Indian Renascent Engagement with the Gospel of
Christ: Gandhi
February
2017
Presenter: Laldanmawia
_______________________________________________________________________________
Introduction
Mahatma
Gandhi was one of the giants of the 20th Century in India as well as
abroad, particularly in the field of social, economic and political. However,
his contribution to religion including Christianity was not worthless. His idea
upon the Bible and Christianity as a whole took him to the engagement with the
gospel of Christ. In this paper, his engagements with the Gospel of Christ are
discussed with critical analysis and contemporary significance and relevance.
1. Gandhi’s Methodological Frames
towards the Gospel of Christ
Satya, Ahimsa
and Swadeshi (truth, nonviolence and
indigeniety) are the three cardinals of Gandhi, which form the core of his
framework. He always put truth first, and he says, “I was capable of
sacrificing nonviolence for the sake of truth; for truth is the supreme goal of
human.”[1]
And coming to his engagement with the Gospel of Christ, he thinks that Jesus
Christ was a great moral teacher who taught a principle of non-violence.
However, though a deeply devout Hindu, Gandhi's basic approach to all religions
was 'sarvadharma samabhav' (equal
respect for all religions). For him all religions had equal status and were
different paths to the same goal of achieving union with the Divine. This
approach really directs the way how he understands the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
1.1.
The Message of Jesus Christ
Basing
on the reading of the Sermon on the Mount, Gandhi says, “the message of Jesus,
as I understand it, is contained in his Sermon
on the Mount unadulterated and taken as a whole.”[2] In
that Sermon, he finds the impression which awakens him to the rightness and
value of passive resistance and inspires him as the author of the teaching of
non-resistance to evil.[3] He
even thinks that the Bhagavadgita’s message of renunciation was confirmed in
the Sermon of the Mount.[4]
Even though he was not Christian, but he did not hesitate to claim to be a
Christian if he had to face only the Sermon on the Mount and his own
interpretation of it.[5] To
him, Jesus did not preach a new religion but a new life by calling humans to
repent. Jesus could have died in vain if he did not teach to regulate the whole
of life by the eternal Law of Love.[6] The
teachings of Jesus Christ had an immense moral value for him and he regards him
as one of the greatest teachers of humankind, even though he does not accept
him as the only son of God.[7]
Critical
Analysis: Gandhi’s advocacy to love is critically
examined by Joseph Thekkinedath
and argued that Gandhi does not believe Christ as the only Son of God, and his
concept of love is not enough in theological virtue, because he does not admit
that human’s response to God and neighbor can be affected only in and through
Christ. In line with him, B. Haring also says, “one cannot love the heavenly
God without loving Christ, and one cannot love Christ without loving his (sic)
neighbour”.[8]
Is Gandhi’s motif of love for neighbour differed from that of Christian?
Christian motif is God’s own love and the marvelous gift of God’s love which is
his Spirit. We love God for God’s sake, and we love our neighbours for God’s
sake. Whereas, Gandhi’s motif is oneness or unity of all life.[9]
Gandhi once said, “If
Indian Christians will simply cling to the Sermon on the Mount, they would not
go wrong, and they would find that no religion is false, and that they would
not worry about organizations, forms of worship and ministry.”[10] As
his thought upon Christ and Christianity are guided by his approach 'sarvadharma samabhav', he does not see
any superiority of Christ among other teachers and Christianity among other
religions. However from the viewpoint of Christians, he is too ethical and
considers ethical teaching of Jesus as the main essence in Christianity. To him
to be Christians is to live ethical live, to preach is to live. If so, like
other critics say, the personality, divinity, and work of salvation of Jesus
Christ are denied by Gandhi. Accepting Jesus as merely an ethical teacher would
reduce the value of the purpose of God’s revelation through Jesus Christ,
through whom we have eternal life.
1.2.
The Person and Work of Christ
Gandhi
regards Jesus as a great teacher of humanity, but he does not regard him as the
only son of God. And he does not think that Jesus had attained perfection
because to say that he was perfect would deny God’s superiority. That is why he
thinks that Jesus came near to perfection as possible.[11] He
thinks that Jesus was a beautiful example who was 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.[12] Jesus
belongs to not solely Christianity, but to the entire world, to all races and
people irrespective of their faith.[13]
He is not interested in historical Jesus that he would not even care if someone
proves that the man called Jesus never lived and that what was written in the
Gospels was a figment of the writers’ imagination, and he says, “The Sermon of
the Mount would still be true for me.”[14]
Critical
Analysis: Sunand Sumithra thinks that his loyal
to Hindu teaching blinds him from seeing the uniqueness of the historical
person as he preferred the principles what Jesus taught.[15]
His rejection of historical Jesus would let him different from Christians as a
whole. Stanley Jones challenged Gandhi particularly for his rejection of Jesus’
personality. To him, in order to find truth, Gandhi failed so to penetrate the
principle and meet the person, Jesus.[16]
As he understands Jesus as the symbol of eternal law of Ahimsa, expressed in the Sermon on the Mount, Christianity to him
is not constituted in Christology, but ethics as the means to Truth. Basing on
this idea, M. M. Thomas argues that Gandhi cannot receive Jesus approving of
the organized religion of modern Christianity.[17]
Paul
Devanandan also agrees that it is wrong to make ethical teaching the standard of
religion. He say that the Sermon on the Mount is not the essence of the
Christian faith, and Jesus Christ to Christian faith is the self disclosure of
God as righteous and merciful as just and forgiving, of God as love. So, in
opposition to Gandhi’s loyalty towards the Sermon on the Mount, he says that
the Christian faith makes the person and work of Jesus Christ central, not the
Sermon on the Mount.[18]
Gandhi
pays equal homage to Jesus, Mohammad, Krishna, Buddha, Zoroaster and all other
teachers, and he reduces the nature of Christ as merely an ethical teacher.
This concept of Christ is what Christians cannot accept, for Christ is not
merely a teacher, but the incarnated Son of God who gives life abundantly.
1.3.
Jesus, the Supreme Satyagrahi
Gandhi
is so much devoted to Satyagraha (satya-truth, graha-insistence, and holding firmly to) that he even makes a
statement “My uniform experiment has convinced me that there is no other God
than Truth”[19]
Satyagraha reduces to a system the art of grappling with evil, the science of
aggressive love attacking evil in its strongholds and dragging it out into the
open for a life and death struggle. The cross of Christ is thus the supreme and
perfect example of such assault and victory of love over evil.[20] Jesus
is to him a supreme artist who saw and expressed Truth. It is because of him
strove first for Truth that the grace of expression naturally came in and that
Truth is what he crave for, live for and would die for.[21] For
Gandhi, the quest of Truth involves tapascharya,
self-suffering, sometimes even unto death. There can be no place for
self-interest, cowardice and defeat for it is the selfless search for Truth and
death even becomes the portal to life eternal.[22] So, Jesus Christ with his selfless
suffering till death and yet not defeated by death becomes the perfect and
supreme Satyagrahi.
Critical
Analysis: S. K. George affirms the idea of Gandhi
that the way of suffering love, supremely illustrated in the Cross of Jesus of
Nazareth has solved the great problem- how love can realize justice and yet
remain love. He explains the equation between satyagraha and the way of the Cross that the Cross of Christ is the
supreme, perfect historic example of the victory of love over evil. The sense
has been lost in Christianity and it must be taken back as a working principle
of life.[23]
If that victory of love over evil is the working principle, can we expect a
revolutionary change in the society? To his Satya
(truth) understanding, M. M. Thomas has the opinion that Gandhi’s
identification of truth with God can be a problem because those who place the
moral law along with God tend to minimize the importance of seeing God as
person. For him, God is not only truth, but also grace and that is the
significance of God as a person.[24] If
we see Truth as equal to God, there can be tension to worship and devote a
system or a moral law, that can lead atheism.
1.4.
Jesus, the Illustrator of Ahimsa
Gandhi
thought that Satya is always to be
coupled with ahimsa (non-violence).
He used to say that Ahimsa is the
means and the Truth is the end. That means seeking truth through the exclusive
means the law of life- Ahimsa. Gandhi’s Ahimsa
not only confined to human, it also includes the whole creation.[25] In
Gandhian framework, Jesus is given a place that he represents the eternal
principle of ahimsa. Then Gandhi
considers Jesus as a beautiful example illustrating the principle of ahimsa through suffering and teaching.[26] He illustrated in reality what he
had taught. Gandhi approached the question of the person of Christ from a
different perspective, that is ethic of love, which he interpreted in terms of Ahimsa.[27]
It was the New Testament particularly the Sermon on the Mount which really
awakened him to the rightness and value of passive resistance. The passages
‘Resist not him that is evil; but whosoever smiteth thee on thy right cheek,
turn the other also’ and ‘love your enemies…’ made him overjoyed and satisfied
in his expectation.[28]
Though he cannot claim to be a
Christian in the sectarian sense, the example of Jesus' suffering is one of the
factors for which he has faith in non-violence. He accepted Jesus as a martyr,
an embodiment of sacrifice and the cross as a great example to the world. Jesus
represents the principle and he claims that if Jesus represents not a person
but the principle of non-violence, India has accepted its protecting power.[29]
Critical
Analysis: For Gandhi’s consideration of Jesus as
the perfect example illustrating the principle of ahimsa, M. M. Thomas thinks that Gandhi failed to grasp fully the
centrality of the Christian message. Stanley Jones was also in the same line
who thinks Gandhi grasps certain principles of Christian faith, but misses the
Person.[30]
Thomas is of the
opinion that the technique of Ahimsa
(non violence) is the most unique contribution of Gandhi. It is an absolute
ethical creed which can play important role as a realistic ethic of
international relations in the face of the nuclear threat and for the fight of
justice.[31]
However, questions have been asked regarding Jesus’ non-violence teaching. Does
he really teach Pacifism while he even attacks people to cleanse the
temple with aggressive and active resistance? Even though he taught not to
resist and evil and to love enemies, it can be harmful for human civilization
if we simply take them literally particularly in the contemporary realities.
In John 18:36, Jesus says: "My
kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, then my
servants would be fighting, that I might not be delivered up to the Jews; but
as it is, my kingdom is not of this realm." This passage can be taken as
Jesus was a great illustrator of non-violence. However if we critically examine
the passage, we can see Jesus advocates that it is right to fight for a kingdom
if the cause is rightful and just. So, taking Jesus as teaching ahimsa or non violence can be a kind of
looking the only one side of the coin. To make the unjust in a society, he even
used physical power when he cleanse the temple.
2. Contemporary Significance and
Relevance
In contemporary
situation in India, where Christian Contextual theologies are occupying
important place in the theological circle, Gandhi’s understanding of Christ and
his interpretation of the Gospel of Christ can be significant and relevant. We
will try to supplement with some points:
Firstly,
as for Gandhi, the message of Christ is contained in his Sermon on the Mount, which
is adulterated. He encourages Indian Christians to take it as a whole and to
follow it in the daily life. He often says living the Gospel is the best way of
preaching the gospel. Gandhi was against Christianity in India thinking that
they areas synonymous as materialistic civilization and imperialistic
exploitation. Therefore he sees that the contribution of Christianity to the
national life of India is largely of a negative character. Today, Indian
Christians need to live out the lovely message preached by our Lord Jesus
Christ. Contextual theologies emerge out of different unjust issues. A social,
political or any other system which is unjust can be responded through the life
principles taught in the Sermon. Gandhi presents the Sermon on the Mount as a
universal principle.
Secondly,
Gandhi regards Jesus as a great teacher of humanity, but he does not regard him
as the only son of God. In spite of his rejection of historical Jesus, he still
endorses him as great teacher. Do Indian Christians understand Jesus as Savior
only? What does His salvific work do to the Christians’ life in contemporary
situation? I think that we over emphasis the salvific and redemptive work of
Christ even to the extent of neglecting the teaching of life principle. Gandhi
clearly sees this situation. Like him we need to acknowledge Jesus Christ as
not merely savior, but also as a great teacher of humanity.
Thirdly,
In Gandhi’s thought, Jesus is a supreme artist who saw and expressed Truth. In
his pursue of truth self-suffering, even unto death involves. Moreover, Jesus represents
the eternal principle of non-violence by which Gandhi considers him as a
beautiful illustrator through his suffering and teaching. We are the cross
bearer, but tend to avoid suffering for Truth. The reality of suffering life of
the oppressed people calls to fight back non-violently for the liberation for
the ultimate unity of all human beings. Gandhi well learned non-violence and
self-giving love from Christ. He received a confirmation from the teachings of
Jesus what he had already received from his own tradition. Therefore the call
was to renounce egoism and to act in the interests of the whole human
community.
Conclusion
The Sermon on the Mount
makes Gandhi an obedient student of Christ whom he regards the great teacher of
humanity. From that ‘Sermon’ he builds his understanding of Jesus Christ as
illustrator of Ahimsa and as a
perfect satyagrahi. If Ahimsa is not merely a negative state of
harmlessness, but a positive state of love of doing good even to the
evil-doers, and if Satyagraha’s aim
is to overcome human’s evil nature, what else do we need to compromise the
engagement of Gandhi with the Gospel of Chris? For the Gospel of Christ, “love”
becomes the central theme.
Bibliography
Chacko, Laji. Introduction to Christian Theologies in
India. Kolkata: SCEPTRE, 2014.
Chandran,
Russell “Development of Christian Theology in India: A Critical Survey”
Readings
in Indian Christian Theology. Edited by R. S. Sugirtharajah and
Cecil
Hargreaves.
Delhi: ISPCK, 1993.
Gandhi,
Mahatma. An Autobiography: The Story of
My Experiment with Truth. Translated by
Mahadev Desai.
Ahmadabad: Navjivan Publishing House, 1927.
Gandhi,
M. K. What Jesus Means to Me.
Compiled by R. K. Prabhu. Ahmedabad: Navajivan
Publishing
House, 1959.
Gandhi,
M. K. The Message of Jesus Christ.
Edited by Anand T. Hingorani. Bombay:
Bharatiya
Vidya Bhavan, 1963.
George,
S. K. Gandhi’s Challenge to Christianity.
Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House,
1960.
Iyer,
Raghavan. The Essential Writings of
Mahatma Gandhi. New Delhi: Oxford University
Press, 1990.
Philip,
T. M. The Encounter Between Theology and
Ideology: An Exploration into the
Communicative
Theology of M. M. Thomas. Madras: The Christian Literature Society,
1986.
Sumithra,
Sunand. Christian Theology from an Indian
Perspective. Bangalore: Theological
Book Trust, 1990.
Thekkinedath,
Joseph. Love of Neighbour in Mahatma Gandhi. Kerala: Pontifical Institute
of
Theology and
Philosophy, 1973.
Thomas,
M. M. The Acknowledge Christ of the
Indian Renaissance. Madras: The
Christian
Literature Society, 1976.
[1] Sunand Sumithra, Christian Theology from an Indian
Perspective (Bangalore: Theological Book Trust, 1990), 211.
[2] M. K. Gandhi, The Message of Jesus Christ., edited by
Anand T. Hingorani (Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1963), 43.
[3] M. M. Thomas, The Acknowledge Christ of the Indian
Renaissance, 205.
[4] Sunand Sumithra, Christian Theology from an Indian
Perspective, 214.
[5] Raghavan Iyer, The Essential Writings of Mahatma Gandhi
(New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1990), 146.
[6] M. K. Gandhi, What Jesus Means to Me, compiled by R.
K. Prabhu (Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House, 1959), 12.
[7] M. K. Gandhi, The Message of Jesus Christ, 41.
[8] Joseph Thekkinedath, Love of Neighbour in Mahatma Gandhi
(Kerala: Pontifical Institute of Theology and Philosophy, 1973), 190.
[9] Joseph Thekkinedath, Love of Neighbour in Mahatma Gandhi,
191.
[10] M. K. Gandhi, What Jesus Means to Me, 25.
[11] M. K. Gandhi, What Jesus Means to Me, 6.
[12] M. K. Gandhi, The Message of Jesus Christ, vi.
[13] M. K. Gandhi, What Jesus Means to Me, 11.
[14] M. K. Gandhi, What Jesus Means to Me, 14.
[15] Sunand Sumithra, Christian Theology from an Indian
Perspective, 216.
[16] Sunand Sumithra, Christian Theology from an Indian
Perspective, 215.
[17] M. M. Thomas, The Acknowledge Christ of the Indian
Renaissance, 214.
[18] M. M. Thomas, The Acknowledge Christ of the Indian
Renaissance, 239.
[19] Mahatma Gandhi, An Autobiography: The Story of My
Experiment with Truth. Translated by Mahadev Desai (Ahmadabad: Navjivan
Publishing House, 1927).
[20] S. K. George, Gandhi’s Challenge to Christianity
(Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House, 1960), 23.
[21] M. K. Gandhi, What Jesus Means to Me, 5.
[22] Raghavan Iyer, The Essential Writings of Mahatma Gandhi,
233.
[23] M. M. Thomas, The Acknowledge Christ of the Indian
Renaissance, 223.
[24] T. M. Philip, The Encounter Between Theology and Ideology,
An Exploration into the Communicative
Theology of M. M. Thomas (Madras: The Christian Literature Society, 1986), 93.
[25] M. M. Thomas, The Acknowledge Christ of the Indian
Renaissance, 197.
[26] T. M. Philip, The Encounter Between Theology and Ideology,
93.
[27] Russell Chandran, “Development
of Christian Theology in India: A Critical Survey” Readings in Indian Christian Theology, edited by R. S.
Sugirtharajah and Cecil Hargreaves (Delhi: ISPCK, 1993), 5.
[28] M. K. Gandhi, The Message of Jesus Christ, 5.
[29] Laji Chacko, Introduction to Christian Theologies in
India (Kolkata: SCEPTRE, 2014), 27.
[30] T. M. Philip, The Encounter Between Theology and Ideology,
93.
[31] T. M. Philip, The Encounter Between Theology and Ideology,
90.
No comments:
Post a Comment