

“Reverenceȱ toȱ Christȱ Throughȱ Mysticalȱ Experienceȱ andȱ IncarnaȬ tionalȱ Identity:ȱ Sriȱ Ramakrishna.”ȱ In:ȱ Arvindȱ Sharmaȱ (ed.).ȱ NeoȬ HinduȱViewsȱofȱChristianity.ȱLeiden:ȱE.J.ȱBrill,ȱ1988.ȱPp.ȱ66Ȭ81. Gambhirananda.ȱHistoryȱofȱtheȱRamakrishnaȱMathȱandȱMission.ȱCalcutta: AdvaitaȱAshrama,ȱ1957. Ganguli,ȱ Kisariȱ Mohanȱ (transl.).ȱ Theȱ Mahabharataȱ ofȱ KrishnaȬDwaipaȬ yanaȱ Vyasa.ȱ Vol.ȱ XI.ȱ 4thȱ ed.ȱ Newȱ Delhi:ȱ Munshiramȱ Manoharlal, 1982. Gardner,ȱC.E.ȱLifeȱofȱFatherȱGoreh.ȱLondon:ȱLongmans,ȱGreen,ȱandȱCo., 1900. Geldner,ȱKarlȱFriedrichȱ(transl.).ȱDerȱRigȬVeda.ȱHarvardȱOrientalȱSeries 33Ȭ35.ȱCambridge:ȱHarvardȱUniversityȱPress,ȱ1951. Gilhuis,ȱ T.M.ȱ Vertelȱ mijȱ tochȱ ...:ȱ Bijbelseȱ verhalenȱ –ȱ nieuwȱ gehoord.ȱ KamȬ pen:ȱJ.H.ȱKok,ȱ1988.ȱPp.ȱ191Ȭ95. GispertȬSauch,ȱ G.ȱ “Christȱ andȱ theȱ Indianȱ Mysticalȱ Tradition:ȱ Swami Abhishiktananda.”ȱJeevadharaȱXXVIIIȱ(1998):ȱ193Ȭ206. Goel,ȱSitaȱRam.ȱHistoryȱofȱHinduȬChristianȱEncountersȱ(ADȱ304ȱtoȱ1996). 2ndȱed.ȱNewȱDelhi:ȱVoiceȱofȱIndia,ȱ1996. Catholicȱ Ashrams:ȱ Sannyasinsȱ orȱ Swindlers?ȱ 2ndȱ ed.ȱ Newȱ Delhi: VoiceȱofȱIndia,ȱ1994. Gogos,ȱ Manuel.ȱ Raimonȱ Panikkar:ȱ Grenzgängerȱ zwischenȱ Philosophie, Mystikȱ undȱ denȱ Weltreligionen.ȱ Mainz:ȱ MatthiasȬGrünewaldȬVerȬ lag,ȱ2000. Gonda,ȱJ.ȱDeȱIndischeȱgodsdiensten.ȱTheȱHague:ȱServire,ȱs.a. Gonsalves,ȱ Francis.ȱ “Wilkommen,ȱ Welcome,ȱ Swagatham!”ȱ National CatholicȱReporterȱ3/5ȱ(2005). Grant,ȱ Sara.ȱ “Sharedȱ Prayerȱ andȱ Sharingȱ ofȱ Scriptures.”ȱ In:ȱ Paulȱ PuȬ thanangadyȱ(ed.).ȱSharingȱWorship:ȱCommunicatioȱinȱSacris.ȱBangaȬ lore:ȱNationalȱBiblical,ȱCatecheticalȱ&ȱLiturgicalȱCentre,ȱ1988.ȱPp. 459Ȭ81. Gregoryȱ ofȱ Nazianzus,ȱ “Carminumȱ liberȱ I,”ȱ in:ȱ J.ȬP.ȱ Migneȱ (ed.),ȱ PaȬ trologiaeȱcursusȱcompletus,ȱSeriesȱGraecaȱprior,ȱVol.ȱXXXVI.ȱParis: Garnier,ȱ1862. Gupta,ȱ Bhagwanȱ Das.ȱ “Pranamiȱ Sampradayaȱ ofȱ Bundelkhand.”ȱ In: N.N.ȱBhattacharyyaȱ(ed.).ȱMedievalȱBhaktiȱMovementsȱinȱIndia.ȱSri Caitanyaȱ Quincentenaryȱ Commemorationȱ Volume.ȱ Newȱ Delhi: MunshiramȱManoharlal,ȱ1989.ȱPp.ȱ127Ȭ35.

290

JESUSȱASȱGURU “SwamiȱPranȱNathȱandȱtheȱPranamiȱReligiousȱMovementȱinȱthe 17thȬCenturyȱ Bundelkhand.”ȱ In:ȱ S.P.ȱ Senȱ (ed.).ȱ Socialȱ Contentsȱ of IndianȱReligiousȱReformȱMovements.ȱCalcutta:ȱInstituteȱofȱHistoricȬ alȱStudies,ȱ1978.ȱPp.ȱ183Ȭ95.

Habermas,ȱJürgen.ȱStrukturwandelȱderȱÖffentlichkeit:ȱUntersuchungenȱzu einerȱKategorieȱderȱbürgerlichenȱGesellschaft.ȱ6thȱed.ȱNeuwied/Berlin: Luchterhand,ȱ1974. Harper,ȱ Susanȱ Billington.ȱ Inȱ theȱ Shadowȱ ofȱ theȱ Mahatma:ȱ Bishopȱ V.S. Azariahȱ andȱ theȱ Travailsȱ ofȱ Christianityȱ inȱ Britishȱ India.ȱ Grandȱ RaȬ pids/Cambridge/Richmond:ȱ Williamȱ B.ȱ Eerdmansȱ Publishing Company/CurzonȱPress,ȱ2000. Hecker,ȱ Dieter.ȱ “AdivasiȬTheologie.”ȱ Gossnerȱ Missionȱ Informationȱ 4 (2003):ȱ4Ȭ6. Heiler,ȱFriedrich.ȱChristlicherȱGlaubeȱundȱindischesȱGeistesleben.ȱMunich: ErnstȱReinhardt,ȱ1926. Hoens,ȱ D.J.ȱ Dr.ȱ Frisoȱ Melzer.ȱ Farewellȱ Lecture,ȱ Utrechtȱ University, 1983. Hongerdoekenȱ uitȱ LatijnsȬAmerika,ȱ Afrika,ȱ Aziëȱ enȱ Europa.ȱ ’sȬHertogenȬ bosch:ȱHongerdoeken,ȱ1996. Honig,ȱ Jr.,ȱ A.G.ȱ Deȱ kosmischeȱ betekenisȱ vanȱ Christusȱ inȱ hedendaagseȱ aziȬ atischeȱtheologie.ȱKamperȱCahiersȱ55.ȱKampen:ȱJ.H.ȱKok,ȱ1984. Isherwood,ȱ Christopher.ȱ Myȱ Guruȱ andȱ Hisȱ Disciple.ȱ Newȱ York:ȱ FarȬ rar/Straus/Giroux,ȱ1980. Jones,ȱE.ȱStanley.ȱMahatmaȱGandhi:ȱAnȱInterpretation.ȱLondon:ȱHodder andȱStoughton,ȱ1948. Jordens,ȱJ.T.F.ȱ“DayanandaȱSarasvati’sȱInterpretationȱofȱChristianity.” In:ȱArvindȱSharmaȱ(ed.).ȱNeoȬHinduȱViewsȱofȱChristianity.ȱLeiden: E.J.ȱBrill,ȱ1988.ȱPp.ȱ120Ȭ42. Jyotiȱ Sahi:ȱ Eenȱ selectieȱ uitȱ hetȱ recenteȱ werk.ȱ Nijmegen:ȱ Studentenkerk, 2004. Keithahn,ȱRalphȱRichard.ȱPilgrimageȱinȱIndia:ȱAnȱAutobiographicalȱFragȬ ment.ȱIndianȱChristianȱThoughtȱSeriesȱ13.ȱMadras:ȱTheȱChristian LiteratureȱSociety,ȱ1973. Killingley,ȱDermot.ȱ“RammohunȱRoyȱandȱBishopȱHeber’sȱViewȱofȱthe Trinity.”ȱ In:ȱ Grahamȱ Harveyȱ etȱ al.,ȱ Wordsȱ Remembered,ȱ Textsȱ ReȬ

BIBLIOGRAPHY

291

newed:ȱ Essaysȱ inȱ Honourȱ ofȱ Johnȱ F.A.ȱ Sawyer.ȱ Sheffield:ȱ Sheffield AcademicȱPress,ȱ1995.ȱPp.ȱ480Ȭ96. Rammohunȱ Royȱ inȱ Hinduȱ andȱ Christianȱ Traditions:ȱ Theȱ Teapeȱ LecȬ turesȱ1990.ȱNewcastleȱuponȱTyne:ȱGrevattȱ&ȱGrevatt,ȱ1993. Kim,ȱ Heupȱ Young.ȱ “Towardȱ aȱ Christotao:ȱ Christȱ asȱ theȱ TheanthroȬ pocosmicȱTao.”ȱStudiesȱinȱInterreligiousȱDialogueȱ10/1ȱ(2000):ȱ5Ȭ29. Kipling,ȱ Rudyard.ȱ Rudyardȱ Kipling’sȱ Verse:ȱ Definitiveȱ Edition.ȱ London: HodderȱandȱStoughton,ȱ1949. Klootwijk,ȱ Eeuwout.ȱ Commitmentȱ andȱ Openness:ȱ Theȱ Interreligiousȱ DiaȬ logueȱ andȱ Theologyȱ ofȱ Religionsȱ inȱ theȱ Workȱ ofȱ Stanleyȱ J.ȱ Samartha. Zoetermeer:ȱBoekencentrum,ȱ1992. Klostermaier,ȱKlausȱK.ȱKristvidya:ȱAȱSketchȱofȱanȱIndianȱChristology.ȱInȬ dianȱ Christianȱ Thoughtȱ Seriesȱ 8.ȱ Bangalore:ȱ Christianȱ Institute forȱtheȱStudyȱofȱReligionȱandȱSociety,ȱ1967. Kondvilker,ȱ Madhau.ȱ Dagboekȱ vanȱ eenȱ onaanraakbare.ȱ ’sȬ Hertogenbosch:ȱStichtingȱGezamenlijkeȱMissiepubliciteit,ȱ1986. Kotnala,ȱM.C.ȱRajaȱRamȱMohunȱRoyȱandȱIndianȱAwakening.ȱNewȱDelhi: GitanjaliȱPrakashan,ȱ1975. Kranenborg,ȱ R.ȱ “Deȱ Schoolȱ voorȱ Filosofieȱ alsȱ neoȬhindoeïstischeȱ beȬ weging.”ȱ In:ȱ R.ȱ Bakkerȱ (ed).ȱ Religieuzeȱ bewegingenȱ inȱ Nederland. Partȱ10.ȱAmsterdam.ȱ1985.ȱPp.ȱ7Ȭ65. Kripal,ȱ Jeffreyȱ J.ȱ Kali’sȱ Child:ȱ Theȱ Mysticalȱ andȱ theȱ Eroticȱ inȱ theȱ Lifeȱ and Teachingsȱ ofȱ Ramakrishna.ȱ Chicago/London:ȱ Theȱ Universityȱ of ChicagoȱPress,ȱ1995. Kripalani,ȱJ.B.ȱ“Gandhiji’sȱSpiritualȱIdeas.”ȱIn:ȱS.ȱRadhakrishnanȱ(ed.). Mahatmaȱ Gandhiȱ 100ȱ Years.ȱ Newȱ Delhi:ȱ Gandhiȱ Peaceȱ FoundaȬ tion,ȱ1968. Kuitert,ȱ H.M.ȱ Jezus:ȱ Nalatenschapȱ vanȱ hetȱ christendom.ȱ Schetsȱ voorȱ een christologie.ȱBaarn:ȱTenȱHave,ȱ1998. Küster,ȱ Volker.ȱ “Derȱ Christusȱ derȱ indischenȱ Landstrasse:ȱ Dasȱ Leben JesuȱinȱBildernȱvonȱAlfredȱDavidȱThomasȱ/ȱIndien.”ȱIn:ȱFreekȱL. Bakkerȱ andȱ Janȱ S.ȱ Aritonangȱ (eds).ȱ Onȱ theȱ Edgeȱ ofȱ Manyȱ Worlds. Festschriftȱ Karelȱ Steenbrink.ȱ Zoetermeer:ȱ Meinema,ȱ 2006.ȱ Pp. 300Ȭ19. Dieȱ vielenȱ Gesichterȱ Jesuȱ Christi:ȱ Christologieȱ interkulturell.ȱ NeuȬ kirchenȬVluyn:ȱNeukirchenerȱVerlag,ȱ1999. Lannoy,ȱRichard.ȱTheȱSpeakingȱTree:ȱAȱStudyȱofȱIndianȱCultureȱandȱSociȬ ety.ȱLondon:ȱOxfordȱUniversityȱPress,ȱ1971.

292

JESUSȱASȱGURU

Lehmann,ȱ Arno.ȱ Christianȱ Artȱ inȱ Africaȱ andȱ Asia.ȱ Stȱ Louis/London: ConcordiaȱPublishingȱHouse,ȱ1969. LifeȱofȱSriȱRamakrishna.ȱCompiledȱfromȱVariousȱAuthenticȱSources.ȱ4th ed.ȱMayavati:ȱAdvaitaȱAshrama,ȱ1936. TheȱLifeȱofȱSwamiȱVivekananda.ȱByȱHisȱEasternȱandȱWesternȱDisciples.ȱ2 Vols.ȱ2ndȱed.ȱMayavati:ȱAdvaitaȱAshrama,ȱ1933. Livermore,ȱCraigȱW.,ȱMiȬRangȱYoon,ȱNathanȱS.ȱSanders.ȱ“Christology ofȱ Response:ȱ NeoȬHinduȱ Interpretationsȱ ofȱ Jesus.”ȱ Studiesȱ inȱ InȬ terreligiousȱDialogueȱ4ȱ(1994):ȱ5Ȭ31. Lobo,ȱ Lancy.ȱ “Towardsȱ anȱ Inculturationȱ inȱ theȱ NonȬSanskriticȱ TradiȬ tion.”ȱVidyajyotiȱ49ȱ(1985):ȱ16Ȭ28. Macnicol,ȱNicol.ȱPanditaȱRamabai.ȱBuildersȱofȱModernȱIndia.ȱCalcutta: Associationȱ Press,ȱ 1926ȱ (Germanȱ transl.ȱ (1930):ȱ Panditaȱ Ramabai: Dieȱ Mutterȱ derȱ Ausgestoßenen.ȱ Transl.ȱ P.ȱ Baltzer.ȱ Stuttgart/Basel: Evang.ȱMissionsverlag). ManikkaȬVaçagar.ȱ Theȱ Tiruvaçagam.ȱ Ed.ȱ andȱ transl.ȱ G.U.ȱ Pope.ȱ New Delhi:ȱAsianȱEducationalȱServices,ȱ1995. Massey,ȱ James.ȱ Roots:ȱ Aȱ Conciseȱ Historyȱ ofȱ Dalits.ȱ 2ndȱ rev.ȱ ed.ȱ Delhi: ISPCK,ȱ1994. Mathew,ȱ C.P.ȱ “Christȱ andȱ Humanȱ Fellowshipȱ inȱ Secularȱ Cultureȱ – AccordingȱtoȱM.M.ȱThomas.”ȱJeevadharaȱXXVIIIȱ(1998):ȱ221Ȭ35. Mathew,ȱ K.G.ȱ andȱ Cecilȱ Hargreaves.ȱ 25ȱ Indianȱ Churches.ȱ Calcutta:ȱ BiȬ shopȱCollege,ȱ1975. McGee,ȱ Garyȱ B.ȱ “Baptismȱ ofȱ theȱ Holyȱ Ghostȱ andȱ Fire!ȱ Theȱ Revival LegacyȱofȱMinnieȱF.ȱAbrams.”ȱEnrichmentȱJournalȱ(Summerȱ1998). Meditatiedoekȱ Levengevendȱ water.ȱ Amersfoort:ȱ Bisschoppelijkeȱ vastenȬ actie,ȱs.a. Mehta,ȱVed.ȱGandhiȱandȱHisȱApostles.ȱHarmondsworth:ȱPenguinȱBooks, 1977. Minz,ȱNirmal.ȱMahatmaȱGandhiȱandȱHinduȬChristianȱDialogue.ȱInterreliȬ giousȱ Dialogueȱ Seriesȱ 3.ȱ Madras:ȱ Theȱ Christianȱ Literatureȱ SociȬ ety,ȱ1970. Mitter,ȱ Partha.ȱ Artȱ andȱ Nationalismȱ inȱ Colonialȱ India,ȱ 1850Ȭ1922:ȱ OcciȬ dentalȱ Orientations.ȱ Cambridge:ȱ Cambridgeȱ Universityȱ Press, 1995. Mock,ȱ Erwin.ȱ Deȱ geschiedenisȱ vanȱ deȱ hongerdoekenȱ enȱ hunȱ betekenisȱ door deȱeeuwenȱheen.ȱ’sȬHertogenbosch:ȱHongerdoeken,ȱ1996.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

293

Mohanadoss,ȱ Theresnathan.ȱ “Dasȱ Kastenwesenȱ undȱ dieȱ Kircheȱ inȱ InȬ dien.”ȱZeitschriftȱfürȱMissionswissenschaftȱundȱReligionswissenschaft 80ȱ(1996):ȱ255Ȭ64. “TheȱGandhianȱUnderstandingȱofȱPrayer:ȱSensitivityȱtoȱGodȱand toȱOthers.”ȱStudiesȱinȱInterreligiousȱDialogueȱ6ȱ(1996):ȱ129Ȭ44. More,ȱ Johnȱ Blake.ȱ “Theȱ Evolutionȱ ofȱ Consciousnessȱ inȱ theȱ Worksȱ of BedeȱGriffiths.”ȱVidyajyotiȱ64ȱ(2000):ȱ278Ȭ82. Mukharya,ȱP.S.ȱ“SantȱPrannathȱandȱtheȱPranamiȱSect.”ȱIn:ȱN.N.ȱBhatȬ tacharyyaȱ (ed.).ȱ Medievalȱ Bhaktiȱ Movementsȱ inȱ India.ȱ Sriȱ Caitanya Quincentenaryȱ Commemorationȱ Volume.ȱ Newȱ Delhi:ȱ MunshiȬ ramȱManoharlal,ȱ1989.ȱPp.ȱ113Ȭ26. Neevel,ȱ Walterȱ G.ȱ “Theȱ Transformationȱ ofȱ Shriȱ Ramakrishna.”ȱ In: BardwellȱL.ȱSmithȱ(ed.).ȱHinduism:ȱNewȱEssaysȱinȱtheȱHistoryȱofȱReȬ ligions.ȱ Studiesȱ inȱ theȱ Historyȱ ofȱ Religions.ȱ Suppl.ȱ toȱ Numen XXXIII.ȱLeiden:ȱE.J.ȱBrill,ȱ1976.ȱPp.ȱ53Ȭ97. Neufeldt,ȱRonald.ȱ“HinduȱViewsȱofȱChrist.”ȱIn:ȱHaroldȱCowardȱ(ed.). HinduȬChristianȱ Dialogue:ȱ Perspectivesȱ andȱ Encounters.ȱ Maryknoll: OrbisȱBooks,ȱ1990.ȱPp.ȱ162Ȭ75. Ninan,ȱ M.M.ȱ “Dr.ȱ M.M.ȱ Thomas:ȱ Ifȱ youȱ don’tȱ love,ȱ whoȱ will?” www.acns.com/~mm9n/mmt/mmt.htm,ȱ1997. Nitsche,ȱ Bernhardȱ (ed.).ȱ Gottesdenkenȱ inȱ interreligiöserȱ Perspektive:ȱ RaiȬ monȱ Panikkarsȱ Trinitätstheologieȱ inȱ derȱ Diskussion.ȱ Frankfurtȱ am Main/Paderborn:ȱVerlagȱOttoȱLembeck/BonifatiusȱVerlag,ȱ2005. Noreen,ȱBarbara.ȱCrossroadsȱofȱTheȱSpirit.ȱDelhi:ȱISPCK,ȱ1994. O’Toole,ȱMichael.ȱChristianȱAshramȱCommunitiesȱinȱIndia.ȱPune/Indore: Ishvani/Satprakashan,ȱ1983. Pallath,ȱ J.J.ȱ “Subalternȱ Christianȱ Groupsȱ andȱ theȱ Crisisȱ ofȱ Culturalȱ IȬ dentity:ȱAȱCaseȱStudyȱofȱChristianȱPulayaȱofȱNorthȱKerala.”ȱJourȬ nalȱofȱDharmaȱXXIVȱ(1999):ȱ51Ȭ66. Pangborn,ȱCyrus.ȱ“TheȱRamakrishnaȱMathȱandȱMission:ȱAȱCaseȱStudy ofȱaȱRevitalizationȱMovement.”ȱIn:ȱBardwellȱL.ȱSmithȱ(ed.).ȱHinȬ duism:ȱ Newȱ Essaysȱ inȱ theȱ Historyȱ ofȱ Religions.ȱ Studiesȱ inȱ the HistoryȱofȱReligions.ȱSuppl.ȱtoȱNumenȱXXXIII.ȱLeiden:ȱE.J.ȱBrill, 1976.ȱPp.ȱ98Ȭ119. Paradkar,ȱ Balwantȱ A.M.ȱ Theȱ Theologyȱ ofȱ Nehemiahȱ Goreh.ȱ Confessing theȱ Faithȱ inȱ Indiaȱ Seriesȱ 3.ȱ Bangalore/Madras:ȱ Theȱ Christian

294

JESUSȱASȱGURU

Instituteȱ forȱ theȱ Studyȱ ofȱ Religionȱ andȱ Society/Theȱ Christian LiteratureȱSociety,ȱ1968. Parrinder,ȱ Geoffrey.ȱ Avatarȱ andȱ Incarnation:ȱ Theȱ Wildeȱ Lecturesȱ inȱ NaȬ turalȱandȱComparativeȱReligionȱinȱtheȱUniversityȱofȱLondon.ȱLondon: FaberȱandȱFaber,ȱ1970. Patta,ȱRajȱBharath.ȱJesusȱChristȱbetweenȱChristiansȱandȱHindus:ȱAȱCritical Evaluationȱ ofȱ Selectedȱ Indianȱ Christianȱ Theologians’ȱ Contributionȱ to Christologyȱ inȱ theȱ Lightȱ ofȱ Selectedȱ Hinduȱ Viewsȱ ofȱ Christȱ andȱ their Relevanceȱ toȱ theȱ ChristianȬHinduȱ Dialogue.ȱ Master’sȱ Thesisȱ TheoȬ logy.ȱVUȱUniversity,ȱAmsterdam,ȱ2003. Pattathu,ȱ Paul.ȱ Ashramȱ Spirituality:ȱ Aȱ Searchȱ intoȱ theȱ Christianȱ Ashram Movementȱ againstȱ itsȱ Hinduȱ Background.ȱ Indore:ȱ Satprakashan, 1997. Pelgrimȱ inȱ Godsȱ hand:ȱ Deȱ Indiaseȱ schilderȱ Frankȱ Wesley.ȱ MissieȬzendȬ ingskalenderȱ 1996,ȱ Amsterdam/Oegstgeest:ȱ Nederlandseȱ ZendȬ ingsraad/NedelandseȱMissieraad,ȱ1995. Polak,ȱMillieȱGraham.ȱMr.ȱGandhi:ȱTheȱMan.ȱLondon:ȱGeorgeȱAllenȱ& Unwin,ȱ1931. PooleȬConnor,ȱ B.J.ȱ Visitationsȱ ofȱ Grace:ȱ Withȱ Specialȱ Referenceȱ toȱ theȱ ReȬ vivalȱofȱ1859.ȱLondon:ȱBritishȱEvangelicalȱCouncil,ȱ1960. Prabhu,ȱ Josephȱ (ed.).ȱ Theȱ Interculturalȱ Challengeȱ ofȱ Raimonȱ Panikkar. FaithȱMeetsȱFaithȱSeries.ȱMaryknoll:ȱOrbisȱBooks,ȱ1996. Puthiadam,ȱ Ignatiusȱ andȱ Martinȱ Kämpchen.ȱ Endlosȱ istȱ dieȱ Zeitȱ in DeinenȱHänden:ȱMitȱdenȱHindusȱbeten.ȱKevelaer:ȱButzonȱ&ȱBercker, 1978. PyeȬSmith,ȱCharlie.ȱRebelsȱandȱOutcasts:ȱAȱJourneyȱThroughȱChristianȱInȬ dia.ȱHarmondsworth:ȱViking,ȱ1997. Radhakrishnan,ȱ S.ȱ (ed.ȱ andȱ transl.).ȱ Theȱ Principalȱ Upanishads.ȱ LonȬ don/NewȱYork:ȱGeorgeȱAllenȱ&ȱUnwin/HumanitiesȱPress,ȱ1974. (ed.).ȱMahatmaȱGandhiȱ100ȱYears.ȱNewȱDelhi:ȱGandhiȱPeaceȱFounȬ dation,ȱ1968. Räisänen,ȱHeikki.ȱ“MahatmaȱGandhiȱandȱtheȱSermonȱonȱtheȱMount.” Temenosȱ27ȱ(1991):ȱ83Ȭ108. Raja,ȱJebamalai.ȱ“TheȱProblemȱofȱCasteȱwithinȱtheȱChurch.”ȱJournalȱof DharmaȱXXIVȱ(1999):ȱ28Ȭ39. Rajan,ȱJesu.ȱBedeȱGriffithsȱandȱSannyasa.ȱ2ndȱed.ȱBangalore:ȱAsianȱTradȬ ingȱCorporation,ȱ1997.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

295

Ralston,ȱ Helen.ȱ Christianȱ Ashrams:ȱ Aȱ Newȱ Religiousȱ Movementȱ inȱ ConȬ temporaryȱIndia.ȱStudiesȱinȱReligionȱandȱSocietyȱ20.ȱLewiston:ȱEdȬ winȱMellenȱPress,ȱ1987. Rao,ȱ K.L.S.ȱ “Mahatmaȱ Gandhiȱ andȱ Christianity.”ȱ In:ȱ Arvindȱ Sharma (ed.).ȱ NeoȬHinduȱ Viewsȱ ofȱ Christianity.ȱ Leiden:ȱ E.J.ȱ Brill,ȱ 1988.ȱ Pp. 143Ȭ55. Richard,ȱ H.L.ȱ “Rethinkingȱ ‘Rethinking’:ȱ Gospelȱ Fermentȱ inȱ India amongȱbothȱHindusȱandȱChristians.”ȱInternationalȱJournalȱofȱFronȬ tierȱMissionsȱ19ȱ(2002):ȱ7Ȭ17. Richards,ȱ Glyn.ȱ Theȱ Philosophyȱ ofȱ Gandhi:ȱ Aȱ Studyȱ ofȱ Hisȱ Basicȱ Ideas. London:ȱCurzonȱPress,ȱ1982. Robertson,ȱBruceȱCarlisle.ȱRajaȱRammohanȱRay:ȱTheȱFatherȱofȱModernȱInȬ dia.ȱ2ndȱed.ȱDelhi:ȱOxfordȱUniversityȱPress,ȱ1999. Rolland,ȱRomain.ȱLaȱvieȱdeȱRamakrishna.ȱParis:ȱLibrairieȱStock,ȱ1929. LaȱvieȱdeȱVivekanandaȱetȱl’évangileȱuniversel.ȱ2ȱVols.ȱParis:ȱLibrairie Stock,ȱ1948. Sahi,ȱ Jyoti.ȱ “Theȱ Meetingȱ ofȱ Faithsȱ inȱ anȱ Indianȱ Context.”ȱ The Westminsterianȱ(Springȱ2002). HolyȱGround:ȱAȱNewȱApproachȱtoȱtheȱMissionȱofȱtheȱChurchȱinȱIndia. Auckland:ȱPaceȱPublishing,ȱ1998. SteppingȱStones:ȱReflectionsȱ onȱtheȱTheologyȱofȱIndianȱChristianȱCulȬ ture.ȱBangalore:ȱAsianȱTradingȱCorporation,ȱ1986. Satavalekara,ȱ Sripadaȱ Damodaraȱ (ed.).ȱ YajurvediyaȬKathakaȬSamhita. Aundharajadhanyam:ȱSvadhyayamandala,ȱ1943. Schelling,ȱ N.J.ȱ Panditaȱ Ramabai:ȱ Baanbreeksterȱ voorȱ deȱ opheffingȱ derȱ HinȬ doeȬvrouwen.ȱ Lichtstralenȱ opȱ denȱ akkerȱ derȱ wereldȱ 30/1.ȱ HoenȬ derloo:ȱZendingsstudieȬRaad,ȱ1924. Schouten,ȱ Janȱ Peter.ȱ Bhakti:ȱ Spiritualiteitȱ inȱ hetȱ hindoeïsme.ȱ Wegwijs. Kampen:ȱKok,ȱ2005. Wieȱ zeggenȱ deȱ mensenȱ datȱ Ikȱ ben?ȱ Jezusȱ Christusȱ inȱ deȱ dialoog.ȱ OeȬ cumenischeȱ bezinningȱ 27.ȱ Amersfoort:ȱ Raadȱ vanȱ Kerkenȱ inȱ NeȬ derland,ȱ2004. Goddelijkeȱvergezichten:ȱMystiekȱuitȱIndiaȱvoorȱwesterseȱlezers.ȱBaarn: TenȱHave,ȱ1996. Revolutionsȱ ofȱ theȱ Mystics:ȱ Onȱ theȱ Socialȱ Aspectsȱ ofȱ Virashaivism. Kampen:ȱKokȱPharos,ȱ1991. “Hinduismȱ andȱ Development:ȱ Threeȱ Caseȱ Studies.”ȱ Religionȱ and SocietyȱXXVIIIȱ(1981):ȱ68Ȭ99.

296

JESUSȱASȱGURU

Schouten,ȱ J.ȱ Deȱ jongeȱ Leeuwȱ vanȱ hetȱ Vijfstroomenland.ȱ Arnhem:ȱ H.ȱ ten Brink,ȱ1924. Sengupta,ȱPadmini.ȱPanditaȱRamabaiȱSaraswati:ȱHerȱLifeȱandȱWork.ȱPanȬ ditaȱRamabaiȱBirthȱCentenaryȱMemorialȱVolume.ȱLondon:ȱAsiaȱPubȬ lishingȱHouse,ȱ1970. Sevenster,ȱJ.N.ȱGandhiȱenȱhetȱChristendom.ȱHaarlem:ȱF.ȱBohn,ȱ1934. Sharma,ȱ Arvind.ȱ “Sankara’sȱ Bhaktiȱ andȱ Swamiȱ Abhishiktananda’s ‘AdultȱFaith’.”ȱJournalȱofȱDharmaȱXVȱ(1990):ȱ240Ȭ44. Sharpe,ȱ Ericȱ J.ȱ “NeoȬHinduȱ Imagesȱ ofȱ Christianity.”ȱ In:ȱ Arvindȱ SharȬ maȱ (ed.).ȱ NeoȬHinduȱ Viewsȱ ofȱ Christianity.ȱ Leiden:ȱ E.J.ȱ Brill,ȱ 1988. Pp.ȱ1Ȭ15. Sil,ȱ N.P.ȱ “Vivekananda’sȱ Ramakrishna:ȱ Anȱ Untoldȱ Storyȱ ofȱ MythȬ makingȱandȱPropaganda.”ȱNumenȱ40ȱ(1993):ȱ38Ȭ62. Singh,ȱ Sadhuȱ Sundar.ȱ Wisdomȱ ofȱ theȱ Sadhu.ȱ Ed.ȱ Kimȱ Comer.ȱ FarmȬ ington:ȱPloughȱPublishingȱHouse,ȱ2000. Sinha,ȱ Nandlalȱ (ed.,ȱ transl.).ȱ Theȱ Bhaktiȱ Sûtrasȱ ofȱ Nârada.ȱ Theȱ Sacred BooksȱofȱtheȱHindusȱVII/1.ȱAllahabad:ȱTheȱPaniniȱOffice,ȱ1911. Smith,ȱ George.ȱ Lifeȱ ofȱ Williamȱ Carey:ȱ Shoemakerȱ andȱ Missionary.ȱ LonȬ don/ȱToronto:ȱJ.M.ȱDentȱ&ȱSons,ȱ1922ȱ[1909]. Smith,ȱWilliam.ȱDwij:ȱTheȱConversionȱofȱaȱBrahmanȱtoȱtheȱFaithȱofȱChrist. London:ȱJamesȱNisbetȱandȱCo.,ȱ1850. SoaresȬPrabhu,ȱ George.ȱ “Theȱ Tableȱ Fellowshipȱ ofȱ Jesus:ȱ Itsȱ SignifiȬ canceȱforȱDalitȱChristiansȱinȱIndiaȱToday.”ȱJeevadharaȱXXIIȱ(1992): 140Ȭ59. Sugirtharajah,ȱR.S.ȱAsianȱFacesȱofȱJesus.ȱ4thȱed.ȱMaryknoll:ȱOrbisȱBooks, 1999. “Theȱ Indianȱ Textualȱ Mutinyȱ ofȱ 1820.”ȱ In:ȱ R.S.ȱ Sugirtharajah. Asianȱ Biblicalȱ Hermeneuticsȱ andȱ Postcolonialism:ȱ Contestingȱ theȱ InȬ terpretations.ȱ Theȱ Bibleȱ &ȱ Liberationȱ Series.ȱ Maryknoll:ȱ Orbis Books,ȱ1998.ȱPp.ȱ29Ȭ53. Sumitra,ȱ Sunand.ȱ Revolutionȱ asȱ Revelation:ȱ Aȱ Studyȱ ofȱ M.M.ȱ Thomas’s Theology.ȱProȱfideȱdefendendaȱSeriesȱ1.ȱTübingen/NewȱDelhi:ȱInȬ ternationalȱ Christianȱ Network/Theologicalȱ Researchȱ andȱ ComȬ municationsȱInstitute,ȱ1984. Sukthankar,ȱ Vishnuȱ S.ȱ etȱ al.ȱ (eds).ȱ Theȱ Mahabharata.ȱ 19ȱ Vols.ȱ Poona: BhandarkarȱOrientalȱResearchȱInstitute,ȱ1933Ȭ1966. SwamiȱParamaȱArubiȱAnandamȱ(Fr.ȱJ.ȱMonchanin),ȱ1895Ȭ1957:ȱAȱMemorȬ ial.ȱTiruchirapalli:ȱSaccidanandaȱAshram,ȱ1959.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

297

Swarup,ȱ Ram.ȱ Hinduismȱ visȬàȬvisȱ Christianityȱ andȱ Islam.ȱ 3rdȱ ed.ȱ New Delhi:ȱVoiceȱofȱIndia,ȱ1992. Takenaka,ȱMasao.ȱȱChristianȱArtȱinȱAsia.ȱTokyo:ȱKyoȱBunȱKwan,ȱ1975. “Aȱ Tributeȱ toȱ Frankȱ Wesley.”ȱ Image:ȱ Christȱ andȱ Artȱ inȱ Asiaȱ 94 (2003):ȱ1Ȭ7. Tam,ȱ Eckmanȱ P.C.ȱ “Theȱ Trinityȱ andȱ Worldȱ Religionsȱ Reconsidered.” StudiesȱinȱInterreligiousȱDialogueȱ9ȱ(1999):ȱ52Ȭ66. Taylor,ȱ Richardȱ W.ȱ “Currentȱ HinduȬChristianȱ Dialogueȱ inȱ India.”ȱ In: Haroldȱ Cowardȱ (ed.).ȱ HinduȬChristianȱ Dialogue:ȱ Perspectivesȱ and Encounters.ȱMaryknoll:ȱOrbisȱBooks,ȱ1990.ȱPp.ȱ119Ȭ28. “Fromȱ Khadiȱ toȱ Kavi:ȱ Towardȱ aȱ Typologyȱ ofȱ Christianȱ AshȬ rams.”ȱReligionȱandȱSocietyȱ24ȱ(1977):ȱ19Ȭ37. Jesusȱ inȱ Indianȱ Paintings.ȱ Confessingȱ theȱ Faithȱ inȱ Indiaȱ Seriesȱ 11. Madras:ȱTheȱChristianȱLiteratureȱSociety,ȱ1975. Teasdale,ȱ Wayneȱ Robert.ȱ Towardȱ aȱ Christianȱ Vedanta:ȱ Theȱ Encounterȱ of Hinduismȱ andȱ Christianityȱ accordingȱ toȱ Bedeȱ Griffiths.ȱ Bangalore: AsianȱTradingȱCorporation,ȱ1987. Thangaraj,ȱM.ȱThomas.ȱTheȱCrucifiedȱGuru:ȱAnȱExperimentȱinȱCrossȬCulȬ turalȱChristology.ȱNashville:ȱAbingdonȱPress,ȱ1994. Thomas,ȱ Alfred.ȱ Theȱ Lifeȱ ofȱ Christȱ byȱ anȱ Indianȱ Artist.ȱ 2ndȱ ed.ȱ London: TheȱSocietyȱforȱtheȱPropagationȱofȱtheȱGospel,ȱ1961ȱ[1948]. Thomas,ȱP.T.ȱTheȱTheologyȱofȱChakkaraiȱwithȱSelectionsȱfromȱhisȱWritings. ConfessingȱtheȱFaithȱinȱIndia.ȱVol.ȱ2.ȱBangalore:ȱTheȱChristianȱInȬ stituteȱforȱtheȱStudyȱofȱReligionȱandȱSociety,ȱ1968. Thomassen,ȱ T.M.,ȱ andȱ C.C.G.M.ȱ ’tȱ Mannetje.ȱ Deȱ hongerdoekȱ uitȱ India: Hulpȱvoorȱpredikingȱenȱliturgie.ȱRotterdam:ȱD.P.C.,ȱ1986. Thomson,ȱ Mark.ȱ Gandhiȱ andȱ Hisȱ Ashrams.ȱ Bombay:ȱ Popular Prakashan,ȱ1995. Tiliander,ȱBror.ȱChristianȱandȱHinduȱTerminology:ȱAȱStudyȱinȱTheirȱMuȬ tualȱ Relationsȱ withȱ Specialȱ Referenceȱ toȱ theȱ Tamilȱ Area.ȱ Skrifterȱ utȬ givnaȱavȱReligionshistoriskaȱInstitutionenȱiȱUppsalaȱ(Hum.ȱFak.) 12.ȱUppsala:ȱAlmqvistȱ&ȱWiksell,ȱ1974. Tolstoy,ȱ Leo.ȱ Theȱ Kingdomȱ ofȱ Godȱ Isȱ withinȱ You:ȱ Christianityȱ Notȱ asȱ a MysticȱReligionȱbutȱasȱaȱNewȱTheoryȱofȱLife.ȱTransl.ȱfromȱRussianȱby Constanceȱ Garnett.ȱ Lincoln/London:ȱ Universityȱ ofȱ Nebraska Press,1984.ȱRpt.ȱofȱtheȱNewȱYorkȱ1894ȱedition. “Gandhiȱ Letters.”ȱ In:ȱ Recollectionsȱ &ȱ Essaysȱ byȱ Leoȱ Tolstoy.ȱ LonȬ don:ȱOxfordȱUniversityȱPress,ȱ1937.ȱPp.ȱ433Ȭ39.

298

JESUSȱASȱGURU

Vallabhadeva.ȱ Theȱ Subhashitavaliȱ ofȱ Vallabhadeva.ȱ Ed.ȱ P.ȱ Peterson,ȱ pt Durgaprasad.ȱBombayȱSanskritȱSeriesȱXXXI.ȱ2ndȱed.ȱPune:ȱBhanȬ darkarȱOrientalȱResearchȱInstitute,ȱ1961. Vanȱ Bergen,ȱ Ludgerȱ Franzȱ Maria.ȱ Lichtȱ opȱ hetȱ levenȱ vanȱ religieuzen: SannyasaȬdipika.ȱNijmegen:ȱThoben,ȱ1975. VanȱBuitenen,ȱJ.A.B.ȱTheȱMahabharata.ȱBookȱ4Ȭ5.ȱChicago/London:ȱThe UniversityȱofȱChicagoȱPress,ȱ1978. Vanȱ Lin,ȱ Jan.ȱ Shakingȱ inȱ theȱ Fundamentals:ȱ Religiousȱ Pluralityȱ andȱ EcuȬ menicalȱMovement.ȱChurchȱandȱTheologyȱinȱContext.ȱVol.ȱ36.ȱAmȬ sterdam/NewȱYork:ȱRodopi,ȱ2002. “Christologyȱ andȱ Christologiesȱ inȱ Indiaȱ –ȱ Anȱ Introduction.” ExchangeȱXIVȱ(1985):ȱ1Ȭ30. Venema,ȱ Charlotte.ȱ Livingȱ Apartȱ Together:ȱ InterȬfaithȱ Dialogueȱ inȱ India. Master’sȱThesisȱTheology,ȱUniversiteitȱvanȱAmsterdam,ȱ1993. Vidyatmananda.ȱ “Overȱ deȱ foto’sȱ vanȱ Sriȱ Ramakrishna.”ȱ Vedantaȱ 18 (1991):ȱ14Ȭ40. Vroom,ȱ H.M.ȱ Religionsȱ andȱ theȱ Truth:ȱ Philosophicalȱ Reflectionsȱ andȱ PerȬ spectives.ȱTransl.ȱJ.W.ȱRebel,ȱCurrentsȱofȱEncounterȱ2.ȱGrandȱRaȬ pids/Amsterdam:ȱEerdmans/Rodopi,ȱ1989. Webster,ȱ Johnȱ C.B.ȱ “Gandhiȱ andȱ theȱ Christians:ȱ Dialogueȱ inȱ theȱ NaȬ tionalistȱEra.”ȱIn:ȱHaroldȱCowardȱ(ed.).ȱHinduȬChristianȱDialogue: PerspectivesȱandȱEncounters.ȱMaryknoll:ȱOrbisȱBooks,ȱ1990.ȱPp.ȱ80Ȭ 99. TheȱPastorȱtoȱDalits.ȱISPCKȱContextualȱTheologicalȱEducationȱSerȬ iesȱ8.ȱDelhi:ȱISPCK,ȱ1995. Wessels,ȱAnton.ȱImagesȱofȱJesus:ȱHowȱJesusȱisȱPerceivedȱandȱPortrayedȱin NonȬEuropeanȱCultures.ȱGrandȱRapids:ȱEerdmans,ȱ1990. Wheeler,ȱG.,ȱandȱL.ȱFarrell.ȱ“TheȱReligiousȱArtȱofȱFrankȱWesley.”ȱAusȬ tralianȱ EJournalȱ ofȱ Theologyȱ 4.ȱ http://dlibrary.acu.edu.au/research/ theology/ejournal/aejt_4farrell.htm. Wilfred,ȱ Felix,ȱ andȱ M.M.ȱ Thomas.ȱ Theologiegeschichteȱ derȱ Drittenȱ Welt, Indien.ȱMunich:ȱChr.ȱKaiserȱVerlag,ȱ1992. Wolff,ȱOtto.ȱChristusȱunterȱdenȱHindus.ȱGütersloh:ȱGerdȱMohn,ȱ1965. Wolters,ȱ Hielkeȱ Tjeerd.ȱ (1987).ȱ M.M.ȱ Thomas’ȱ Conceptȱ ofȱ Salvationȱ and theȱCollectiveȱStruggleȱforȱFullerȱHumanityȱinȱIndia.ȱSerampore:ȱSerȬ amporeȱCollege.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

299

Woodcock,ȱ George.ȱ Mohandasȱ Gandhi.ȱ Newȱ York:ȱ Theȱ Vikingȱ Press, 1971. Wray,ȱ Naomi.ȱ Frankȱ Wesley:ȱ Exploringȱ Faithȱ Withȱ aȱ Brush.ȱ Auckland: PaceȱPublishing,ȱ1993. Yewangoe,ȱ A.A.ȱ Theologiaȱ Crucisȱ inȱ Asia:ȱ Asianȱ Christianȱ Viewsȱ on SufferingȱinȱtheȱFaceȱofȱOverwhelmingȱPovertyȱandȱMultifacetedȱReliȬ giosityȱinȱAsia.ȱAmsterdam:ȱRodopi,ȱ1987. Young,ȱRichardȱFox.ȱResistantȱHinduism:ȱSanskritȱSourcesȱonȱAntiȬChrisȬ tianȱ Apologeticsȱ inȱ Earlyȱ NineteenthȬCenturyȱ India.ȱ Publicationsȱ of theȱDeȱNobiliȱResearchȱLibraryȱVIII.ȱVienna:ȱUniversityȱofȱVienȬ na,ȱ1981. Zaehnerȱ ,ȱ R.C.ȱ (ed.,ȱ transl.).ȱ Theȱ BhagavadȬGita.ȱ London:ȱ Oxfordȱ UniȬ versityȱPress,ȱ1973.

IndexȱofȱNames Barlage,ȱHeinrich . . . 103,ȱ112 Barth,ȱKarl . . . . . . . . 109,ȱ116 Basava . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271 Bawa,ȱV.K. . . . . . . . . . . . . 169 Beyerhaus,ȱPeter . . . . . . . 217 Bhatt,ȱShamal . . . . . . . . . . 134 Birukoff,ȱPaul . . . . . . . . . . 142 Blake,ȱWilliam . . . . . . . . . . 33 Bodley,ȱRachelȱL. . . . . . 59,ȱ60 Boff,ȱLeonardo . . . . . . . . . 242 Bose,ȱNandalal . . 159Ȭ161,ȱ200 Boyd,ȱR.H.S. . . . . . . . . 53,ȱ216 Brahmananda,ȱSwami . . 104 Brinkman,ȱMartienȱE. . . . 124, 212 Bruere,ȱW.W. . . . . . . . . 71,ȱ78 Buchenel,ȱPaul . . . . . . . . . . 55

Abhishiktananda,ȱ Swami (Henriȱ leȱ Saux;ȱ also: Swamiȱ AbhishikteshvaȬ rananda . . . . . . 172,174, 176,ȱ179,ȱ187Ȭ89,ȱ192,ȱ197, 261 Abrams,ȱMinnieȱF. . . . 71,ȱ78 Adam,ȱWilliam . . . . . . . . . 30 Agera,ȱCassianȱR. . . . . . . 277 Akhilananda,ȱSwami 103Ȭ06, 109Ȭ12,ȱȱ114,ȱ219,ȱ275 Ali,ȱH.M.T. . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 Alvares,ȱArmando;ȱseeȱAnimaȬ nanda Anandam.ȱLourdu . . 173Ȭ77, 180,ȱ183,ȱ193,ȱ196 Andrews,ȱCharleyȱF. . . . . 119, 138,ȱ169,ȱ183 Animananda,ȱSwamiȱ(ArmanȬ doȱAlvares) . . . 180,ȱ181 Appasamy,ȱA.J. . . . . . 53,ȱ116, 119,ȱ167,ȱ255,ȱ276 Aquinas,ȱThomas. . . . . . . 178 Arokiadoss,ȱP. . . . . . . . . . 241 ArulȱRaja,ȱA.ȱMaria . . . . . 241 Arulraja,ȱM.R. . . . . . 241,ȱ243, 249,ȱ251,ȱ252 Athyal,ȱAbrahamȱP. . . . . 247 Athyal,ȱJesudasȱM. . 240,ȱ241 Atmajnanananda,ȱSwami . 89 AttenboroughȱR. . . . 131,ȱ150ȱ Ayrookuzhiel,ȱAbraham 241 Azariah,ȱV.S. . . . . . . 126,ȱ154

Camps,ȱArnulf . . . . . . . 1,ȱ212 Carey,ȱWilliam . . 11Ȭ13,ȱ15,ȱ30 Chaitanya . . . . . . . 88,ȱ89,ȱ113 Chakkarai,ȱVengal . . . . . . . 53, 115Ȭ26,ȱ129,ȱ262,ȱ274,ȱ276, 277 Chakravarti,ȱUma . 56,ȱ73,ȱ75 Chatterji,ȱS.K. . . . . . . . . . . 241 Chenchiah,ȱP. . . . . . . 116,ȱ117 Chhatrasal . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 Cone,ȱJames . . . . . . . . . . . 241 Cooke,ȱGeraldȱB. . . . . . . . . 98 Crawford,ȱCromwell . . 15,ȱ22 daȱFonseca,ȱAngelo . . . . . 200 Dasgupta,ȱB.N. . 12,ȱ22,ȱ26,ȱ29 Datta,ȱRamȱCandra . . . . . . 87 Dayananda,ȱ Swami;ȱ seeȱ GrifȬ fiths,ȱBede deȱBrito,ȱJoão . . . . . . . . . . 181

Badarayana . . . . . . . . . . . 210 Bakker,ȱFreekȱL. . . . . . . . . 266 Balasundaram,ȱF.ȱJ. . . . . . 241 Bapat,ȱRam . . . . . . . 56,ȱ57,ȱ70

301

302

JESUSȱASȱGURU

deȱNobili,ȱRoberto . . . 39,ȱ166, 181,ȱ239,ȱ268,ȱ269,ȱ276 Dekker,ȱJojanneke . . . . . . 266 Desai,ȱM.H. . . . . . . . . 140,ȱ150 Devadatta,ȱ Swami;ȱ seeȱ WinȬ slow,ȱJ.C Devanandan,ȱPaul.ȱD. . . . 214, 218,ȱ224 Devasahayam,ȱV. . . . . . . . 239, 241,ȱ242,ȱ247,ȱ253 Dhar,ȱSailendraȱNath . . . . 93 DionysiusȱtheȱAreopagite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175 Dumont,ȱLouis . . . . . . . . . 236 Dyer,ȱHelenȱS. . . . . 55,ȱ65,ȱ75, 76,ȱ81 Eck,ȱD.L. . . . . . . . . . . 149,ȱ154 Elisa,ȱPaulȱS. . . . . . . . . . . . 245 Ewald,ȱOskar . . . . . . . . . . 155 Farquhar,ȱJ.N. . . . . . 119,ȱ171 Farrell,ȱL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 Fischer,ȱLouis . . . . . . . . . . 139 ForestorȬPaton,ȱErnest . . . . . . 165Ȭ67,ȱ169,ȱ183ȱ Freire,ȱPaolo . . . . . . . . . . . 242 French,ȱHalȱW. . . . . . . . . . . 86 Gambhirananda,ȱSwami . 90 Gandhi,ȱ Mohandaȱ K.ȱ (MahatȬ ma) . . . . 97,ȱ119,ȱ131Ȭ43, 146Ȭ50,ȱ 153Ȭ61,ȱ 163Ȭ65, 169,ȱ 172,ȱ 182,ȱ 183,ȱ 215, 216,ȱ 219,ȱ 220,ȱ 244,ȱ 259, 267,ȱ270,ȱ272 Gardner,ȱC.E. . . . . . . . . 36Ȭ38, 42,ȱ43,ȱ52,ȱ53 George,ȱS.K. . . . . . . . . . . . 156 GispertȬSauch,ȱG. . . . . . . 174, 176,ȱ189 Gnanavaram,ȱM. . . . 242,ȱ253

Goel,ȱSitaȱRam . . . . . . . . . 261 Gonda,ȱJ. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Gonsalves,ȱFrancis . . . . . 254 Goreh,ȱNehemiah. . 19,ȱ35Ȭ39, 41Ȭ53,ȱ56,ȱ66,ȱ67,ȱ115,ȱ215, 262,ȱ270,ȱ272,ȱ276 Gracias,ȱValerian . . . . . . . 156 Grant,ȱSara . . . . 172,ȱ188,ȱ192 Green,ȱMartin . . . . 33,ȱ36,ȱ143 GregoryȱofȱNazianzus 175,ȱ176 Griffiths,ȱ Bedeȱ (Swamiȱ DayaȬ nanda) . . . . 177Ȭ80,ȱ188, 193Ȭ96,ȱ229,ȱ230,ȱ276ȱȬ78 Gupta,ȱB.[D.] . . . . . . . . . . 151 Gupta,ȱMahendranath . . . 83, 84,ȱ86.ȱ87,ȱ88 Gutierrez,ȱGustavo . . . . . 242 Habermas,ȱJürgen . . . . . . . 13 Hargreaves,ȱCecil . . 168,ȱ199 Harper,ȱS.B. . . . . . . . 126,ȱ154 Haslam,ȱWilliam . . . . . 69,ȱ71 Heber,ȱReginald . . . . . . . . . 31 Hecker,ȱDieter . . . . . 242,ȱ254 Heiler,ȱFriedrich . . . . . . . 155 Hoens,ȱD.J. . . . . . . . . . . . . 222 Isherwood,ȱChristopher . . . . . . . . . . . 91,ȱ98,ȱ103 Jesudason,ȱSavarirayan . . . . 165Ȭ67,ȱ169,ȱ183Ȭ85, 187,ȱ190,ȱ191,ȱ273 Jones,ȱE.ȱStanley . . . . 139,ȱ155, 156,ȱ172 Jordens,ȱJ.T.F. . . . . . . . . . . 113 Kabir . . . . . . . . . 152,ȱ269,ȱ271 Kämpchen,ȱMartin . . . . . 260 Kappen,ȱSebastian . . . . . . 241 Katre,ȱS.L. . . . . . . . . . . . 41,ȱ43 Kaur,ȱRajkumariȱAmrit . 137

INDEXȱOFȱNAMES Keithahn,ȱRichardȱR. . . . . 172, 182,ȱ183,ȱ190 Killingley,ȱDermot . . . 22,ȱ32 Kim,ȱHeupȱYoung . . 167,ȱ214 Kingsford,ȱAnna . . . . . . . 141 Kipling,ȱRudyard . . . . . . 1,ȱ2 Klootwijk,ȱEeuwout . . . . 221, 222,ȱ226 Klostermaier,ȱKlausȱK. . . 212 Kondvilker,ȱMadhau . . . 241 Kosambi,ȱMeera . . . . . . . . . 57 Kotnala,ȱM.C. . . . . . 11,ȱ12,ȱ30 Kraemer,ȱHendrik . . 116,ȱ126 Kranenborg,ȱR. . . . . . . . . . 104 Kripal,ȱJeffreyȱJ. . . . . . . 86,ȱ87, 89,ȱ96 Kripalani,ȱJ.B. . . . . . . . . . . 157 Krishnamurti,ȱJ. . . . . . . . . 229 Kuitert,ȱH.M. . . . . . . . 31,ȱ267 Lakshmibai . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Lannoy,ȱRichard . . . . . . . 269 leȱ Saux,ȱ Henri;ȱ seeȱ AbhishikȬ tananda,ȱSwami . . . . 173Ȭ77,ȱ185Ȭ89,192, 195Ȭ97,ȱ273,ȱ278 Lewis,ȱC.S. . . . . . . . . . . . . 177 Livermore,ȱCraigȱW. . . 15,ȱ22 Lobo,ȱLancy . . . . . . . 240,ȱ241 Macnicol,ȱNicol . . . 55,ȱ61,ȱ65, 71,ȱ78,ȱ79 Madhva . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60,ȱ61 Madtha,ȱWilliam . . . . . . . 241, 242,ȱ247,ȱ248 Mahieu,ȱFrancis . . . . . . . . 178 Maitland,ȱEdward . . . . . . 141 Mallick,ȱJaduȱNath . . . . . . 85 ManikkaȬvacakar . . . 187,ȱ190 Manorama . . . . 64,ȱ66,ȱ69,ȱ71 Marshman,ȱJoshua . . . . . . 15,

303

25Ȭ27,ȱ29Ȭ32 Marx,ȱKarl . . . . . . . . 145,ȱ216 Massey,ȱJames . . . . . 241,ȱ248 Mathew,ȱK.G. . . . . . . 168,ȱ199 Medhavi,ȱ Babuȱ Bipinȱ BeharȬ idas . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Mehta,ȱV. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 Melzer,ȱFriso . . . . . . . . . . 222 Miller,ȱWilliam . . . . . . . . . 118 Mirabehn,ȱ seeȱ Slade,ȱ MadeȬ leine Mohanadoss,ȱT. . . . . . . . . 147 Monchanin,ȱ Julesȱ (Swamiȱ PaȬ ramaȱArubiȱAnandam) . . . . . . . . . . 173Ȭ77,ȱ183, 185,ȱ195,ȱ196,ȱ273 MonierȬWilliams,ȱMonier . . . . . . . . . . . . 37,ȱ42,ȱ62 Monikaraj,ȱD. . . . . . . . . . . 247 Mozoomdar,ȱP.C. . . . . . . 215 Muir,ȱJohn . . . . . . . 38Ȭ41,ȱ142 Mukharya,ȱP.S. . . . . . . . . 151 Müller,ȱF.ȱMax . . . . . . . 53,ȱ75 Neevel,ȱWalterȱG. . . . . 89,ȱ96 Neufeldt,ȱRonald . . . . . . . 268 Nikhilananda,ȱSwami . 83,ȱ86 Ninan,ȱM.M. . . . . . . . . . . . 206 Nirmal,ȱArvindȱP. . . . 240Ȭ42, 245Ȭ49,ȱ251,ȱ252 Noreen,ȱBarbara . . . 168,ȱ186 Oosterhuis,ȱHuub . . . . . . 125 O’Toole,ȱMichael . . . . . . . 172 Paley,ȱWilliam . . . . . . . . . . 49 Pallath,ȱJ.J. . . . . . . . . . . . . 250 Panikkar,ȱR. . . . . . . . . 205Ȭ14, 222Ȭ24,ȱ230,ȱ264,ȱ278 Paramaȱ Arubiȱ Anandam, Swami;ȱ seeȱ Monchanin, Jules

304

JESUSȱASȱGURU

Parrinder,ȱGeoffrey . 105,ȱ122 Patanjali . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 Philip,ȱA.J. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Phule,ȱMahatma . . . . . . . 237 Polak,ȱMillieȱGraham . . . 136 PooleȬConnor,ȱB.J. . . . . . . . 69 Prabhakar,ȱM.E. . . . . . 241Ȭ43, 245Ȭ48,ȱ251,ȱ252 Prabhavananda,ȱSwami . . 98, 103,ȱ104,ȱ107Ȭ11,ȱ114,ȱ275 Prannath,ȱSwami . . . . . 151Ȭ54 Pusey,ȱEdward . . . . . . . . . . 45 Puthiadam,ȱIgnatius . . . . 260 PyeȬSmith,ȱCharlie . . 79,ȱ239 Radhakrishnan,ȱSarvepalli . . . . . . . . . . 24,ȱ156,ȱ157, 215,ȱ220,ȱ221 Räisänen,ȱH. . . . . . . . . . . . 142 Raj,ȱAnthony . . . . . . . . . . 241 Raj,ȱP.ȱSolomon . . . . . . . . 266 Raja,ȱJebamalai . . . . . 239,ȱ241 Rajan,ȱJesu . . . . . . . . . . . . 177 Ralston,ȱHelen . . . . . . . . . 172 Ramabai . . . . . . 47,ȱ53,ȱ55Ȭ82, 239,ȱ262,ȱ270,ȱ272 Ramakrishna . . . . . 81Ȭ90,ȱ92, 94,ȱ 96Ȭ100,ȱ 102Ȭ04,ȱ 112, 113,ȱ219,ȱ259,ȱ270,ȱ273,ȱ275 RamanaȱMaharshi . . . . . . 176 Ramanuja . . . . . . . . . 125,ȱ149 RammohanȱRoy . . . . . . . 5Ȭ21, 24Ȭ35,ȱ47,ȱ48,ȱ52,ȱ63,ȱ73,ȱ74, 77,ȱ93,ȱ113,ȱ136,ȱ213,ȱ214, 219,ȱ259,ȱ262,ȱ268,ȱ272 Ranganathananda,ȱSwami . . . . . . . . . . . 98Ȭ102,ȱ110 Raychandbhai . . . . . . . . . 141 Richard,ȱH.L. . . . . . . . . . . 116 Richards,ȱG. . . . . . . . . . . . 149 Robertson,ȱBruceȱC. . . . 7,ȱ30

Rolland,ȱRomain . . . . . . . . 86 Romero,ȱOscar . . . . . . . . . 242 Ruskin,ȱJohn . . . . . . . . . . . 142 Sahi,ȱJyoti . . . . . . 229Ȭ31,ȱ233, 234,ȱ255,ȱ266 Samartha,ȱStanleyȱJ. . . 15,ȱ25, 33,ȱ97,ȱ103,ȱ111,ȱ140,ȱ154, 157,ȱ 205Ȭ07,ȱ 217Ȭ22,ȱ 225, 226,ȱ230,ȱ264,ȱ276,ȱ278 Schelling,ȱN.J. . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Schouten,ȱJ.P. . . . . . 84,ȱ89,90,ȱ 94,ȱ129,ȱ132,ȱ152,ȱ171,ȱ187, 269Ȭ71 Schweitzer,ȱAlbert . . . . . . 119 Sen,ȱKeshubȱChunder 151,ȱ215 Sengupta,ȱPadmini . . . 59,ȱ62, 70,ȱ71,ȱ74,ȱ79 Sevenster,ȱJ.N. . 138,ȱ142,ȱ155 Shankara . . . . . 8,ȱ37,ȱ149,ȱ188, 195,ȱ196,ȱ220 Sharpe,ȱEricȱJ. . . . . . . . . . . 267 Sil,ȱN.P. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 Slade,ȱMadeleine . . . . . . . 261 Smith,ȱWilliam . . . . . . . 37,ȱ38, 41Ȭ46 SoaresȬPrabhu,ȱGeorge . . 250 Sugirtharajah,ȱR.S. . . . . . 4,ȱ15, 16,ȱ21,ȱ30ȱ Sumithra,ȱSunand . . . . . . 217 SundarȱSingh,ȱSadhu . . . . 27, 166,ȱ167,ȱ169,ȱ170 Swarup,ȱRam . . . . . . . . . . 261 Tagore,ȱAbanindranath . 159, 200 Tagore,ȱRabindranath . . . 159, 164,ȱ165,ȱ169 Taylor,ȱRichardȱW. . . . . . 140, 160,ȱ182,ȱ183,ȱ203,ȱ234,ȱ260 Teasdale,ȱWayneȱR. . . . . . 177

INDEXȱOFȱNAMES Thangaraj,ȱM.ȱThomas . . 269 ȱThomas,ȱAlfred. . . . . 199Ȭ204 Thomas,ȱM.M. . . . . 15,ȱ19,ȱ78, 156,ȱ 205Ȭ07,ȱ 212Ȭ17,ȱ 220, 224,ȱ225,ȱ230,ȱ264 Thomson,ȱMark . . . . . . . . 150 Tilak,ȱN.V. . . . . . . . . 166,ȱ170 Tiliander,ȱBror . . . . . 268,ȱ276 Tolstoy,ȱLeo . . . . . . . . 141Ȭ146 Tukaram . . . . . . 171,ȱ187,ȱ191 Tytler,ȱR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Upadhyay(a),ȱBrahmabhandav . . . . . . . . . . . 174,ȱ215 Vallabhadeva . . . . . . . . . . . 51 vanȱBergen,ȱLudgerȱF.M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197,ȱ198 vanȱLin,ȱJanȱ . . . . . . . 116,ȱ218 Vandana,ȱ Sisterȱ (Goolȱ Mary Dhalla) . . . . . . . 172,ȱ174, 186,ȱ188

305

Venema,ȱCharlotte . . . . . 260 Vivekananda,ȱSwami . . . . 81, 82,ȱ90Ȭ97,ȱ99,ȱ100,ȱ102Ȭ04, 110,ȱ112,ȱ113,ȱ215,ȱ219,ȱ273 Vroom,ȱH.M. . . . . . . . . . . 149 Ward,ȱWilliam . . . . . . . 15,ȱ30 Watts,ȱIsaac . . . . . . . . . . . 138 Webster,ȱJohnȱC.B. . . . . . 241, 242,ȱ245,ȱ246 Wesley,ȱFrank . . . . . . . 127Ȭ29 Wheeler,ȱG. . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 Williams,ȱSusheila . . . ȱ255Ȭ57, 266 Winslow,ȱ Jackȱ C.ȱ (Swamiȱ DeȬ vadatta) . . . 168Ȭ71,ȱ183,ȱ 185Ȭ87,ȱ191,ȱ269 Wolff,ȱOtto . . . . . . 103,ȱ111Ȭ13 Young,ȱRichardȱFox . . 39Ȭ41, 53,ȱ112

IndexȱofȱSubjects 177,ȱ226,ȱ229,ȱ262,ȱ267Ȭ68 atheism/atheist . . . . . . . . . 223 atman . . . . . . . . 8,ȱ92,ȱ125,ȱ188 AtmiyaȱSabha . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 avarna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237 avatara . . . . . . 105,ȱ117,ȱ119Ȭ26

abba . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189 AbhishiktanandaȱSociety 261 acharya . . . . 172,ȱ183,ȱ186,ȱ190 adivasi . . . . . . . . 238,ȱ242,ȱ265 adivasiȱtheology . . . . 242,ȱ265 advaita . . . . . . 8,ȱ60,ȱ86,ȱ90Ȭ91, 93,ȱ 95Ȭ97,ȱ 99,ȱ 149,ȱ 176, 187Ȭ89,ȱ 195Ȭ97,ȱ 215,ȱ 220Ȭ 22,ȱ263Ȭ64,ȱ278 ahimsa . . . . . . . . . . . . 156,ȱ158 Ahmedabad . . . . . . . . . . . 164 amȬhaȬarez . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253 ananyabhakti . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 anawim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 anekantavada . . . . . . . . . . . 149 AnglicanȱChurch . 37,ȱ45,ȱ66,ȱ 70,ȱ 75,ȱ 78,ȱ 126,ȱ 154,ȱ 169, 171,ȱ200 anjali . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232 antaryamin . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 Antpur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 anubhava . . . . . . . . . . 101,ȱ120 apophatic . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175 architecture . . . . . . . . . . . 168 Arunachala . . . . . . . . . . . . 176 AryaȱMahilaȱSamaj . . . . . . 64 AryaȱSamaj . . . . . . . . . . . . 112 asceticism . . . . . . 8,ȱ52,ȱ88,ȱ96, 120,ȱ180,ȱ183,ȱ273 AshramȱofȱtheȱHolyȱTrinity . . 174 ashram(a) . . . 53,ȱ58,ȱ126,ȱ137, 147,ȱ 163Ȭ74,ȱ 176Ȭ92,ȱ 195, 197,ȱ199Ȭ200,ȱ204,ȱ229Ȭ230, 233,ȱ263,ȱ269,ȱ272Ȭ73,ȱ278 Asian/Asiatic . . . . 1,ȱ4,ȱ16,ȱ25, 32,ȱ52,ȱ93,ȱ127Ȭ28,ȱ136,ȱ168,

Balakrishna . . . . . . . . . . . . 129 Bangalore . . . . . . . . . . 98,ȱ178, 206Ȭ07,ȱ212,ȱ230,ȱ240Ȭ41 baptism . . . . . . . 19,ȱ43,ȱ45Ȭ46, 69,ȱ76,ȱ101,ȱ118,ȱ124 BaptistȱMission/missionaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 BaselerȱMission . . . . 206,ȱ222 Belur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 Benares;ȱseeȱVaranasi BenedictineȱOrder . . 174,ȱ177 BengalȱSchoolȱofȱArt . . . . 159 BhagavadȬGita . . . . 51,ȱ61,ȱ72, 101,ȱ105,ȱ107Ȭ08,ȱ122,ȱ134Ȭ 35,ȱ177,ȱ223,ȱ275 BhagavataȱPurana . . . . 51,ȱ61, 105 bhajan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 bhakti/bhakta . . . . . . 53,ȱ84,ȱ89, 96,ȱ 101,ȱ 110,ȱ 117Ȭ20,ȱ 123, 132,ȱ134,ȱ149,ȱ151Ȭ52,ȱ170Ȭ 71,ȱ 173Ȭ74,ȱ 181,ȱ 187,ȱ 190, 221,ȱ235,ȱ262Ȭ63,ȱ269,ȱ271 bhashya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210 bhumisparshamudra . . . . . 201 blackȱtheology . . . . . 241,ȱ249 Boston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 BrahmaȱSutra . . . . . . 8,ȱ210Ȭ11 brahmanȱ(caste) . . . . . . 5,ȱ7,ȱ8, 11,ȱ26,ȱ35Ȭ36,ȱ38Ȭ40,ȱ43,ȱ45, 47,ȱ52Ȭ53,ȱ56,ȱ58Ȭ59,ȱ61Ȭ63,

307

308

JESUSȱASȱGURU

65,ȱ 66,ȱ 68,ȱ 70,ȱ 75,ȱ 79,ȱ 82, 83,ȱ 117,ȱ 170,ȱ 236,ȱ 238Ȭ40, 252,ȱ264Ȭ65,ȱ271Ȭ72 Brahmanȱ(UltimateȱReality) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,ȱ84,ȱ89, 92,ȱ 94,ȱ 106Ȭ07,ȱ 111,ȱ 125, 153,ȱ180,ȱ188Ȭ89,ȱ192,ȱ195Ȭ 96,ȱ210Ȭ11,ȱ221,ȱ265 BrahmoȱSamaj . . . . . 9,ȱ47Ȭ50, 63,ȱ72,ȱ81,ȱ113,ȱ215 BrihadȬAranyakaȱUpanishad 100,ȱ170,ȱ189,ȱ191Ȭ92 Buddha . . . . . 92,ȱ97,ȱ108,ȱ113, 129,ȱ 190,ȱ 201,ȱ 204,ȱ 220, 223,ȱ246,ȱ266,ȱ275 Buddhism/Buddhist . . . . 119, 152Ȭ53,ȱ180,ȱ194,ȱ201,ȱ223, 230,ȱ239 Calcutta;ȱseeȱKolkata Calvinism/Calvinist . . . . . 37 caste . . . . . . . . . . 4Ȭ5,ȱ8,ȱ20,ȱ24, 43Ȭ45,ȱ53,ȱ56Ȭ57,ȱ59Ȭ70,ȱ73, 75,ȱ 79,ȱ 82,ȱ 117,ȱ 132,ȱ 154, 214Ȭ15,ȱ 232,ȱ 235Ȭ40,ȱ 242, 244,ȱ247,ȱ249Ȭ51,ȱ255,ȱ257, 265,ȱ271 celibacy/celibate . . . . . 165Ȭ66, 169,ȱ171,ȱ184 Centreȱ ofȱ Dalitȱ Studies,ȱ New Delhi . . . . . . . . . . 241 chamar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 chetti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 chitpavan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 ChristaȱPremaȱSevaȱSangha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 ChristaȱSevaȱSangha . . . . 168, 170,ȱ199Ȭ200 Christianȱ Instituteȱ forȱ the StudyȱofȱReligionȱandȱSoȬ cietyȱ(CISRS)ȱ . . . . . . 98,

185,ȱ206,ȱ212 Christmas . . . . 90,ȱ97Ȭ99,ȱ102, 104,ȱ110,ȱ146,ȱ199,ȱ246 Christology . . . . . . . . 4,ȱ16,ȱ32, 67,ȱ 77,ȱ 89,ȱ 106,ȱ 111,ȱ 113, 116Ȭ17,ȱ 119,ȱ 121Ȭ22,ȱ 124, 126,ȱ 129,ȱ 140,ȱ 163,ȱ 177, 179,ȱ184,ȱ187,ȱ193,ȱ195Ȭ97, 210,ȱ212,ȱ214,ȱ220Ȭ22,ȱ225Ȭ 26,ȱ 262,ȱ 264Ȭ67,ȱ 269,ȱ 276Ȭ 78 ChristukulaȱAshram . . . . 165, 167Ȭ68 ChurchȱMissionaryȱSociety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 ChurchȱofȱSouthȱIndiaȱ(CSI) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206,ȱ255 Cistercianȱorder . . . . . . . . 178 communalism . . . . . . . . . 219 Communityȱ ofȱ St.ȱ Maryȱ the Virgin;ȱ seeȱ Wantageȱ SisȬ ters Confucianism/Confucian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180 conversion . . . . . 38Ȭ39,ȱ43Ȭ44, 48,ȱ 61,ȱ 69,ȱ 73,ȱ 75Ȭ76,ȱ 78, 104,ȱ154,ȱ157,ȱ239,ȱ247 cosmicȱChrist . . . . . . 196,ȱ211, 222,ȱ225,ȱ264Ȭ65,ȱ277Ȭ79 cosmotheandric . . . . . . . . 209 CowleyȱFathers . . . . . . . . . 46 Creed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,ȱ145 crucifixion . . . . . 127,ȱ140,ȱ156, 158,ȱ160,ȱ192,ȱ247,ȱ255,ȱ257 dalit . . . . . . . . 53,ȱ237,ȱ239Ȭ53, 255,ȱ257,ȱ265,ȱ270,ȱ272,ȱ279 DalitȱPanthers . . . . . . . . . 241 dalitȱtheology . . . . 53,ȱ239Ȭ43, 245Ȭ49,ȱ 251Ȭ53,ȱ 255,ȱ 272, 279

INDEXȱOFȱSUBJECTS

309

DanishȱMission . . . . . . 118Ȭ19 darshana . . . . . . . . . 44,ȱ47,ȱ186 desertȱfathers . . . . . . . . . . 175 Deshnur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181 dvija . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237

haveli . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 hindutva . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260 holistic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179 Hollywood . . . . . 98,ȱ103,ȱ104 hungerȱcloth . . . . . . . . 231Ȭ233

Easter . . . . . . . . . 111,ȱ192,ȱ231 EasternȱOrthodoxȱChurches . . . . . . . . . 205,ȱ225,ȱ264 exclusive/inclusive . . . 70,ȱ71, 108,ȱ 116,ȱ 147,ȱ 151,ȱ 180, 219,ȱ220,ȱ224Ȭ26,ȱ235,ȱ265, 267 fastȱ(hungerȱstrike) . . . 138Ȭ39 feminism/feminist . . . . 56,ȱ57 Franciscanȱorder . . . . . . . 171 FreeȱChurchȱofȱScotland . 118 fulfillmentȱtheology . . . . 171

incarnation . . . . 26,ȱ32,ȱ49Ȭ51, 53,ȱ88,ȱ101Ȭ02,ȱ105Ȭ06,ȱ108Ȭ 09,ȱ 113,ȱ 118,ȱ 121Ȭ24,ȱ 129, 132,ȱ 138,ȱ 141,ȱ 171,ȱ 176, 191,ȱ 194,ȱ 204,ȱ 208,ȱ 246, 259,ȱ275Ȭ76 inculturation . . . . . 4,ȱ115Ȭ17, 121,ȱȱ124,ȱ127,ȱ165Ȭ66,ȱ169, 200,ȱ 230,ȱ 233,ȱ 240,ȱ 253, 262,ȱ265Ȭ66 IndianȱSchoolȱofȱArtȱforȱPeace (INSCAPE) . . . . . 230 Indianization . . . . . . 117,ȱ121, 126 interreligiousȱcelebrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218 interreligiousȱdialogue . . . . . . . 15,ȱ52,ȱ147,ȱ214, 221,ȱ224,ȱ226,ȱ230,ȱ233Ȭ34, 261,ȱ270,ȱ277 ishtadeva . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Ishvara . . . . . . . . . . . 210,ȱ211 Islam/Islamic . . . . . . 7,ȱ23,ȱ85, 132,ȱ152,ȱ195,ȱ261

Gandhianȱmovement . . . . . . . . . . 159Ȭ60,ȱ169, 172,ȱ183,ȱ260Ȭ61 Gayatriȱmantra . . . . 170,ȱ191 ghatasphota . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Gnosticism . . . . . . . . . . . . 179 Goa . . . . . . . . . . . . 180Ȭ81,ȱ187 GoaȱJesuitȱSwamis . . . . . . 181 GoldenȱRule . . 23,ȱ27,ȱ99,ȱ110 gopuram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 guru . . . . 21Ȭ24,ȱ31,ȱ34,ȱ60,ȱ88, 91,ȱ 98,ȱ 101,ȱ 103Ȭ04,ȱ 122, 124,ȱ129,ȱ152,ȱ159,ȱ164Ȭ66, 169,ȱ171,ȱ180,ȱ182,ȱ186Ȭ87, 204,ȱ212,ȱ259,ȱ262Ȭ63,ȱ265Ȭ 72,ȱ277 gurudeva . . . . . . . 24,ȱ186,ȱ269 GurukulȱLutheranȱTheological College,ȱMadras . . . 241 gurukula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 Hanuman . . . . . . . . . . 84,ȱ266 harijan . . . . 136,ȱ140,ȱ154,ȱ244

JacobiteȱChurch . . . . . . . . 179 jagadguru . . . . . . . . . . 186,ȱ269 Jainism . . . 132,ȱ141,ȱ149,ȱ158 jati . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236 jebalayam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 Jesuitȱorder . . . . . 166,ȱ180Ȭ81, 240,ȱ254,ȱ260 Jews/Jewish . . . . . . . . 33,ȱ124 jivanmukta . . . . . . 187Ȭ89,ȱ196, 264,ȱ274

310

JESUSȱASȱGURU

Kali . . . . . . . 56,ȱ82Ȭ85,ȱ89,ȱ118 karma . . . 38,ȱ41,ȱ64,ȱ108,ȱ216 KathaȱUpanishad . . . . . . 100 kavi . . . . . . . . 174,ȱ182Ȭ85,ȱ188, 195,ȱ197,ȱ201 Kedgaon . . . . . . . . . . . . 60,ȱ70 KenaȱUpanishad . . . . . . . 197 kenosis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185 kevalaȱadvaita . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 khadi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182Ȭ85 KhudaiȱRaj . . . . . . . . . . . . 146 KingdomȱofȱGod . . . . . 20,ȱ94, 100,ȱ102,ȱ109,ȱ141Ȭ43,ȱ145Ȭ 46,ȱ158,ȱ214 Kodaikanal . . . . . 172,ȱ177,ȱ190 Kolkataȱ(Calcutta) . . . . 5,ȱ6,ȱ8, 9,ȱ10,ȱ11,ȱ13,ȱ16,ȱ30,ȱ31,ȱ32, 35,ȱ44,ȱ45,ȱ47,ȱ62,ȱ63 Krishna . . . . 42,ȱ49,ȱ51,ȱ83,ȱ88, 92,ȱ 101Ȭ02,ȱ 105,ȱ 108,ȱ 113, 122Ȭ23,ȱ 129,ȱ 132,ȱ 151Ȭ52, 171,ȱ187,ȱ200,ȱ203Ȭ04,ȱ220Ȭ 21,ȱ226,ȱ266,ȱ275,ȱ277 kshama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 kshatriya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236 Kuljam . . . . . . . . . . . . 152,ȱ153 Kurishumala . . . . . . . 178Ȭ79, 182Ȭ83,ȱ229 Lent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231Ȭ32 Lentenȱveil . . . . . . . . . . . . 231 liberationȱtheology . . 241Ȭ43, 248 linga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181 lingayatas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181 liturgy . . . . . . 52,ȱ169,ȱ178Ȭ79, 244Ȭ45,ȱ262,ȱ264 logos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107,ȱ191 Lord’sȱPrayer,ȱthe . . . 95,ȱ110, 244 LucasȱAshram . . . . . . . . . 230

Lucknow . . . . . . . . . . 127,ȱ200 lungi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 Madras . . . . . . . . . . 15,ȱ53,ȱ93, 97,ȱ 116Ȭ19,ȱ 140,ȱ 160,ȱ 167, 183,ȱ 186,ȱ 203,ȱ 216,ȱ 218, 234,ȱ239Ȭ41,ȱ262 MadrasȱChristianȱCollege . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118 Mahabharata . . . . . . 110,ȱ223 mahar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 mandala . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230 mandorla . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232 MandukyaȱUpanishad . . 125 MarȱThomaȱChurch . . . . 206 marriage . . . . . . 58Ȭ60,ȱ63,ȱ64, 177,ȱ184Ȭ85,ȱ230 Marxism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206 matha . . . . . . . . . . . . 164,ȱ181 maya . . . . . . . . . 8,ȱ96,ȱ188,ȱ221 meditation . . . . . . 58,ȱ98,ȱ163, 168,ȱ 170,ȱ 175,ȱ 232,ȱ 259, 273,ȱ278 Methodists . . . . . . . . . . 71,ȱ76, 78Ȭ80,ȱ217 mission/missionaries . . 9,ȱ14 30,ȱ 45,ȱ 55,ȱ 60,ȱ 81,ȱ 90,ȱ 94, 98Ȭ99,ȱ 105,ȱ 116,ȱ 118Ȭ19, 126,ȱ 139,ȱ 154,ȱ 157,ȱ 166, 172Ȭ73,ȱ200,ȱ206,ȱ216,ȱ219, 222,ȱ234,ȱ238Ȭ39,ȱ242,ȱ257, 259,ȱ275 modhȱbania . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 mohadharma . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 mohashastra . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 moksha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188 monastery . . . . . . 98,ȱ164,ȱ169, 175,ȱ178Ȭ79,ȱ181Ȭ82 monism/monistic . . . 8,ȱ60,ȱ84, 89,ȱ93Ȭ94,ȱ118,ȱ149,ȱ172Ȭ74, 176,ȱ187Ȭ89,ȱ195,ȱ196,ȱ197,

INDEXȱOFȱSUBJECTS 220Ȭ22,ȱ 235,ȱ 263Ȭ64,ȱ 274, 278 monophysism/monophysist . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179,ȱ264 monotheism/monotheist . . . . . 6Ȭ9,ȱ26,ȱ47,ȱ63,ȱ181 MoralȱReȬArmament . . . . 172 morph¾ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193 MuktiȱSadan . . . . . . . . . . 70Ȭ71 murti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193 Murugan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118 Muslim . . . . . . . 6,ȱ27,ȱ85,ȱ132, 150Ȭ51,ȱ232 mysticism/mystic . . . . 85Ȭ86, 113,ȱ143Ȭ45,ȱ166,ȱ169,ȱ183, 259,ȱ263Ȭ64,ȱ269 namrata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 NaradaȱBhaktiȱSutra . . . . 101 Nationalȱ Biblical,ȱ Catechetical andȱ Liturgicalȱ Centre, Bangaloreȱ(NBCLC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192,ȱ230 NazarethȱManifesto . . . . 247 NewȱAge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179 Nirvana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180 nishkamakarma . . . . . . . . . 135 nityaȬsiddha . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 nonȬviolentȱresistance . . . 131, 139,ȱ216 OM . . . . . . . . . 174,ȱ191Ȭ92,ȱ195 OxfordȱGroup . . . . . . . . . 172 pandit . . . . . . . 36,ȱ44,ȱ62,ȱ262 pandita . . 47,ȱ53,ȱ55Ȭ57,ȱ59Ȭ65, 68,ȱ 70Ȭ71,ȱ 73Ȭ79,ȱ 81Ȭ82, 239,ȱ262,ȱ270,ȱ272 parda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 pariah . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243,ȱ244 ParliamentȱofȱtheȱWorld’sȱReliȬ gions . . . . . . . . 81,ȱ91

311

Parsism/Parsi . . . . . . 132,ȱ172 passion . . . 19,ȱ29,ȱ42,ȱ88,ȱ101, 111 PlymouthȱBrethren . . . . . 137 practicalȱVedanta . . . . . 93Ȭ94 praeparatioȱevangelica . . 50,ȱ74, 176 pranami . . . . . 132,ȱ149Ȭ51,ȱ153 pranava . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174 PrarthanaȱSamaj . . . . . 47,ȱ50 prayer . . . 7,ȱ44,ȱ47,ȱ50,ȱ52,ȱ63, 69,ȱ71,ȱ95,ȱ110,ȱ121,ȱ137Ȭ38, 147Ȭ48,ȱ 167Ȭ68,ȱ 170,ȱ 179, 184,ȱ187,ȱ191Ȭ92,ȱ199,ȱ232, 244Ȭ45,ȱ272Ȭ74 Protestantism/Protestant . . . . . . . . 92,116,ȱ125Ȭ26, 138,ȱ140,ȱ163,ȱȱ165,ȱ171Ȭ73, 183,ȱ187,ȱ190Ȭ91,ȱ205,ȱ220, 224,ȱ 229,ȱ 239,ȱ 255,ȱ 257, 263,ȱ272Ȭ73,ȱ278 pulaya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250 Pune . 47,ȱ51,ȱ60,ȱ64Ȭ68,ȱ70Ȭ71, 166,ȱ170Ȭ72,ȱ183,ȱ186,ȱ191, 192,ȱ199,ȱ229,ȱ269 punya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Purana . . . . . . . . . . 51,ȱ61,ȱ105 purity 5,ȱ8,ȱ11,ȱ20,ȱ63,ȱ235Ȭ38, 246,ȱ250Ȭ51 Purusha . . . . 125,ȱ192,ȱ194Ȭ95, 197,ȱ277 PurushaȬsukta . . . . . . . . . 192 Quakers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230 Radha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 RadhasvamiȱSatsang . . . . 229 Radhavallabhaiȱsampradaya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 Rama . . . . . . . . 51,ȱ87,ȱ88,ȱ113, 122Ȭ23,ȱ132,ȱ187,ȱ203,ȱ209Ȭ

312

JESUSȱASȱGURU

11,ȱ226,ȱ262,ȱ266,ȱ275,ȱ277 RamakrishnaȱMission . . . . 81, 94,ȱ98Ȭ99,ȱ219,ȱ259 Ramayana . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223 Renaissanceȱ(Indian) . . . . 156, 159,ȱ200,ȱ213,ȱ215,ȱ217 “RethinkingȱChristianity” Group . . . . . 116Ȭ17,ȱ126,ȱ 262 renunciation . . . . . . . . . 51,ȱ90, 95,ȱ113,ȱ135,ȱ175,ȱ185,ȱ263, 273 resurrection . . . . . . . . . 29,ȱ90, 111,ȱ211,ȱ219,ȱ221Ȭ22 RigȬVeda . . . . . . 170,ȱ192,ȱ194 rishi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 RockȱofȱVision . . . . . . . . . 172 RomanȱCatholicism . . . . . . . . . . 98,ȱ116,ȱ126, 156,ȱ160,ȱ163,ȱ172Ȭ74,ȱ178, 180,ȱ183,ȱ185Ȭ88,ȱ200,ȱ205, 212,ȱ224,ȱ230Ȭ31,ȱ234,ȱ239, 241,ȱ252,ȱ263,ȱ273Ȭ74,ȱ278 Saccidanandaȱ(SatȬCitȬAnanda) 173Ȭ74,ȱ176,ȱ188Ȭ89,ȱ195Ȭ97 SaccidanandaȱAshrama . 174 sadguru . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269 sadhana . . . . . . . 101,ȱ163,ȱ165 sadhu . . . . . . . 27,ȱ166Ȭ67,ȱ170, 184,ȱ186,ȱ263,ȱ273 samadhi . . . . . . . . . . 83,ȱ84,ȱ86 samanyata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Samaritans . . . 21,ȱ72,ȱ77,ȱ204, 232Ȭ33,ȱ251 sandhya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 sannyasa/sannyasi(n) . . . . . 53, 90,ȱ96,ȱ99,ȱ102,ȱ113,ȱ166Ȭ67, 174,ȱ177Ȭ78,ȱ182,ȱ185,ȱ197, 200Ȭ01,ȱ272,ȱ273

Sant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 sarvadharmaȱsamanatva . . 152, 154 SatȱPurusha . . . . . . . . 125,ȱ277 SatȱTal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172 satyagraha/satyagrahi . . . . 139, 140,ȱ158,ȱ216 sati . . . . . . . . . . . . 10Ȭ14,ȱ20,ȱ65 SatyagrahaȱAshram . . . . . 164 Savitar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 ScottishȱChurchȱCollege . . 90 ScottishȱMission . . . . . . . . 118 ScottishȱPresbyterianȱChurch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229 Serampore . . . . . . 9Ȭ11,ȱ14Ȭ15, 21,ȱ25,ȱ30,ȱ207 SermonȱonȱtheȱMount . . . . 19, 23,ȱ 28,ȱ 42,ȱ 48,ȱ 98Ȭ99,ȱ 102, 104Ȭ05,ȱ 107Ȭ111,ȱ 113Ȭ14, 133Ȭ36,ȱ 139,ȱ 141Ȭ42,ȱ 145Ȭ 46,ȱ156Ȭ58,ȱ259,ȱ270,ȱ272 shakti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82,ȱ89 Shaivism/Shaiva . . . . . 37,ȱ44, 45,ȱ123,ȱ269. ShantiȱNiketan . . . . . 159,ȱ160, 165 Shantivanam . . 174,ȱ177,ȱ179 180,ȱ183,ȱ185,ȱ196,ȱ230 SharadaȱSadan . . . . . . . 68,ȱ70 shastra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 shastri . . . . . . . . . . . . 36,ȱ44,ȱ52 ShvetashvataraȱUpanishad . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 Shiva . . . . . 36,ȱ37,ȱ51,ȱ122Ȭ23, 132,ȱ 171,ȱ 181,ȱ 187,ȱ 190, 204,ȱ233,ȱ266,ȱ274 shraddha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 shreshthata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 shruti . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120,ȱ208 shudra . . . 63,ȱ236,ȱ237,ȱ239Ȭ40

INDEXȱOFȱSUBJECTS Siluvepura . . . . . . . . . . . . 230 SistersȱofȱSt.ȱMaryȱtheȱVirgin (CSMV) . . . . . . . . . . 172 smriti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 Sociétéȱdesȱauxiliairesȱdes Missionsȱ(SAM) . . . 173 SocietyȱforȱtheȱPropagationȱof theȱGospel . . . . . 45,ȱ168, 200Ȭ01 SocietyȱofȱStȱJohnȱthe Evangelist . . . . . . . . . 46 Societyȱ ofȱ theȱ Sacredȱ Heart (RSCJ) . . . . . . . . . . . . 172 Sufi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 syncretism . . . . 117,ȱ121,ȱ151 SyrianȱOrthodoxȱChurch . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169,ȱ206 SyroȬMalankarȱChurch . . 178 TaittiriyaȱUpanishad . 24,ȱ192 Tambaram . . . . . . . . . 116,ȱ126 tantra/tantric/tantrika . . . . . . . . . 82,ȱ83,ȱ89,ȱ96 Tao . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180,ȱ214 Taoism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179 tarka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40,ȱ48 tathagata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194 theandrism . . . . . . . . . . . . 209 theocentric . . . . 180,ȱ195,ȱ225 theotes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175 theyyam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250 ThomasȱChristians . . . . . 264 Thomism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178 Tiruchirapalli . . . . . . . . 173Ȭ74 Tirupattur . . . . . 165,ȱ170,ȱ172, 183Ȭ84 tribe/tribal . . . . . 144,ȱ235,ȱ242, 250,ȱ254,ȱ266 tribhanga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204 Trimurti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

313

Trinity . . . . . . 29Ȭ30,ȱ32,ȱ49Ȭ50, 174,ȱ196Ȭ97,ȱ208 UnitedȱFreeȱChurchȱMissionȱof Scotland . . . . . . . . . . 166 UnitedȱTheologicalȱCollege, Bangaloreȱ(UTC) . . 207, 218,ȱ240Ȭ41 untouchable . . . . . . . . . . . 169 upanishad . . . . . . 24,ȱ100,ȱ111, 125, 170,ȱ 188Ȭ89,ȱ 191Ȭ92, 197 ushnisha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201 Vagamon . . . . . . . . . . . 178Ȭ79 vairagya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 vaishya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236 Vaishnavism/Vaishnava . . . . . . 37,ȱ45,ȱ83,ȱ88,ȱ89, 122,ȱ 132,ȱ 149,ȱ 150,ȱ 151, 274,ȱ275,ȱ276 Varanasiȱ(Benares) . . . ȱ6,ȱ12, 36,ȱ39,ȱ47,ȱ129 varna . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236,ȱ237 Veda/Vedic . . . . . . 61,ȱ107Ȭ08, 120,ȱ125,ȱ163,ȱ169Ȭ70,ȱ192, 194Ȭ95,ȱ223,ȱ236,ȱ277 Vedanta . . . . . . 8,ȱ9,ȱ60,ȱ84,ȱ89, 92Ȭȱ98,ȱ104,ȱ106,ȱ118,ȱ170, 173Ȭ74,ȱ 176,ȱ 178Ȭ79,ȱ 187Ȭ 89,ȱ195Ȭ96,ȱ235,ȱ263 VedantaȱSocietyȱofȱProvidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 velumȱtempli . . . . . . . . . . . 231 Virashaivism/Virashaiva . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181,ȱ187 vishishtadvaita . . . . . . . . . . 149 Vishnu . . . . . 36Ȭ37,ȱ51,ȱ53,ȱ60, 105,ȱ 118,ȱ 122,ȱ 132,ȱ 204, 275Ȭ76 vows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46,ȱ169

314

INDEXȱOFȱSUBJECTS

WantageȱSisters . . . 66,ȱ72Ȭ73, 75,ȱ80 Wardha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 woman/women . . . 10Ȭ12,ȱ21, 24,ȱ55Ȭ57,ȱ59Ȭ65,ȱ67Ȭ70,ȱ72Ȭ 73,ȱ 75,ȱ 77,ȱ 79Ȭ80,ȱ 84,ȱ 101, 131,ȱ 137,ȱ 160,ȱ 172,ȱ 185, 201,ȱ 203Ȭ05,ȱ 230,ȱ 232Ȭ33, 239,ȱ246,ȱ251,ȱ262,ȱ271 WorldȱCouncilȱofȱChurches (WCC) . . . . . 33,ȱ206Ȭ07, 216Ȭ17,ȱ224Ȭ25,ȱ278

WorldȱMissionȱConference . . 116,ȱ126 YajurȬVeda . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 yoga/yogi . . . . . . . . 81,ȱ88Ȭ89, 96,ȱ 105Ȭ06,ȱ 113,ȱ 121,ȱ 232, 259,ȱ272Ȭ74 Zoroastrianism . . . . . . . . 148