INDIAN RENASCENT ENGAGEMENT WITH THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST
1. Raja
Rammohan Roy
2. M.
K. Gandhi
3. B.
R. Ambedkar
___________________________________________________________________________
Introduction
Indian Christian Theology is an outcome of a major
awakening in socio-political and religious systems in India. The Christians also were influenced by the
movements and tried to formulate an Indian (Contextual) theology, as against
the western imported theology. These
three important leaders played an vital role in forming such a theology, let us
look into that three personalities along with Indian Christianity.
1.
Raja Rammohan Roy : The Christ of ‘The Precepts’
1.1. Biography - Raja
Rammohan Roy
Raja Rammohan Roy was
born in a Brahmin family. He also worked with British officials of the East
India company, and became familiar with the English language and western ideas.
He knew Arabic, Persian and Sanskrit. From 1815-1830 he lived in Calcutta and
wrote in Bengali, Sanskrit and English. He was well known in missionary
circles, ,politics and in the field of education and he had corresponded with
English and American thinkers. He called his religion the national worship of
the God of nature who is the one true God. He formed the Brahma Samaj to
promote this worship and engaged in controversies with Christians and Hindus.
While he valued Christ for his moral teachings, he rejected the incarnation,
trinity and original sin. His affinity was with the Unitarians among
Christians,
He was a humanist and
was called the Father of Indian Renaissance. He rejected Sati, infanticide and
caste system as he joined with Serampore Trio and their efforts. He was
understood as the prophet of Indian nationalism. He was influenced by Quran,
Parsee religion, Upanishadic Philosophy and Unitarian belief. He was strictly
monotheistic and anti-idolatrous. His endeavour was to recreate tuna:
brotherhood and unit for all religions of mankind. In 1815, he established the
Atmeeya Sabha, then Brahma Sabha, later it became Brahma Samaj. He published a
pamphlet Tuhfat-ul-Muwathiddin. (A present to the believers in one God). The
next work was ‘vedanta-sutra' in Bengali. This book establishes unity of the
supreme being. In 1820 he published the ‘precepts of Jesus: The guide to peace
and happiness‘. Marshman questioned the selection of Jesus’ moral teachings
only. Roy’s argument was mainly against Marshman. He questioned the doctrine of
Trinity and divinity of Jesus. Marshman questioned his views in ‘Friend of
India‘. Roy assumed that morality is the essence of true religion.
Raja Rammohan Roy was
influenced by Islam, Upanishads, Sufism, ethical teachings of Jesus and liberal
humanism of the west. His monotheistic belief, rational understanding of
reality and humanistic views were the outcome of these influences. According to
DR. Bali, “Rammohan Roy believed that religion must inculcate knowledge, love
of God and sympathy for his fellowmen, it must inculcate human feelings and
soften the general attitude" (Modem Indian Thought: F mm Rammohan Roy to
Jayaprakash Narayan, New Delhi: Sterling publishers, 1989, RS). According to
Dermot H. Killingly, Roy believed that God is revealed in nature and in reason
and religious traditions, if properly understood, is consistent with reason and
supports it. His main sources are Upanishads and vedanta sutras, though quotes
from Tantras, Puranas, Dhar masastras and Bhagavadgita. He presents himself as
a follower of Sankara’s advaita. Killingly observes that Rammohan believed that
the Upanishads direct our thoughts to Brahman, an omniscient creator manifest
in the universe. He considered the Hindu view of God superior to any other, but
has reservations on the moral effects of Hinduism. Morality, he believed, was best
taught in Christianity.
There was a debate
between Roy and Marshman of the Serampore mission. For Roy, the Biblical
scripture has no higher value over other scriptures, but for Marshman divine
authority of the whole of Holy scriptures is important as the word of God.
Marshman challenges the selection of Roy in ‘Precepts of Jesus’ especially the
criteria used to select the passages (Roy included only the moral teachings of
Jesus, like the Sermon on the Mount). Marshman insisted on the whole Bible as
the basis for salvation and he underlined the soteriological function of
doctrines.
1.2.
Raja Rammohan Roy and theological debate
In 1820 Raja Rammohan
Roy published extracts from the Gospels containing the Teachings of Jesus,
especially sermons and parables. The title of the publication was The Precepts
of Jesus, The Guide to Peace and Happiness, extracted from the Books of the New
Testament, ascribed to the four evangelists (with translations into Sanskrit
and Bengalese). Joshua Marshman, one of the Baptist missionaries of Serampore,
writing editorially in the Friend of India No. XX (February 1820) commented
critically on the manner in which only a part of the Gospels was published, and
said that it ‘ may greatly injure the cause of truth ’. In response to this,
Rammohan Roy published An Appeal to the
Christian public in Defence of the precepts of Jesus by a Friend of Truth. hence
the argument between them went on.
As this controversy was
going on, William Adam, one of the Serampore missionaries who was translating
the New Testament into Bengali with the help of Rammohan Roy, confessed
Unitarianism in 1821. This incident added heat to the controversy.
Some other writings of
Rammohan Roy have a bearing on his ideas on Christianity. Of these, special
mention may be made of his writings under the pseudonym ‘ Shivaprasad Sarma ’
on ‘ The Missionary and the Brahman ’ in the Brahminical magazine, which appeared
occasionally between 1821 and 1823; and under the pseudonym of Ram Doss in
which he entered into a public controversy with Tytler on Hinduism and
Christianity.
1.3.
Divinity of Jesus
Marshman stood for
verbal inspiration. For Roy some texts of the Bible are distorted. Marshman
advances seven positions to prove the deity of Jesus.
1. Jesus was possessed
of ubiquity, omnipresence, an attribute peculiar to God alone.
2. That he declared
that knowledge of His nature was equally incomprehensive with that of the
nature of God.
3. He exercised the
power of forgiving sins, the peculiar prerogative of God.
4. He claimed almighty
power in the most unequivocal manner.
5. His heavenly father
had committed to him the final judgement of all who have lived since the
creation.
6. He received worship
due to God alone.
7. He associated his
own name with that of God the father, in the sacred rite of baptism.
1.4.
Raja Rammohan Roy on Christian Churches
In the collected
English works of Raja Rammohan Roy, he mentions about “Christian Chruches have
selected passages from the Bible, which they conceive particularly excellent
and well adapted for the constant perusal and study of the people of their
respective churches.”
Raja also points out
with a strong rationalistic protest against all religions and an attempt to
build a natural theology on the basis of the authority of reason. He mentions,
“a class of deceivers, a class of deceived people,.. a class of people who are
deceivers , and also deceived, and those who by the help of Almighty God are
neither deceivers nor deceived.” This shows the stand point of Raja Rammohan
Roy towards Christian Churches and on natural theology.
1.5. Raja Rammohan Roy
on Religion
Raja Rammohan Roy had
three fundamental ideas in his religion
1. A
monotheistic faith in the unity of God inspired fundamentally perhaps by Islam.
2. The
conviction that morality is the essence of true religion, that moral
degradationis the accompaniment of polytheism and idolatrous worship.
3. A
certain rationalism which, while conscious of its limits, still demands that
religion should hold only to beliefs which are reasonable, and that reason
should serve to purify religion of superstition and unnecessary mysteries and
miracles.
Raja Rammohan Roy was a
protestant Hindu moving away from a moral and monistic/polytheistic tendencies
of traditional Hinduism under the influence of western liberalism. The appeal
of Jesus Christ to him was primarily to his protestant Hindu soul Jesus ethics
and monotheism attracted him.
Raja Rammohan Roy has
shown in many of his writings his aversion to what he called ‘speculative
doctrines and creeds’ and ‘metaphysical arguments’. About God, he
affirmed that man cannot know or contemplate the nature of deity. He can only
‘read His existence’ in ‘the works of nature’ including, we should suppose, the
works of moral nature of man and society.
1.6.
The Idea of God and Divine Nature
Rammohan Roy has his
own distinctive theism as the starting point of all his theological
reflections. It is a version of the idea of Brahman revised in the light of the
philosophical categories of the natural theology of monotheism and rational
Deism from the West, and conceives the moral law as the will of God. And he is
seeking to interpret Jesus Christ in the light of this prior understanding of
God and divine nature. Given the nature of an immutable God, transcending all
creation and all creatures, and upholding them by his moral law, any kind of a
dynamic of movement in God or from God to the world is ruled out. Within this
framework of thought, Rammohan Roy can interpret the most spiritual unity
between Jesus and God only as one of ‘Will and design’. This is the limit beyond which
his philosophical monotheism will simply break down. We do not know whether
this ‘ beyond’ was possible for Rammohan Roy himself. But if it ever came, it
could come only by digging into the nature of morality and God and their relation
in terms essentially of love. This would have meant a new vision of the
centrality of the Cross of Jesus Christ, at least as the symbol of God in the
midst of mankind, and probably leading to a fuller faith in Jesus as God’s
self-disclosure to man.
1.7.
Son and Father Relationship
Roy said that Son was
dependent and was subject. He quoted the Bible to affirm Jesus’ natural
inferiority (1 Cor, 15 :24-28; Col. 1:15). There is a unity of will i.e., of
father and son and not united in identity. The oneness in essence was not
accepted by Roy. Preexistence is also disclaimed by Roy.
Marshman said Jesus is
really one in essence with the father but emptied himself for a meditorial
office. He talked of the unity of nature with the distinction of persons. Jesus
was not the first creation but first born.
According to Roy, the
Holy Spirit is a prevailing influence of God. For Marshman he is a person. For
Roy, Holy Spirit is a messenger, the vicarious suffering and sacrificial death
is rejected by Roy. (M.M. Thomas, The
Acknowledged Christ of Indian Renaissance, P.15ff)
Raja Rammohan Roy was a
great influence as he condemned the social evils and inhuman practices. He
questioned superstitions, idolatry, mysteries and miracles. His theology was
natural theology. He worked hard to enlighten Indians. Though he held distinct
view about Jesus, he had the highest respect for Jesus. His understanding about
Bible, Christ, God and Christianity gave shape to a particular Indian theology.
But it is certain that all what he said is not acceptable.
2.
Mahatma Gandhi
Mahatma Gandhi, the
father of the nation, who had read the scriptures of all the important
religions with Open mind and without prejudice, had developed friendship with
several Christians and had learnt a great deal about Christianity. Yet, he had
a critical attitude towards Christian missionaries, their methods of evangelism
and also of Indian Christians who had the legacy of missionary attitude to
Hinduism, conversion and so on. He was frank, honest and openly criticized the
Christian mission in India. In this short paper, Gandhi’s critique on Christian
mission is highlighted in order to reflect the understanding of Christian
mission today, particularly Christian mission from Indian perspective.
2.1.
Gandhi’s attitude toward Missionaries
Gandhi had a thoroughly
negative attitude towards Christian missionaries. Although he appreciated
philanthropic work of missionaries he did not appreciate the goal of mission
work, which is soul winning or conversion. “I willingly admit that missions
have done indirect good to India but also admit that Christians in India had
committed grave mistakes also.” Their indirect contributions were educational
and curative institutions of Christian missions but direct contribution was an
aid to proselytizing probably more harmful than otherwise.”
Few reasons why he was
critical with missionaries:
1. He discovered that
the missionaries were the agents of British Raj. He finds that Christianity is
so much intertwined with the ruling British power that it has become synonymous
with materialism and imperialistic exploitation. He said, “Christian
missionaries came to India under the shadow or if you like, under the
protection of a temporal power, and it creates an impossible bar. They seemed,
in the minds of many nationalists, to be allied to imperialism.” He further
said that the Christian missionaries as a body, with honourable exceptions, had
actively supported a system which has impoverished, enervated and demoralized a
people considered to be among the gentlest and the most civilized on earth.‘
Hence, the entrance of the missionary into the fray added to the forces of
division rather than of healing.
2. His negative
attitude towards Christian missionaries seems to have sprung from the basis that
missionaries abused people of other faiths especially Hinduism as false and
devilish. This prompted him to develop a hatred for Christianity. He did not
like exclusive claim of Christianity as the truest religion that only they had
something good to offer and condemned other religions as false. Conversely this
means that missionaries regarded other faiths as false and this was not
acceptable to Gandhi. Gandhi was sore With missionaries because they abused
Hinduism contained only superstition. Therefore, he said, “You, the
missionaries come to India thinking that you come to a land of heathens of idolaters,
of men who do not know God”. Hence, he
was emphatic in his advice to the missionaries at Calcutta.
3 Gandhi was not happy
with missionaries’ methods of
proselytizing, preach-to-convert-efforts and their approach primarily to
depressed classes, whom he thought cannot understand Christianity.
4. He disliked missionaries’
imposition of western crimes as superior over Indian culture and spreading
western civilization through Christianization. He did not want to accept
Christianity which was contained in a foreign vessel. Gandhi warned the
Christian against confusing Jesus’ message with the message of western
civilization. He invites the Christians to take in the good things that they
are in other cultures and not to uproot them. “Confuse not Jesus’ teachings
with what passes as modern civilization, and pray do not do unconscious
violence to the people among whom you cast your lot. Don’t tear the lives of the
people of the East by its roots. Tolerate whatever is good in them and do not
judge hastily with your preconceived notions.
2.2.
Gandhi’s understanding of Religion
Gandhi’s attitude
toward his own religion had a lot of impact on his attitude toward Christianity.
He said that “Hinduism contained all the necessary ingredients to propel him
towards Truth. Gandhi remained a Hindu, yet he admired other faiths for the
good things they contained in them His view all faiths constitute a revelation
of truth, but all are imperfect, and liable to error. No single religion has the
absolute or exclusive truth. Hence, he did not consider Christianity as the
greatest or the perfect religion, because the life of Christians was not
different from that of people of other faiths. “The pious lives of Christians
do not give me anything that the lives of men of other faiths had failed to
give.” Philosophically there was nothing extraordinary in Christian principles.
He said that the Hindus greatly surpassed the Christians and so did not regard
Christianity as a perfect religion or the greatest of all
He believed in
universality of all religions. This position of Gandhi would not permit him to
accept Christianity with its innumerable demands such as conversion,
proselytization, etc. He had a great regard for the Christianity of the
Founder,’ but not for the Christianity of the missionaries.
Gandhi held the View
that the relation between one “Religion and another can best be maintained by
mutual respect for and toleration of one mother‘s position therefore, Gandhi
called for religious tolerance and mutual aspect, instead of exclusive claim
upon the other. Gandhi proposed dialogue in place of conversion," respect
and tore for other religions as for one’s own. His call to lndian Christians
was to make them live as Christians rooted in Jesus’ message, true citizens of
India. Every nation's religion is as good as any other. Certainly India’s
religions are adequate for her people. We do not need of converting
Spiritually."
2.3.
Christian Mission
What Gandhi had pointed
out against Christian mission in India is a grave Missiological problem with
regard to the nature, methods and process of doing mission. Mission as
imposition of western culture, its conversion and confrontation process,
exclusive claim of Christianity as the only absolute truth in the midst of
India’s religious pluralism are very offensive methods. We need to retrospect
tad prospect of doing mission today from the perspective Gandhi’s critique.
The history of
Christian mission shows that Christianity has been used as an instrument or
agent to protect the interest of the rich and colonial power, exactly like
Gandhi had pointed out as agents of British Raj. Some examples:
1. Since from the time
of first ecumenical council of Nicea, Christianity has consistently maintained
religious legitimacy of the Empire. Gradually, faith became an obligatory state
religion to express loyalty to the empire.
2. The history of
Christian countries in the west shows that Christianity was used as an instrument
to expand imperialism.
3. The western
Christianity has been closely associated with colonial expansion. Using the
military forces Christianity was spread in Asia, Latin America and Africa They
considered colonial expansion as providence of God to take good news to heathen
world. The colonizers not only invaded their territories, but also forcibly
proselytize the people. Though some of the missionaries were critical of
colonial interest, most missionaries conspired with the colonial governments
and cooperated with them. Some missionaries acted as government agents rather
than messengers of the Gospel.
4. The western theology
with a strong monotheistic approach, exclusive, anthropocentric has been
imposed upon the native people and condemned the people of other faiths as
devilish, heathen and native culture as uncivilized.
Gandhi’s critique on
Christian mission should be noted seriously. His call to Indian Christians to
live as Christians, rooted in Jesus’ message and be true citizens of India,
with true patriotic and national sentiments and as true participants in nation
building. His is a relevant message to Christians
even today. Hence, we need to promote God’s mission in order to transform the
people and the society but not for
destruction, and to destroy.
3. B. R. Ambedkar
Ambedkar was rated
among the best brains of the country and some thought that he was one of the
best brains of the world. He was regarded as one of the dozen most astonishing
men and one of the bravest sons of India.
This lengthy quote is
justified when one realises that the emancipation of the untouchables was a
religious commitment for Ambedkar. In his last speech at Bombay, on May 24,
1956, he “compared himself with Moses who had led his people from Egypt to
Palestine, the land of freedom.”
3.1. Ambedkar = Moses
Ambedkar, a devoted
student of the Bible, possessed a huge collection of Biblical literature, was
led to comp are himself to Moses. And aptly so. Moses wanted to relieve the
Israelites from forced labour and their unending servitude. Moses was brought
up and educated by a princess. Ambedkar was provided with educational
facilities by a prince. Moses learnt at the University-Temple of On, then a
famous centre of learning. Ambedkar received his education at three world
famous universities with an enquiring, searching and acquisitive mind. Like
Moses, he was strong, determined and courageous. But Moses was humbled by his
respect for and worship of God. Ambedkar was learning this attribute at the
feet of his man-god, the Buddha. Both led their people out of bondage, gave
them their religion and law and brought them to the doorsteps of the promised
Land. Moses was eighty when he liberated his people, and Ambedkar was sixty
five. Like Moses, Ambedkar catalogued, expanded and interpreted the code of the
laws of a nation.
3.2. Ambedkar – A Man
of Mission
Ambedkar was a deeply
religious man and “believed in God in the sense that some unknown power might
be influencing the human destiny. He was sceptical of the sincerity of the man
who boasted that he had no faith in God and no belief in religion.” He was ‘a
man of mission’. He believed that his life would be as long as it was necessary
to bring about the welfare of the depressed classes and prayed that God bless
him with a span of life necessary for his life work.‘ In February 1933 he
declared, “the mission of the untouchables movement was to fight their tyranny,
injustice and false traditions, and undo all privileges and release the
harassed people from bondage. His entire life he devoted to this cause. His
appreciation or affiliation to any religion or disappointment with it was based
on the religion’s ideals and ability to improve and change the conditions of
the Depressed classes.
3.3. Ambedkar’s
understanding of Religion
On Ambedkar’s
understanding of Religion: In his essay on the ‘Philosophy of Hinduism’ he
wrote that the Primary meaning of religion was theology, and summarised his
brief discussion thus:
Taking the three theses
of theology, namely
(1) the existence of
God,
(2) God’s providential
government of the universe
(3) God’s moral
government of mankind. I take Religion to mean the propounding of an ideal
scheme of divine governance the aim and object of which is to make the social
order in which men live, a moral order. This is what I understand by Religion.
Tracing the evolution
of Religion, by internal revolution, to become an ideal scheme of divine
governance for the well-being of man, he
arrives at the following conclusions. The essential understanding of God came
to be that of his being the creator of the universe and being capable of
absolute good and absolute virtue. Man ceased to be a mindless worshipper of
God, merely obeying God’s commandments, but became a responsible person
required to justify his belief in God’s commandments by his conviction (and
conduct). Society and man changed places within the divine order and man became
the centre of it. Thus the religious revolution was a revolution in norms» to
enable people to judge between right and wrong in the conduct of human beings
and to recognise the true basis of moral good , which is justice.“ The
relations of God to man, and of man to man, become the real contents of
religion. Justice under girds these relationships and becomes the foundation of
the moral order.
3.4. Ambedkar on
Justice
Explaining the
principle of justice, Ambekar said:
Justice has always
evoked ideas of equality, of proportion, of ‘Compensation’. Equity signifies
equality. Rules and Regulations, right and righteousness are concerned with
equality in value. If all men are equal, then all men are of the same essence,
and the common essence entitled them to the same fundamental rights and to
equal liberty.’
In short, justice is
simply another name for liberty, equality, and fraternity. It is in this sense
I shall be using ‘justice’ as a criterion to judge Hinduism.
3.5. Bishop Pickett on
Ambedkar
Bishop Pickett,
“Occasionally he (Ambedkar) seemed on the verge of declaring himself a
Christian and advising his people to become Christians”. Thrice he enquired
whether the Bishop would be “willing to baptise him secretly on the understanding
that within a few years he would make confession of his faith". He wanted
secrecy because he wished to remain eligible to represent his people in the
Assembly. Sometimes during those years, he seemed to have thought of marrying a
Christian “but he never did. Instead he married a Brahmin.”
Ambedkar came so near
and yet moved away so far from entering the Christian Church. He often said
that his quest for conversion, either his own or of his people, was for
spiritual reasons. He considered that liberty, equality and brotherhood were
spiritual fruits. He was well-versed in the Biblical religion and history of
nations, the Gospels and the Epistles and convinced about the suitability of
the Christian faith for the conversion of himself and of his people.
3.6. Ambedkar on Christian
Untouchables
Ambedkar saw three
reasons why the Christian untouchables have failed to raise a movement-(1) the
complete absence of desire on the part of educated Christians to take up the
cause of the community and to fight for it within the Christian community there
is no kinship between the educated class and the mass. The untouchable
Christians are therefore leaderless to mobilise and redress their wrongs; (2)
In the mental make-up of untouchable Christians there is no urge to break his
bonds because of his antecedents, and positive dislike of the Hindu religious
teachings, thus making Christianity just an addendum to his old faith, (3) the
Christian Church teaches that the fall of man is due to his original sin and
the promise of forgiveness of sins. He thought that, apart from it theological
or evangelistic basis, this doctrine was sociologically misleading. Not
teaching them that the fall was due to wrong social and religious environment,
made them weak and passive, to make them think that there was no use
struggling. When he was a Hindu his fall was due to his karma. When he became a
Christian he learnt that his fall was due to sin of his remote ancestor. So
what was new. Ambedkar asked. However Christians feel about this, it is very
right to think that Indian Christians need a dynamic theology of a new
spirituality for struggle and liberation.
The emergence of the
Christian Dalit Movement. and its commitment to fight against casteism within
churches and society, and to promote along with the churches, the Christian
Dalit struggles for civil economic rights, are not fully recognised or
appreciated by the Church. Indian Christianity has not yet accepted the
emergence of Dalit Theology which can initiate a counter-culture within the
Church. It is necessary to end the discrimination against and isolation of
Dalits. What are the consequences of this isolation? Isolation means social
segregation, social humiliation, social discrimination and social injustice.
Isolation means denial of protection, denial of justice, denial of opportunity.
Isolation means want of sympathy, want of fellowship and want of consideration.
By having kinship, untouchables will have equal position, equal protection and
equal justice, will be able to draw upon (the community) its goodwill. A
Community is a body of kindred, the bond which holds community together is
kinship. These are the stupendous tasks
facing the Church today.
Conclusion
and Evaluation
The church is called to
participate in building communities that prioritize the eradication of poverty
and the elimination of hunger, the ending of wars and the evolution of
conflicts; and the overcoming of ignorance, curing of diseases, and healing of
enmities. Peace rooted in God’s justice will help bring about forgiveness and
wholeness for all God’s people and the whole of creation Asian oikomene will
only be relevant when churches respond, join and work actively in the struggle
for justice with people in pain.
Need to develop an
ecclesiology based on equality, justice and partnership based on Jesus model
where all sections of people irrespective of caste, colour, sex, races and
cultures can come together and participate. Church should be a place where justice
and peace take place for all people but not a place of discrimination.
When we read these
three leaders with light to Indian theological ideas, we can conclude that A Christian Theology in the Indian context
is necessary. More than that, the task of doing theology in the light of God,
Christ and Holy spirit in the Indian context is the prime goal, that was the
ultimate aim for these three leaders that they set a particular goal and lead
their life towards that. With humility we too accept that and build a Christian
Theology in Indian Context of our time.
Bibliography
Thomas, M. M. The
Acknowledged Christ of the Indian Renaissance. Madras: The Christian
Literature Society, 1976.
Larbeer, Kwon Jin-Kwan
and P. Mohan, eds. Mission in the
context of Margins. Bangalore: BTESSC, 2015.
Stephen, M. A
Christian Theology in the Indian Context. Delhi: ISPCK, 2001.
Sun, James Massey and
NOH, Jong, eds. Dalit Minjung Theological Dialogue On Being a New Community
and Ecclesia of Justice and Peace. Bangalore: BTESSC/SATHRI, 2010.
Devasahayam, Arvind P.
Nirmal and V, eds. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar A Centenary Tribute. Madras: Gurukul Lutheran Theological College
and Research Institute, 1991.
No comments:
Post a Comment