The Hindu Response to the Unbound Christ - S.J.

Samartha

Chapter I –Introduction

- J. Prem Samuel, BD III

Summary

The author begins his book by stating the aim of this book. It tries to bring out the views
of some eminent Hindu scholars and to state about the Christology in India today. The
Christology’s task is to recognize the mystery and to understand the meaning of the person and
work of Christ. Samartha calls in for a co-operative quest of Hindus and Christians in finding the
meaning and fullness of life. Then he focuses on the upcoming trend of secularization. Though it
has its impacts in India it should not be either over-estimated or under-estimated. Because when
one see India till now religion has its own prominence. In an age of competition the message of
the gospel should be relevant to the human need in the light of our Lord Jesus Christ. The hidden
Christ has to be brought out in all spheres of life.

Norman Puttinger says, “There can be no genuine Christianity without an evaluation of

total personality of Jesus Christ”.1 The faith in Jesus as the Savior is central to the life and
witness of the church and also to the unity of the churches. The book deals with what
Devanandan calls as the Christian concern in Hinduism by those men and women who
confronted Christ while they were Hindus. The author brings out many articles written on Christ
in Hindu periodicals. There were many eminent people like Vinoba Bhave who accepted that the
model, life and principles of Christ are very apt in an Indian context. He was sure of Christ’s
influence on Gandhi in his concept of ahimsa (non-violence). The author also highlights the
attitude of “commitment without conversion” in which Hindu men and women secretly follow
the teachings of Jesus Christ through the continued influence of his life. The author also asks the
church to participate actively in theologizing. Hence “theology is not a means of enhancing self-
righteousness and political messianism but a spiritual source of constructive and discriminating
participation”2, says M.M. Thomas. K. C. Sen also when he speaks of his New Dispensation calls
for “freshness and vigor of indigenous growth”.3

1
S. J. Samartha, The Hindu Response to the Unbound Christ (Madras: The Christian Literature Society, 1974), 4.

2
Ibid., 8.

3
Ibid., 9.
 The phrase “Unbound Christ” says that Christ is not the possession of Christian
community. Samartha says that “Christianity belongs to Christ but the Christ does not belong to
Christianity”.4 This quote says it all. He goes on to explain that “it is the Christ who is our hope,
not our possession”.5 Devanandan and many people go on to explain that the boundary has to be
breached to bring in the unity which is the will and purpose of God in Jesus Christ. Kaj Baago
also states that “Jesus Christ is not the monopoly of the organized church”. 6 In a pluralistic
country like India there is always a misconception that Christianity is still a westernized religion.
This creates hesitation on the part of the Hindus to confront Christ. To this Samartha says that
the “universality of Christ is inhibited by cultural limitations” 7 and he joins along with D.T. Niles
in asking people from other faith to go beyond the Christian culture and encounter Christ. The
word “response” is used not without a reason. It does not simply mean emotional or intellectual
expression. When compared with other expressions this word was chosen by Samartha after
much study.

Hindu response to Christ cannot be looked too critically because Christ is already present
in the important areas of Hindu life and thought, the indigenous expression of Christ should be
encouraged, the historic particularity of Christ should not gain upper hand over the universal
spirituality of Christ and Hindus should not be looked upon as objects of conversion but should
be looked upon as brothers who participate in the reconciliation and renewal of life in general.
This in turn would enrich the rich cultural heritage of Hinduism. The freedom of expression of
Hindu brothers and sisters should be encouraged in spite of their differences in thought. For
example great brains like Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Swami Vivekananda, Akhilananda, Sri
Ramakrishna, Radhakrishnan and Gandhi had difference in opinion towards their response
towards Christ. But their influence of Christ brought considerable changes in the Hindu religion
and the society in general. Samartha says that the good news when shared to all should be looked
upon as mystery. It should be understandable to everyone and that he calls the goal of
Christology.

4
Ibid., 10.

5
Ibid., 11.

6
Ibid.

7
Ibid., 12.
 Chapter II – Jesus Christ: Guide to Peace and Happiness

Raja Ram Mohan Roy – Prophet of De-mythologization

The caste ridden Hindu community was blind to the human suffering and was in a bad need for
reform. The only thing missing among them was the social conscience which was the need of the
hour. Raja Ram Mohan Roy understood the situation as he felt the pain of the people. Moreover
he was very much opposed by Hindus as well as Christians. The Hindus called him as “apostate”
and Christians as “heathen”. In spite of that he worked to eradicate “Hindu fanaticism and
Christian bigotry”8. He really believed in the ethical precepts of Jesus Christ and supported
western influence on Indians wherever needed (education). He was very much critical of
institutional Christianity. He avoided the person and work of Jesus Christ in regard with the
ethical teaching of Christ because 1. He was not satisfied with the historical accuracy of the
gospels and 2. He did not want to place Jesus alongside puranic gods by portraying him as a
miracle worker.9 Roy was much more interested in the social aspect than in the spiritual aspect of
life. Kaj Baago criticizes Roy saying that his aversion towards Hindu avatara and the sacrificial
system distanced him away from the person and work of Jesus Christ. And his aversion towards
Hindu polytheism distanced himself from the doctrine of Trinity, which was confusing for him.
He understands the “Son of God” as Jesus’ dependence on God and sub-ordination to the Father.
Roy rejects the advaitic unity of the Son and the Father as explained in the fourth gospel. Roy
sees the death of Jesus as a practical expression to his teachings than in any other possible way,
as a God cannot suffer and die and it is really bad to inflict the sufferings of the whole humanity
on an innocent man.
Roy’s Inconsistencies
He failed to understand that even from creeds and confessions ethical notions can be
derived. And he also failed to see the importance of the twin themes: the cross and resurrection
as he was so much confused of theory of atonement. The human agony suffering from sin,
bondage, fate and punishment definitely needs a savior than a Guru who enlightens the people
with his/her ethical teachings. Then his Trinitarian view of subordination of Jesus Christ and the
view of Jesus Christ just from an ethical perspective are serious theological issues to be dealt
with. Though, his participation in the emancipation of social conscience and the contribution to
the social welfare is immense.

8
Ibid., 20.

9
Ibid., 27.
 Chapter III - Jesus Christ the Great Advaitin
Sri Ramakrishna was said to have the personal glimpse of Jesus Christ in his meditation
and by encountering him. He taught his disciples that one can see the infinity of the world
through oneself. That is he insisted on self-realization and he saw himself as an avatar like Jesus
Christ. According to him all the avatars are the same. But the only problem with him is he gives
too much importance to spirituality and the love of God and sideline knowledge and reason. But
his disciples do not stop in critically engaging in discussion or reflection. Any doctrine for that
matter if it is not theologically reflected and any vision or spiritual experience if it is not
theologically assessed will not have its validity.
For Swami Vivekananda “nationalism was not just an attempt to throw off the foreign
yoke; it went deeper than that, touching the spiritual roots of life. It was part of a much larger
quest for spiritual rebirth, cultural identity, religious self-sufficiency, social re-generation,
economic uplift and an all-round development of the national personality”. 10 And the main
teaching of Vivekananda was “that true religion consists not in a set of doctrines or dogmas, but I
inner experience, and that, not tarka (logic) but anubhava (experience)”.11 Vivekananda narrated
to his disciples the teachings of Jesus Christ and he acknowledged the work of his disciples
during that time. But along with Christ’s influence he went on to unbound Christ in Hindu
religion by taking it universally across cultures and boundaries. He was especially influenced by
Jesus’ renunciation. He went to the extent of calling Jesus as sannyasin. He also tried to fit Christ
in to advaitic vedanta philosophy. For example he said that the “highest teaching of Jesus Christ
is on this essential unity of the soul with God”. 12 This he derived from the saying of Jesus Christ
that “I and the Father are one”. He views Christ as the God-man and says that one cannot
worship the essence but the manifestations. He also failed to notice the importance of cross and
resurrection in the life and work of Jesus Christ. But he accepted Christ as the incarnation of
God. there is always a criticism that he does not link the spirituality with the social welfare. But
he did and he stressed the spirituality as well as the service to mankind [sic].
Swami Akhilananda also tries to portray Jesus Christ but this time with the cross and
resurrection. He saw these twin Christian themes as non-violent way of fighting against injustice.
And he also took these incidents to overcome the flesh and to save the present situation rather
than the future. And then he also tries to tell the westerners that the Hindus have understood the

10
Ibid., 47.

11
Ibid., 49.

12
Ibid., 55.
Christ in their religion and in India. He traces Christ as an oriental person as he himself followed
the Hindu view of life, renounced everything in so much that he followed what he taught and
became a yogi. Renunciation from a Christian perspective is not negation of the world but only
the false values. He also claims that Jesus was a complete yogi as he followed all the three
pathways to God like gnana yoga, bhakti yoga and karma yoga.13 He also tries to portray Jesus
Christ as a complete incarnation by saying that he established dharma (justice) and destroyed
adharma (injustice). He also gives many points to justify that Jesus is truly an avatar. Though he
tried to deal with more concepts than the other two people mentioned above, his argument also
was not theologically sound. The concepts of yogi, avatar and his concept of cross and
resurrection have serious theological problems.
Chapter IV – Jesus Christ: The Ideal Satyagrahi
Mahatma Gandhi
Gandhi’s national consciousness can be explained by stating his core principle “ascetic
spirituality represented by Yajnavalkya and the other of worldly responsibility represented by
Kautilya”.14 For him religious values and political responsibilities cannot be separated. In this
sense Gandhi is more a religious person than a philosopher or a nationalist or a moralist, says
Radhakrishnan. Zaehner compares Gandhi with Yudhishtira in the epic Mahabaratha and comes
to a conclusion that he is “the conscience of Hinduism” 15. Gandhi and Jesus Christ are compared
in India. Gandhi’s view on religion is formed on the basis of the plurality of the religions which
serve as a divisive factor rather than as a uniting factor. Gandhi insists on equality and truth
rather than on the claim of which religion is superior. His claim for truth comes from the Hindu
philosophy sat. It is the Ultimate Reality and the One. For Gandhi the truth has to be
acknowledged in other religions also and truth should be in a non-violent form. His contribution
to the world satyagraha is nothing but “insistence of truth”. Though Sermon on the Mount and
the Cross had some influence on Gandhi, it does not made him to leave his religion to follow the
teachings of Christ. Rather he vehemently criticized the western influence of Christianity in
colonial terms and calls it as “beef and beer bottle Christianity” 16. Gandhi is not concerned about
the historicity of Jesus, he just accepted Christ as the great teacher. But he says “the universality
of Christ’s ethical teachings and his abiding presence in the hearts of believers were far more
13
Ibid., 64.

14
Ibid., 73.

15
Ibid., 76.

16
Ibid., 85.
important than the quests of the historical Jesus”. 17 Gandhi always stressed on the inclusive claim
towards other faith. Gandhi says that everyone’s life has an impact of Christ “being changed by
his presence, his actions and the words spoken by his divine voice” 18. In such a sense Gandhi
understands the universal salvific nature of Christ and he is certainly unbinding the Christ within
any constructed religion.
Chapter V
Jesus Christ – One Among the Many
S. Radhakrishnan
Radhakrishnan believed the religion alone can cure the sickness of the modern age. He
advises rational faith in pilgrim of faith. Radhakrishnan says that Hinduism is universalistic and
it has tolerance. For him anubhava (intuition) is the basic source of knowledge. He concentrates
on the inner realization and since Hinduism has the inner realization only he calls it as
universalistic. “He acknowledges that the original source of Christianity is Jesus Christ”. 19 He
understands the gospel form critically and he accepts the historicity to be more important. He
also like many others accepts the concept of incarnation, but he compares Christ with avatara.
He rejects the uniqueness of Christ because there cannot be an absolute manifestation of God,
avatars are not infinite like God, similarity of Jesus, Krishna and Buddha and Christian claim of
Christ cannot be absolute. He considers Jesus as one among the many. Radhakrishnan writing
shows the mention of cross and resurrection. His comparison between Hindu tolerance and
Christian claim of uniqueness comes as a critique.

Chapter VI
From Response to Commitment
Samartha says after dealing with all these profound thinkers response to Christ, “ the
standpoint is frankly one of commitment to Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, and the motivation
for the study is the search for a genuine Christology in India, a Christology which, while being
rooted in the heritage of the country, would at the same time be meaningful to the personal and
social needs of the day”.20 This quote says it all. Though he brings in many views of Hindu
17
Ibid., 89.

18
Ibid., 94.

19
Ibid., 103.

20
Ibid., 116.
scholars there is no deviation from Christ. These thinkers response was without commitment to
either Christ or to the church and even baptism.
1. They believe that individual’s anubhava of Christ has its own authority.
2. They make a selective use of scripture in interpreting Christ.
3. The notion of church and the chosen people of God is dismissed as arrogance.
4. Historicity of Jesus is not regarded as a matter of strong importance.
5. Ethical teachings of Jesus had an impact on them.
6. They tried to unbound Christ away from the Christian world and the church.
7. They stressed the service motive in Hinduism itself.
8. Christ is mostly understood from the advaitic thought.
9. There was an attempt to universalize Christ.
10. The Hindu response is not committed to Christ in the sense that they saw Christ only as
an additional source of spiritual nourishment.
Subba Rao another thinker says that Christ must be pulled out of the “burning house of
religion”21 Subba Rao looks at Christ only as a guru though he did not reject the divinity of
Jesus Christ. Rao should be seen as a man who is not a Christian, not baptized, not going to
church yet follow the central teachings of Jesus Christ. These thinkers altogether reject the
role of the church and they understand the person and work of Christ according to the Hindu
heritage. For example “A. J. Appasamy claims that Jesus Christ is the Incarnation, the one
and only avatara”.22 Likewise Chenchiah, Chakkarai understand Christ in their own Hindu
heritage or understanding. Similarly Mark Sunder Rao’s ananyatva (non-otherness) and S.
Jesudason’s the eternal Om tries to understand Christ in Hindu terms. R. C. Das sees Christ
as the “meeting point of diverse spiritual ideals of mankind” 23. Fr. Panikar says that Christ
within Hinduism in unknown. He compares Kristvidya with Brahmavidya and says realing
Christ within Hinduism in their own terms will make them understand their relationship with
Brahman (God). The importance of ontological and historical dimension of Christ is stressed.
He reclaims that “Christology in terms of advaita is more important”24 than other
Christologies in India.
Conclusion
21
Ibid., 124.

22
Ibid., 130.

23
Ibid., 137.

24
Ibid., 143.
 The Hindu Response to the Unbound Christ certainly is a must read for all theological
student. Samartha’s authority in the Hindu religion and his frankness in the accommodation
of Hindu thought are matchless. This book opened new vistas in my understanding of
Christology. When many often I stop with Christological titles, the Indian understanding of
the person and work of Christ really challenged me. Though Hindu thinkers were open to see
the Christ within their religion they were hesitant to fully accept him. They were also just
merely accepting the ethical teachings of Jesus and reject the theological doctrines like
atonement, cross, resurrection and even the participation of the church. This is a serious
concern for me. I will start from here. That is if there is a dialogue then these defects should
be clarified and the Hindu thinkers should be made to understand that Christ cannot be
separated from the church and this does not mean that they are the chosen people. Rather it
should be made clear that they are the co-workers in Christ and for Christ. Especially in a
pluralistic country like India this book made me to understand the positive values of the
Hindu faith as they appreciate and acknowledge the Christ in their religion knowingly or
unknowingly. I seriously see this book as the work of the Holy Spirit who broke the barriers
of human thinking to see the truth (sat) more clearly. One more interesting observation is the
advaitic understanding of Christ which in itself could be a good resource for having a healthy
dialogue with the Hindu thinkers in the upcoming days. I will take this reading seriously and
carry it into my ministry along with me.
Bibliography
Samartha, S. J. The Hindu Response to the Unbound Christ. Madras: The Christian Literature Society,
1974.