IMAGES OF JESUS AMONG OTHER ASIAN BELIEVERS

Before I evoke some Asian christian images of Jesus it will be helpful to see, very briefly, how other
Asians have imaged Jesus. Even today, many hindus who are critical of or even opposed to Christianity
as a religion will have a soft corner for Jesus as a teacher, a guru or an avatar, not only for Christians, but
also for themselves. They would not accept the claims to uniqueness and superiority that Christians
make about Jesus, considering him as God. But they have no problem in accepting Jesus as a 'divine'
figure. This is true of ordinary people as well as the educated elite and can be illustrated as a constant
practice in India over two hundred years. Some, like Gandhi, would claim to be his disciples. In the
following pages I shall focus on a few people who have been articulate in their views about Jesus.

Jesus as a Moral Teacher

Raja Ram Mohan Roy (1774-1833) was a socio-religious reformer. He wanted to rid Hinduism of its
superstitions like polytheism and 'idol' worship. He also campaigned against social practices like the
burning of the widows with their dead husbands. His zeal for religious reform also lead him to criticize
Christians who worshipped the Trinity, instead of being strict monotheists or Unitarians. He must have
been influenced by the Deist tradition in England. He tended to demythologize the gospel stories about
Jesus, drawing from them only his "precepts". He wrote to a friend in 1815:

The consequence of my long and uninterrupted researches into religious truth has been that I have
found the doctrine of Christ more conducive to moral principles and better adapted for the use of
rational beings than any others which have come to my knowledge.1
He compiled a volume with the title The Precepts of Jesus in which he collected passages from the
parables and sermons in the gospels. He wrote to another friend:

I regret only that the followers of Jesus, in general, should have paid much greater attention to enquiries
after his nature than to the observance of his commandments.2
He had however very definite views about the 'nature' of Jesus. Because of his strong monotheism,
probably linked also to Indian non-duality (advaita) he refused to accept Jesus as God. He spoke of the
unity of will between Jesus and God rather than of identity of being. People are saved not by the death
of Jesus but by being obedient to God by the faithful following of Jesus' precepts. In short, for Ram
Mohan Roy, Jesus was an exemplary human being who taught us how to live by word and example. He
shows us the way to self discovery and moral behaviour.

Jesus as an Avatar
Ramakrishna Paramahamsa (1836-1886) was a saintly figure in Bengal who had a group of disciples. He
was open to other religions, comparing them to the different words used in different languages to
indicate the same reality. He showed this openness in using resources from different religions for his
sadhana (spiritual effort). He was attracted to a picture of Mary with the child Jesus which he saw in the
house of one of his devotees. Shortly after this, as he was walking in his garden "he saw an extra-
ordinary looking person of serene aspect and foreign extraction approach gazing at him. Sri
Ramakrishna's heart spontaneously assured him that it was none other than Christ. The Son of Man then
embraced him and merged in him, sending him to deep ecstasy".3 What is significant here is the claim
to experience Christ personally outside the official mediations of the church. Ramakrishna considered
Jesus as one of the avatars. He seemed to have considered himself an avatar and certainly his disciples
thought so.4

Swami Vivekananda (1863-1902) was Ramakrishna's favourite disciple and founder of the Ramakrishna
order of monks. The order was founded on Christmas eve and Vivekananda spoke about Jesus and his
life to the monks, holding him up as an example to follow. The feast of Christmas is still celebrated every
year in the houses of the order. Vivekananda considered Jesus as an avatar or incarnation of God, but
certainly not as the only one. He did not worry much about the historicity of Jesus. He thought that as an
avatar Jesus could not really suffer. So he did not take seriously the death and resurrection of Jesus and
the aspect of redemption. As a matter of fact he accepts ignorance (avidya) as an obstacle to
selfrealization, but not sin. What we call sin may indicate imperfection, but by encouraging guilt we only
make the chains of ignorance stronger. Jesus as an avatar experiences his one-ness or non-duality
(advaita) with the divine and is therefore a model for all of us to follow. "Jesus had our nature; he
became the Christ; so can we and so must we. Christ and Buddha were the names of a state to be
attained. Jesus and Gautama were the persons to manifest it."5 One need not become a Christian to be
a follower of Jesus. "The Christian is not to become a Hindu or Buddhist, nor a Hindu or a Buddhist to
become a Christian. But each must assimilate the spirit of the others and yet perceive his individuality
and grow according to his own law of growth."6 The following passage gives an idea of how
Vivekananda saw Jesus Christ.

The Word has two manifestations, the general one of Nature, and the special one of the great
Incarnations of God – Krishna, Buddha, Jesus and Ramakrishna. Christ the special manifestation of the
absolute is known and knowable. The Absolute cannot be known; we cannot know the Father, only the
Son...7 He (Christ) had no other occupation in life; no other thought except that one, that he was a
spirit. He was a disembodied, unfettered, unbound spirit. And not only so, but he, with his marvelous
vision, had found that every man and woman, whether Jew or Greek, whether rich or poor, whether
saint or sinner, was the embodiment of the same undying spirit as himself. Therefore the one work his
whole life showed, was calling upon them to realize their own spiritual nature… You are all sons of God,
Immortal spirit. 'Know' he declared, 'the kingdom of Heaven is within you'. 'I and my Father are one.'8
Christ can therefore be called a Yogi and a Jivanmukta – that is, some one who has realized his ultimate
liberation already in this life. That is why he is a model of renunciation – a true Sannyasin. Vivekananda
maintained that Christ was basically an oriental in spirit and the orientals can understand and follow him
better and more easily than the westerners.

Jesus, the Satyagrahi

Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948) is not only a politician who led India to its independence from colonialism
he was also a deeply religious person. Though he was a Hindu and found his inspiration in the Bhagavad
Gita, Gandhi had evolved a personal religion. For him truth is God. The Sanskrit word for truth Sat also
means 'being'. This truth can be realized only progressively by being faithful to the limited truths of daily
life. The way of achieving this truth is ahimsa or non-violence. One must be able to love the meanest
creation as oneself. Non-violence is not possible without brahmacharya, namely self-control and
renunciation. Gandhi's personal religion therefore had a strong ethical character. It is from this vantage
point that he looks at all the religions, including Christianity.

For Gandhi all religions are true, but imperfect. All of them show the way to God. "I believe that all the
great religions of the world are true, more or less. I say 'more or less' because I believe that everything
that the human hand touches, by reason of the very fact that human beings are imperfect, becomes
imperfect."9

Given his ethical orientation and his interest in non-violence what attracted him in Jesus was his
teaching in the Sermon on the Mount and his experience on the cross. He says: "The message of Jesus as
I understand it, is contained in His Sermon on the Mount."10 He saw in Jesus 'a martyr, an embodiment
of sacrifice'. The cross was the symbol of this self-sacrificing love of Christ.

The gentle figure of Christ, so patient, so kind, so loving, so full of forgiveness that he taught his
followers not to retaliate when abused or struck but to turn the other cheek – it was a beautiful
example, I thought, of the perfect man…11 Though I cannot claim to be a christian in the sectarian
sense, the example of Jesus' suffering is a factor in the composition of my underlying faith in
nonviolence, which rules all my actions, worldly and temporal. Jesus lived and died in vain if he did not
teach us to regulate the whole of life by the eternal law of Love.12
The cross and the Sermon on the Mount become thus symbols of a way of life. Gandhi finds them valid
always and everywhere in such a way that the historicity of Christ is not important to him. "I should not
care if it was proved by someone that the man called Jesus never lived… for the Sermon on the Mount
would still be true to me."13

God did not bear the Cross only nineteen hundred years ago, but He bears it today, and He dies and is
resurrected from day to day. It would be poor comfort to the world, if it had to depend upon a historical
God who died two thousand years ago. Do not then preach the God of history but show Him as He lives
today through you… Living Christ means a living Cross, without it life is a living death.14 Joy comes, not
by the infliction of pain on others, but of pain voluntarily borne by oneself.15
Looking at Christ as a symbol and uninterested in his historicity, Gandhi could not accept the uniqueness
of Christ as the Son of God.

It was more than I could believe that Jesus was the only incarnate Son of God… If God could have sons,
all of us were his sons… God alone is absolutely perfect. When he descends to earth, He of his own
accord limits himself. Jesus died on the Cross because he was limited by the flesh.16
Gandhi's mature tribute to Jesus reads as follows:

I refuse to believe that there now exists or has ever existed a person that has not made use of his
example to lessen his sins… the lives of all have, in some greater or lesser degree, been changed by his
presence, his actions, and the words spoken by his divine voice… He belongs not solely to Christianity
but to the entire world, to all races and peoples even though the doctrines they hold and the forms of
worship they practice might be different from each other. 17
Jesus, the Advaitin

S. Radhakrishnan was a professor of philosophy, who also served as the President of India. He was not a
religious figure like Gandhi or Vivekananda. He seems to have been hurt by the way the missionaries
abused Hinduism as a superstitious religion. Therefore he set himself the task of showing that Hinduism
is the 'eternal religion' (sanatana dharma) that lies behind all religions. In a comparative way, he sought
to show that similar doctrines and principles can be found in all religions. He has therefore no use for a
language of uniqueness when speaking about Jesus Christ. Radhakrishnan has no difficulty in accepting
the historical Jesus and the events of his passion and death on the cross. But they have a symbolic
meaning.

For me the person of Jesus is a historical fact. Christ is not a datum of history, but a judgment of history.
Jesus' insight is expressive of a timeless spiritual fact…18 Christ is born in the depths of spirit: we say
that he passes through life, dies on the Cross and rises again. Those are not so much historical events
which occurred once upon a time as universal processes of spiritual life, which are being continually
accomplished in the souls of men.19
Radhakrishnan understands avatar in a two-fold manner as indicating both the descent of the divine and
the ascent of man. Jesus will be an avatar in both senses. It is in this sense that he is an advaitin who has
realized his non-dual relationship with God. "Jesus is the example of a man who has become God and
none can say where His manhood ends and His divinity begins. Man and God are akin. 'That art Thou –
Tat tvam asi.'"20

Jesus, Solidary with Suffering Humanity

In a small book Jesus in Indian Painting Richard W. Taylor21 gives a list of more than ten hindu painters
who have found the image of Jesus an attractive theme. These images of Jesus centre mostly around
two themes: the suffering Christ and the child Jesus with the Madonna. The child is often presented with
his hands in the gesture of protection (abhaya mudra). Here he joins a list of hindu Gods with similar
gestures. The suffering Christ is seen as symbolic of human suffering. Christ is the more than human
archetype of suffering humanity. Once when painting Christ, K.C.S. Panikkar told a friend that he was not
painting Christ but 'agony' and "that Christ occurred to him as the appropriate subject."22

Another artist, Nikhil Biswas said that Jesus Christ symbolized for him the pain and agony of a suffering
man, the fittest symbol of our age. "Europe in her zeal to make a god of him has overlooked the simple
truth that he was essentially a human being."23 Arup Das is even more explicit. Commenting on one of
his art shows titled "Agony" (1970) he said:

There is no room for the good man on earth when he does appear amidst us. His life is cut short by the
same people whom he loves. One such soul was Jesus of Nazareth. Near home we had Gandhiji… I chose
Christ, to Gandhi, quite unconsciously in the beginning and then I realized that nobody suffered as much
as He in all history. His crucifixion was transcendental and his agony unparalleled. In fact Agony is the
theme of my paintings. Agony, not of Christ and Gandhi alone, but of Man, miserable man.24
Jesus becomes the symbol of suffering humanity. This is an aspect that the hindu artists do not see in
their own gods and goddesses. An Indian poet and art critic has suggested that there have been three
iconographic breakthroughs in history: the suffering Christ, the smiling Buddha radiating peace and the
dancing Nataraja symbolizing dynamic creativity. 25 It is significant that just as hindu artists have taken
to painting the suffering Jesus, Indian christian artists love to portray Jesus as seated like the Buddha in
meditation or like the Nataraja, dancing in creative joy.

Jesus, the Bodhisattva

The Buddhists in general see the Buddha as some one who has discovered the path to liberation or
nirvana. He points out a way that every human can follow to reach the same goal. Some later buddhist
traditions will see Buddha as an avatar or divine manifestation or even as a saviour who offers the grace
of liberation. What is important is the practice of meditation or mindfulness and of karuna or
compassion towards suffering humanity.

Contemporary buddhist leaders have no difficulty in seeing Jesus as a Bodhisattva – a liberated soul,
who shows the way of liberation to other humans. Thich Nhat Hanh is representative.26 In his book
Living Buddha, Living Christ27 he says:

Sitting beneath the Bodhi tree, many wonderful, holy seeds within the Buddha blossomed forth. He was
human, but, at the same time, he became an expression of the highest spirit of humanity. When we are
in touch with the highest spirit in ourselves, we too are a Buddha, filled with the Holy Spirit, and we
become very tolerant, very open, very deep, and very understanding…(37- 38)

Jesus is the Son of God and the Son of Man. We are all, at the same time, the sons and daughters of God
and the children of our parents. This means we are of the same reality as Jesus… Jesus is not only our
Lord, but He is also our Father, our Teacher, our Brother, and our Self. The only place we can touch Jesus
and the Kingdom of God is within us. (44) When we understand and practice deeply the life and
teachings of Buddha or the life and teachings of Jesus, we penetrate the door and enter the abode of
the living Buddha and the living Christ, and life eternal presents itself to us. (56)