Christian Square and Hindu Round
Preface
The primary aim of this paper is to shed light on how, through the process of what can be termed as ‘Text Torturing,’1scholars in various faith traditions—if not all—have sought to create what is essentially a ‘Square Round.’ As I am not an academician, this is not presented as an academic paper. However, I firmly believe that several scholarly references and quotations, while disrupting the narrative flow, are indispensable for conveying critical information. Given this approach, the text may naturally contain overlaps, repetitions, and occasional jumps between topics without seamless continuity.
Therefore, I request readers of this paper to bear with its imperfections, as they arise from my commitment to preserving the depth and richness of the scholarly material rather than prioritizing stylistic refinement.
Introduction:
Have you ever heard about Square Round? If not, here it is. This is what Christian apologetics throughout history, in their encounter with other faiths, have tried to create through various methods commonly known as indigenization, contextualization, acculturation, Indianization etc.2 In India, it took a different shape as they encountered a different kind of religion and scriptures that did not easily budge in all their attempts to create another “woodcutters and stone dressers” to serve their theological purpose.
Though they have done this all over the world, even from the early centuries, when it comes to India, we can safely say that this process began when Jesuit Fathers came to India with their single-minded mission to convert India. However, they remained outstanding scholars. Regardless of how we might criticize the way they interpreted or misinterpreted, used, and abused our scriptures, they did all this with honest devotion to their task.
Like the Catholics, when Protestant missionaries reached India later, they also engaged with Hinduism and Hindu scriptures, albeit differently, but with the same purpose: to prepare Hindus for evangelism. Of course, both Catholics and Protestants faced reactions from their own colleagues, supporters, or authorities back home. For example, in the case of Nobili, when he wrote his accounts back home, he had to defend his approach, arguing it was the best way to reach India.3 However, when it came to facing Indians, instead of engaging in cordial dialogue, there was open or subtle confrontation, maintaining a hegemonic attitude that they alone knew the Truth.4 Similarly, Ziegenbalg was criticized and told not to waste his time in India by reading, collecting, and translating “pagan nonsense,” but to focus on converting them to Christianity.5 But when it came to using his materials, he did the same as many other missionaries had done in his and later times.6
On their part, both Orientalists and Indologists, many of whom were appointed by the East India Company and later the British Government, undertook the task of collecting and translating Indian scriptures and literature for their own purposes. In an indirect way, their work also contributed to missionary efforts, as some were sincere evangelists themselves. Even as Oriental scholars deeply engaged with Hindu scriptures for various reasons, they continued, in one way or another, to attempt to create a Square Round. Since several scholarly books on Orientalism are already available, I will not dwell further on the subject here. Edward Said’s influential work, critiquing such attempts Orientalism: Western Conceptions of the Orient, highlights.7
In most of their approaches, particularly when it came to evangelizing India, it was more confrontational than dialogical or a “dialogical dialogue,” as Panikkar expressed.8 After the World Missionary Conference, Edinburgh, 1910, there came a shift.9 When their various attempts through educational missions,10 medical missions,11-10a etc., didn’t yield the expected results, there was serious discussion about their approach. One of the outcomes was the “Fulfillment Theology,” 12 which stated that Christ, being the Crown of Hinduism, came not to destroy but to build and fulfill the “Vedic quest.” 13Whereas, ‘ The real meaning of the word “fulfil” is to carry out, to fulfil in the sense of giving full obedience to it, literally carrying out everything that has been said and stated in the law and in the prophets.14
All these developments were influenced by the Hindu Reformation period that relatively began with Rajaram Mohan Roy, followed by Brahmo Samaj, etc., who were very much influenced by Christianity, Christ, and Muktiveda. This paved the way for the missionaries to quote them as an example of how the Gospel brought change to society. Adding to this, several Indian Christians, some of the so-called high-caste converts like Krishna Mohan Banarji, Nehemiah Goreh, etc.,15 further continuing this fulfillment theology both explicitly and implicitly, tried to create the same Square Round that never fit well with Square Christianity [with its linear theology] nor with Round Hinduism [with its cyclical theory] by creating a Christian Vedanta or Christ Advaita16
Even several evangelicals began to talk about the ‘Acknowledgement of Christ in the Indian Renaissance’.17 But they all fail to see that, Mahatma Gandiji got inspiration from the Sermon on the Mount for Satyagraha, still said, He summarized his position, “I cannot concede to Christ a solitary throne.” 18 And, ‘…Raja Ram Mohun Roy, Keshub Chander Sen, P.C. Mozoomdar, Sri Ramakrishna, Swami Vivekananda, Dr. Radhakrishnan and Mahatma Gandhi. None of these Hindu thinkers ever admitted that the Jesus of history was the Christ of Christian theology, that is, the only son of God and the sole saviour of mankind.’ 19 All of them only APPRECIATED Christ but never ACKNOWLEDGED His authority as the Son of God and the only Savior of humanity.
We can also include many others in the contextualization efforts, such as R.C. Das,20 Subbarao,21 Narayan Vaman Tilka,22 Paul Sudhakar,23 and Pandita Ramabai,24 each pioneering in their unique ways. Additionally, the emergence of Christian ashrams25 with great enthusiasm deserves mention. However, many of these ashrams, particularly in Protestant circles, slowly faded away. Although Catholic ashrams have managed to sustain themselves, they have often drifted from the founding ideals of their early proponents. This deviation can be attributed to doctrines like extra ecclesiam nulla salus (“no salvation outside the Church”) and the restriction of ministry to Church-defined boundaries. Consequently, these ashrams have remained—and continue to remain—“of the Church, for the Church, and by the Church.”26
Gandhi’s influence
We need not talk about Mahatma Gandhiji’s influence on Indian Christian missionaries, who forced them to ‘rethink’ their approach to conversion. Several missionaries of his time, like C.F. Andrews,27 Satyananda Stokes,28 and Stanley Jones,29 etc., were examples of this. Several missionaries also had serious discussions with Mahatmaji, which began during his time in South Africa and continued in India30
Catholics Endeavor
On the part of Catholics, before Vatican II, several monks coming from various orders to India, like Fathers Monchanin, Le Saux, Griffiths, and Mahieu,31 tried to create a Christian Vedanta through their writings. Brahmabandhab Upadhyaya, himself a Christian convert—first to the Anglican Church and later becoming Catholic—earned the title ‘Father of Indian Christian Theology,’ as he upheld Thomas Aquinas as the Christian Shankara and promoted this Christian Vedanta.32 Encouraged by Vatican II,33 the confrontational approach was relatively abandoned and replaced by dialogue, again with sincere efforts to understand the other partner in dialogue, still in a subtle way continuing to create the same Square Round. This shift, however, would soon face new challenges.
Leading Dialogist
One of the leading figures in this dialogue approach, Fr. Francis X. Clooney, SJ, a sincere and serious scholar of Hindu Scripture and the author of several scholarly books, has written about this shift from confrontation to dialogue in his book The Future of Hindu-Christian Studies. He noted with much sorrow how even this dialogue has been put on the back burner by the very same Catholics, particularly Jesuit scholars opting for Liberation Theology.34
Not a scholar or an academician myself, but remaining still a student of Scripture and a Hindu Bhakta of Muktinath, I have observed a recurring pattern. After some elementary study by reading several books on all these points, I felt that what Christians in every branch try to do—and still several of them, be they traditional Christians or converts to Christianity from Hinduism—continue to create the same Square Round. This compulsion to redefine and contextualize the Gospel led to further complexities.
Christian’s Compulsion
When it comes to Christians, as they were under the compulsion to share the Gospel and convert people of other faiths to Christianity and their particular denominational churches, they could not avoid this method of creating several Square Rounds. I will take the example of Prof. Panikkar for this in my next Part Two. However, such tendencies were not confined to the larger Christian missions alone.
Fanciful Tamil Christians
On a pan-Indian level, such claims were made, and on a regional level, Tamilian Christians also found ways to make similar arguments within their Bible: claiming, for instance, that Saiva Siddhanta was propagated by St. Thomas or that Adam was the first Tamilian.35 Even Upanishads were written by Jews, etc. I met a young Christian who claimed he was conducting deep research, visiting Hindu temples, and taking videos to show that temple worship was inaugurated by Jews in India. He asserted he could prove this by pointing to the murals displayed on South Indian temple towers. This trend is now spreading to other religions as well. Some Jewish scholars have begun to propagate the idea that Hinduism originated from Judaism.36 Such endeavors, fanciful as they may seem, only added to the broader picture.
All Created Square Round
At the same time, we should honestly accept that similar attempts to create a Square Round were not limited to Christians. Even Hindus, particularly after their confrontation with missionaries and Orientalists, had to not only defend Hinduism but also turn the tables against them because, as Clooney notes:
“…Christians have largely been in a position to decide whether and when such learning is worthwhile, and Hindus have often been compelled, socially and intellectually, to acknowledge and respond to questions and challenges posed by the West.”37
One of the most famous attempts was the claim that Hinduism is the Mother of all religions everywhere in the world, as said by Swami Vivekananda. Various similar information is available on the internet on this topic. Additionally, claims that Sanskrit is the Mother of all Languages in the world, or that all scientific inventions were stolen from the Vedas, also belong to this category. There is no point in elaborating further on such fantastical views. These exaggerated claims leave one questioning the authenticity of such narratives.
Unknown Christ
One’s mind would reel by reading all this information. In several other places, I have already shared my conviction that there is no Unknown Christ38 in Hinduism and that, however hard one may try, it is difficult to find a universal, hidden, cosmic Christ as the crown of Hinduism fulfilling all its aspirations. The Gospel is the story of God’s promise fulfilled by the Messiah, who was Jesus Christ. Interestingly, even this early church view in Palestine began to wane when the Gospel reached Mediterranean areas, where the concept of a Messiah did not fit their worldview.39 We cannot find this idea of God choosing a nation to fulfill His covenant promise through a Messiah in Hinduism.
Similar not Similarity
Of course, one can find similar thoughts and even terms like ‘grace, mercy, sin, forgiveness, resurrection, atonement (prayaschitta), God, atman, etc. However, each has its own textual and theological context. For example, according to high philosophical Hinduism, even God is not central, as God is not the focus for them. In fact, Indian philosophies center on three entities: Atman-Brahman-Jagat40 and their mutual relationship. This Brahman is not even God but Sad—Existence.41 Of course, theistic Vedantic philosophies like that of Ramanujacharya try to establish that Brahman is none other than Narayana. But even if one discounts God, one can still find theology Hinduism. However, this is not the case with Abrahamic faiths. Because they are based on a Personal God, that too with Attribute as a Person, whereas a Hindu can easily accept Ultimate one God without any Name; Form without any attribute. Atman is neither a minute part of Brahman [Vishishtadvaita] nor very Brahman [Advaita], and God is only the efficient cause and not the material cause, upholding the doctrine ex nihilo [created out of nothing], and matter is not maya but real. Without having proper knowledge of Sanskrit and theology, even these simple basic differences show that we cannot find any Christian Vedanta in Muktiveda or Christ Advaita, as many try to invent.
Personal God vs Brahman
Let us consider another major difference: As previously noted, Hindus believe that the worship of all deities ultimately reaches Narayana or Sankara. A Hindu could say to a Christian, “Even if you worship your God, in the end, you are worshiping only Narayana or Sankara.” But would a Christian accept this? On the other hand, if a Christian were to tell a Hindu, “Even when you worship your gods, you are ultimately worshiping Jesus,” the Hindu might respond, “No problem. As long as we can worship all our gods or our ishtadevata through your God, can you do the same? Ultimately, we are all worshiping that One Nameless and Formless reality through our gods or philosophies.” By remaining Hindu, one can worship any God or no God at all. However, this is not a claim that followers of Abrahamic faiths can make.
Panikkar as a Case Study
In the next part (Part Two), I will delve deeper into this subject. However, to maintain the focus of this paper, let us consider Panikkar as an example. While he is a respected scholar known for honoring other faiths as they are, one can still detect a subtle tendency to interpret and superimpose his Christian doctrinal perspective onto them. This we find in his paper on ‘Vaac in the Sruti,’ pp. 3-24 in Gispert-Sauch, S.J. ed. God’s Word Among Men, papers in honour of Fr. Joseph Putz, S.J., Delhi, Vidyajoti, 1973. I think Panikkar gives his own translation of Sanskrit texts, and in his comments, the way he uses and explains terms like ‘theandric’ reality revealing ‘God and Man,’ and the ‘atoning’ function of the Word, finding the Trinity in the Vaac, are, according to me as a layperson, a subtle way of reading Christian doctrine into Hindu texts.
True Mark of Scholarship
In his paper, The Vedic Conception of Dharma [pp. 25–37], Fr. K. Luke, S.J., exemplifies what I consider a hallmark of true scholarship and interfaith integrity: remaining faithful to the original texts of all faiths while respecting one’s own tradition. This approach is not only scholarly but also a model for every believer engaged in interfaith dialogue.
Fr. Luke carefully navigates the intersection of Christian and Hindu concepts, acknowledging, “Lastly, we may note here in passing that the Christian use of the specifically Hindu term dharma(n) has its justification” (p. 37). However, he refrains from delving deeper into this usage, stating, “It is beyond the purview of this paper to explore the various nuances our technical term has in Christian usage” (note 64).
At the same time, Fr. Luke provides a critical caution against oversimplification:
“That which gives the Judaeo-Christian faith its uniqueness is the element of history, which should never be lost sight of by those who set out to investigate Hindu notions: a simple identification of the Hindu ideas of dharma with Judaeo-Christian concepts will be a sheer absurdity” (p. 37).
This statement underscores the importance of recognizing the distinctiveness of each tradition, avoiding forced equivalence, and fostering a respectful and nuanced understanding of faiths in their own contexts.
Similarly, though certain concepts like atonement or incarnation seem similar, prayaschitta and avatara in Hinduism are not the same. These concepts may come close but have marked theological differences. Ultimately, what makes a religion unique is its fundamental differences, not superficial similarities. (see my article on the blog: Differences Make Unique42). If we fail to realize this, we will end up creating only a Square Round that fits neither a square nor a round. Such reflections set a true standard for scholarship and fidelity to faith, even as they expose the limitations of oversimplified parallels.
My Limitation
If I quote extensively about all those whom I mentioned so far and give my own reflection on them, it would end up as even a separate book. Neither do I have the capacity, scholarship, or resources to do that, nor do I find it necessary, as many Hindu apologists—both scholars like Prof. Arvind Sharma43 and non-academicians like Rajiv Malhotra,44 Sitaram Goel,45 and even a renowned journalist like Arun Shourie46—have done their job in their way to expose such attempts to create a Square Round. Yet, even with such limitations, I felt it essential to highlight these critical points to encourage a deeper understanding and honest engagement with the uniqueness of each tradition.
My view
Already, as a layperson and student of Scripture, I have shared my own view on this. My personal conviction is that one should remain honest to the textual, theological, historical, and sociological context of every Scripture, both in reading and interpreting, for anyone to one’s own people or to ‘the Other.’ Twisting the text out of context to serve one’s purpose, particularly for their own doctrine, should be avoided. However, this has been done in all religious traditions when they wrote commentaries to interpret their own particular doctrines within their religion, as we see in the Vedantic philosophical schools like Advaita, Vishishtadvaita, Dvaita, etc. However, within my limited knowledge, almost all of them have done so while remaining within their own religious tradition. They never tried to find any fulfillment of their doctrine in other faiths, such as Christianity, though some liberal Hindus in the post-Reformation era attempted to find some similarities between religions (about which Clooney mentions a few people in his book ‘How (and Why) Some Hindus Have Studied Christianity.47
Narayana/Shiva as the Crown of all Religions
At the same time, when provoked, several Hindu apologists never hesitated to present counterarguments.48 For example, if a Christian says that Christ is the Crown of Hinduism fulfilling the aspirations of Hinduism, then Hindus would say, ‘Yes, similarly Narayana is the Crown of Christianity fulfilling all its aspirations.’ As “Whoever worships whichever god with faith, they are only worshiping me through that deity” (Gita 7:21). Even Saiva scriptures claim the same. In Siva Jana Siddhiyar Arul Nandi says: “Whichever god you follow, Shiva (Ardhanaarisvara) will come in the form of the same deity.”49 In Tirumandiram, Periyapuram, Tiruvasagam, and Nalayira Divyaprabandam, we find similar views. The famous Vaishnavite claim is:
Aakaasaat patitam toyam yathaa gacchati saagaram,
Sarva-deva-namaskaarah Kesavam pratigacchati.
Just as the water which falls from the sky goes to the sea,
So the salutations offered to the various gods reach Kesava alone.
Conclusion
Ever since the Christian mission came to India with their agenda to convert Hindus to Christianity [to their particular denominations], they have used various strategies like investigating our texts to find similarities, engaging in various kinds of ministries such as education, health, and social upliftment, and later with fulfillment theology, dialogue, etc. But in all of these, they couldn’t make much progress compared to the time and resources they spent. Whichever strategy they used, in the end, they returned to square one, scratching their heads, wondering what to do next. Their converts, following in their own footsteps, continued their legacy, again without much success.
Now, after the rise of ‘Resistant Hinduism,’ which posed serious challenges to all their agendas, they can no longer do their ministry as they used to in the past—no more open preaching, free distribution of Christian literature, film ministry, etc. Due to the awareness of their agenda, even among the common people—thanks to social media, which often issues both genuine and fake videos of direct confrontations between Hindus and some Indian preachers—they feel paralyzed, not knowing how to approach. I can give a real-life experience, about which I have already shared an article.50 One Catholic priest, whom I had never met but who began to contact me through a mutual friend, one day requested me to share the gospel with a domestic helper in his host’s house, handing over the phone to me. But I still can hear the resistant voice of that helper saying, “I don’t want to listen about your God. I have my own God.” When the priest began to rebuke her to remain quiet and listen to me first, she again refused. Then I had to tell the priest that he cannot force his view on others and ask him not to do as I would do that anytime. That was the last contact between us.
In the past, a common Hindu wouldn’t say no to any Christian praying for her or refuse to listen to what the Christian wanted to share. But now, because of the awareness, even among the common people, it is not going to be as easy as it was in the past. None of their strategies are going to work to ‘convert’ Hindus to Christianity. This doesn’t mean that conversion is not happening in India and that Hindus are not becoming Christians. Yes, conversions do occur in certain areas where stiff resistance is less pronounced due to the prevailing political atmosphere. In some places, the approach to conversion has also evolved. Baptisms are no longer conducted openly,51 and converts are often not even referred to as “converted Christians.” Instead, they are encouraged to retain their identity as Hindus in official documents [to avail social benefits]. Additionally, they are sometimes advised not to join traditional churches but to establish their own house fellowships.52 But still, compared to the population and the leakage from the Church, the story remains the same as we say in Tamil, ‘Jaan Yerina Muzham Sarukum’ = if you climb 12 inches, you fall back 20 inches. Though Christianity is spreading rapidly in South Asian countries and some African countries, the way it is disappearing back in the West is alarming them. Though some Western countries like America still remain predominantly Christian, where even their politics also depend on this, the way it is melting away from their traditional homeland is a real event.53
This being the present-day reality of the Church and Mission, as a Hindu and bhakta of the Lord, my view is that remaining faithful to the text of every faith would help even a non-Christian assimilate the Kingdom’s values without giving up her social, cultural, traditional allegiance—including Hinduism. As, at least when it comes to Hinduism, it is not a religion but a way of life and civilization, which could happily accommodate various kinds of spiritual expression, respecting each other as it never allows one to cannibalize the other but coexists without compromising the fundamental, flexible in the peripheral, and charitable in all. But the crucial question that always comes is: Where to draw the line? Already I gave my response in another place by asking, ‘Who to draw the line’.54
Does this mean that all these efforts were wrong and that I am claiming to be the only one with the correct perspective? Absolutely not. These individuals were products of their time, shaped by the fulfillment and dialogue approaches prevalent in their contexts. However, since most of their endeavors were carried out within the constraints of the Church, they were significantly restricted. Even exceptions like Subbarao, who remained independent and never joined a church, failed to leave a lasting influence.55
In contrast, I have stood outside the Church, never conforming to the typical Christian image or expectations. While I sojourned among Christians for about a decade and took an active interest in their efforts—both Catholic and Protestant—I was also deeply influenced by my own background, my passion for reading Scriptures in Tamil, Hindi, and English translations, and my study of Hinduism and Christianity. This journey has led me to conclude that remaining faithful to the texts of each tradition is far more important than creating a “patchwork faith” in the name of contextualization, indigenization, inculturation, or Indianization. Any such model ultimately becomes a square round, a contradiction in terms.
Although dialogue proponents like Francis X. Clooney advocate for continued interfaith engagement to promote mutual understanding—arguably beneficial for Indian Christians to better understand their faith—this approach holds little appeal for Hindus. A Hindu finds no need to study other faiths to understand their own better. The nature of Hinduism, rooted in family traditions, ensures that external influences, even within the diversity of the Hindu fold, rarely alter an individual’s conviction or practices significantly.
Moreover, the modern emphasis on understanding one’s sampradaya (sect) through its scriptures, along with exploring non-sectarian Hindu texts and teachings from various gurus and acharyas, has strengthened the internal coherence of Hindu spirituality. The revival of practices like yoga further reinforces this self-sufficiency. Thus, Hindus generally feel no necessity to engage with other faiths to deepen their understanding of their own.
While Christians involved in dialogue may argue that studying Hinduism can enhance their understanding of Christianity, these efforts often come across as preparatio evangelica—a preparation for evangelization. As long as this remains the underlying intent, Hindus will likely view such efforts with skepticism, or as the saying goes, “with a bag full of salt.”
Notes
1 Though Rambachan have written a scholarly book in the context of critiquing Swami Vivekanand’s view of ‘experience as the evidence’, still what he says about the importance of proper exegesis considering the context than involving a text torturing is applicable in every field of Textual exegesis in every religion. I call such attempts as ‘text torturing’ though these words are not exactly used by Rambachan but similar thought is echoes in his book: Anantanand Rambachan,The Limits of Scripture: Vivekananda’s Reinterpretation of the Vedas. Sri Satguru Publications A Division of Indian Books Centre, Delhi., 1995. Also in “Where Words Fail” in Philosophy East and West, and Accomplishing the Accomplished University of Hawaii Press 1991. [These two works by Rambachan are accessed from ChagBGT, 18-11-2024, 8.20 am.]
2 Brahmabandhav Upadhyaya’s Sacchitananda Brahma, Sundar Singh’s Sadhu Ideal, H. A. Krishna Pillai’s Christian Bhakti, Appaswami’s Idea of Moksa, Chenchiah’s Yoga of the Spirit, Chakkarai’s Atman and Pramatman, Devanandan’s Interpretation of Maya and S. K. George’s Equal Reverence for all Religions in Gandhian spirit, are all examples of attempts of acculturation of Christina thought in India Though such ideas have been shunted very often to the side-lines, the fact remains that they have been the creative efforts of sincere Indian Christians who wanted to discover the relevance of Christian ideas to the Indian socio-cultural context.— Plamthodathil S. Jacob, The Expreriential Response of N. V .Tilak, CLS, Madras, 1979.
3…Today we notice acutely the divided intentions of de Nobili and other missionary scholars. They defended Indian customs in their writings to Europeans in part on the basis of their great learning; in other writings, in the vernacular, they used their learning to attack what they perceived to be core religious beliefs interpreted as errors detachable from the sound basics of the cultures where those errors lay embedded. — Francis X. Clooney, SJ, The Future of Hindu-Christian Studies: A Theological Inquiry, New York, Routledge, 2017Clooney, op. cit. p. 26. And Zupanov’s scholarly works gives the detailed view about the opposition that Nobile faced among his colleague in: Ines G. Zupanov, Disputed Mission. Jesuit Experiments and Brahminical Knowledge in Seventeenth-century India. Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1999. Also see: https://dayanandbharati.in/disputed-mission-book-review/
4 …That his [De Nobili ] knowledge of Indian culture was partial and piecemeal did not discourage him from judging Indian religion in accord with his settled theological norms…. De Nobili’s approach would not work now, but only by close reflection on the delicate balance in his writing can we come to a fair estimate of him and why his achievement is pertinent even today, though also flawed and not the sole key to Hindu-Christian studies. He was neither as open-minded as his admirers claim, nor as closed-minded as others accuse him of being; belief and intellectual curiosity were in tension in his mind and writing…. p. 26
5…when the early Protestant Tranquebar missionary, Ziegenbalg, sent home a thesis on Hindu beliefs and practices, his Halle professor told him “not to waste his time with studying pagan nonsense”.— FRANK WHALING. An Approach to Dialogue with Hinduism, Lucknow, (Lucknow Publishing House, p.7
6 The next thing which Ziegenbalg did in 1712 was to send a large number of letters to a selection of Hindus—Brahmanas and non-Brahmanas—inviting answers to a number of questions…. (p.24)
Ziegenbalg attached to these letters a printed booklet, Abominable Heathenism, which described Hinduism as a state of ajnana (ignorance) and accused it of five sins—idolatory, fornication, fraud, quarrel, witchcraft and laziness. [‘Hindu Apologetics at the Beginning of the Protestant Mission Era in India’, by H. Grafe in Indian Church History Review, June, 1972, p. 64] It was “the very first product of the Tamil Press at Tranquebar ‘inaugurating the modern era of Tamil book-printing’,” as H.W. Gensichen puts it. [ibid. p. 58]— Sitaram Goel, HISTORY OF HINDU-CHRISTIAN ENCOUNTERS, New Delhi, Voice of India, (1986) Enlarged second edition, 1996 pp.24-25. See above notes 4 for similar endeavour by Nobile
7 Edward Said, Orientalism, New York, Pantheon Books, 1978. However for a critique on Said in particularly with Hinduism see: Carol A. Breckenridge and Peter van der Veer, eds. Orientalism and the Postcolonial Predicament. Philadelphi, University of Pennsylvania Press, 1993, p. 215. For another view see: Richard King, Orientalism and Religion, Postcolonial Theory, India and ‘The Mystic East,’ New Delhi, Oxford, 1999. And King says, ‘…Indeed such has been the influence of Said’s work in this area that the term ‘Orientalism’ is often now used as a pejorative term denoting the colonial manipulation of the Orient in general.—p.83
8 See The Intrareligious Dialogue (Paulist Press, New York, 1999) for Panikkar’s this approach though we cannot find this exact term in his works. Panikkar didn’t want Christianity to “absorb” other faiths or to interpret them solely through a Christian lens. Or sifted through the sieve of Catholic church doctrine. Instead, he genuinely strove to honor each tradition on its own terms, even when comparing or relating them. This is why he focused so much on dialogical dialogue—meaning a mutual exchange where each person is open to transformation and to seeing from the other’s viewpoint, rather than filtering everything through their own beliefs.
9 …the following lines are found, as a response to a questionnaire: ‘The …replies lay emphasis upon the necessity that a missionary to the Hindus should possess and not merely assume a sympathetic attitude towards India’ s most ancient religion… Below the strange forms and hardly intelligible languages lies life, the spiritual life of human souls, needing God, seeking God, laying hold of God, so far as they have found Him’ . (Life and Teaching of Tukaram. J .N .Fraser and J . F. Edwards. P. 178). Those who know Hinduism at its best realize that it the story of the pilgrimage of countless seekers after God.— WILBUR STONE DEMING, SELECTIONS FROM TUKARAM, Christian Literature Society for India-1932, p. 34
10 Mathew, A. Christian Missions, Education and Nationalism: from Dominance to Compromise, 1870-1930, Delhi, Anamika Prakashan, 1988,
11 ‘It was as heavy artillery that medical missions were used above all: in the less responsive fields, in Islamic societies, and above all in China….’—Walls, op. cit. 214. Also see: R. fletcher Moorshed, The Way of the Doctor: A Study in Medical Missions, London, n.d., ca. 1926, ; “Heal the Sick.” The Story of the Medical Mission Auxiliary of the Baptist Missionary Society (London, 1929).
12 J.N. Farquhar, The Crown of Hinduism, Oxford University Press, London,1913. Hatcher noting Farquhar’s influence beyond India say, ‘Certainly in the modern era we have had many examples beyond India, from the fulfilment theology of John Nicol Farquhar, to Karl Rahner’s anonymous Christianity, to the Zen Orientalism of D. T. Suzuki.— Brian A. Hatcher, Eclecticism and Modern Hindu Discourse, New York, Oxford University Press, 1999, p. 178. More on this see: Andrew F. Walls, The Missionary Movement in Christian History, New York, Orbis Books, [1996], Tenth Printing 2005, p. 63 ff.
13 Later, Rev. D.P. Titus, though not a scholar but a disciple of Stanley Jones found this ‘Christ on the Indian Road’ Fulfilling the Vedic Quest. Daya Prakash Titus, Fulfillment of the Vedic Quest in the Lord Jesus Christ, Sat Tal Ashram, 1982; Stanly Jones, an American Missionary and the founder of Satal Ashram famous for arranging “Round Table” meetings to dialogue with Hindus, wrote a book titled Christ on the Indian Road, New York, Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, 1946. Jones, a friend of Mahatma Gandhiji famously said, ‘I cannot imagine a Heaven without Gandhiji’.
14 It is worth noting that even, ‘…the term “fulfil”. There has been a great deal of confusion with regard to its meaning, so we must point out at once that it does not mean to complete, to finish; it does not mean to add to something that has already been begun. This popular interpretation is an entire misunderstanding of the word. It has been said that the Old Testament began a certain teaching and that it carried on so far and up to a point. Then our Lord came and carried it a stage further, rounding it off and fulfilling it, as it were. That is not the true interpretation….—Martyn Lloyd Jones. Studies In The Sermon On The Mount. Inter-varsity Fellowship. London. Reprint. Jn. 1966. Vol. One. Ch. 17. Christ And The Old Testament. pp. 185-86.
15 Robyn Boyd in his book ,An Introduction to Indian Christian Theology, Delhi, ISPCK 1994, gives a precise but important information of all such Indian Christians, NEHEMIAH GOREH; BRAHMABANDHAB UPADHYAYA; Sadu SUNDAR SINGH; A.J. APPASAMY; P. CHENCHIAH; V. CHAKKARAI; P.D.DEVANANDAN; and other Reformers like Ram Mohan Roy; Keshab Chandra Sen; who one way or the other were influenced by Fulfilment theory:
16 Lots of information available on this in Internet for all the information on this.
17 M. M. Thomas, The Acknowledged Christ of the Indian Renaissance, CLS, Madras, 1970, repr. 1991. Appreciated Christ of Indian Reniasance would be better title to this book.See also: https://dayanandbharati.in/the-acknowledged-christ-of-the-indian-renaissance-book-review/
18 Philip Yancey, Soul Survivor, New York, Galilee Doubleday, 2001 pp. 174
19 Sitaram Goel, HISTORY OF HINDU-CHRISTIAN ENCOUNTERS, New Delhi, Voice of India, (1986) Enlarged second edition, 1996, p.viii.
20 R.C. Das, evangelical prophet for contextual Christianity (Confessing the faith in India series), Published for CISRS, Bangalore, by ISPCK , 1995
21- H. L. Richard, ed. Exploring the Depths of the Mystery of Christ: K. Subba’s Eclectic Praxis of Hindu Discipleship to Jesus, Centre for Contemporary Christianity, 2005
22 H. L. Richard, Christ bhakti : Narayan Vaman Tilak and Christian work among Hindus, Bangalore Asian Trading Corporation; 3rd Indian edition, 2004
23 Wilhelmina Sudhakar, Chosen to Serve: The Life and Writings of Paul Sudhakar, 2007,
24 Lots of Information is available about Pandita Ramabai about her life and Mission.
25 Ashrams, Paramarubyananda and Shantivana. Pp. 27-42, in, Mario I. Aguilar, CHRISTIAN ASHRAMS, HINDU CAVES AND SACRED RIVERS: Christian-Hindu Monastic Dialogue in India 1950-1993, London and Philadelphia, Jessica Kingsleyy Publisher. Both ABHISHIKTANANDA and Bede Griffith have written several books sharing their experience. For a wonderful Biography on Abhishiktanada see, Fr. James Stuart, Swami Abhishiktananda: His Life Told Through His Letters, ISPCK in Delhi in 1995, this biography weaves together the personal letters of Swami Abhishiktananda, revealing his spiritual journey and deep engagement with both Christian and Hindu traditions. It presents a unique perspective on his life, shedding light on his philosophical explorations, particularly his search for a harmonious understanding of Advaita Vedanta and Christian mysticism. And among several of his writings three books stands out Fr Bede Griffith’s journey: Bede Griffiths, Adrian B Rance, Falling in Love with India, From the Letters of Bede Griffiths, Saccidananda Sahram, Shantivanam, Tamilnadu, ; Bede Griffiths, The Golden String, New York, P.J. Kenedy & Sons, 1954. It offers a reflection on Griffiths’ spiritual journey, weaving together themes of Christian mysticism and Eastern spirituality and Marriage between East and West, Saccidananda Ashram, Thannirpalli
26 One should examine how some early pioneers faced significant resistance from Church authorities and their religious superiors, both within their Orders and the broader Church, as they sought permission merely to experiment with ashram ideals, such as living as Hindu sannyasis. Fr. Bede Griffiths’ Falling in Love with India [op. cit] provides valuable insights into these struggles. In many ways, all their activities were closely monitored, and any new venture required the approval of both the Church and the Order’s hierarchy. At the local level, they remained accountable to the Bishop.
27 Daniel O’Connor, The Testimony of C F Andrews, CLS, Madras, 1974; Hugh Tinker, The Ordeal of Love: C.F. Andrews and India, Andrews, Delhi, Oxford India Paperbacks, [1979] 1998
28 Asha Sharma, An American in Khadi: The Definitive Biography of Satyanand Stokes, New Delhi, Penguin Books, 1999.
29 See notes 13 above
30 M.K. Gandhi, Christian Missions, Ahmedabad, 1941
31 See notes 25 above
32 Upadhyaya who was crucified while he was alive by his own Catholic Church, later resurrected and glorified him as the ‘Father of Indian Christian Theology’. See: Sita Ram Goel, Catholic Ashrams Adopting and Adapting Hindu Dharma. New Delhi, Voice of India, 1988. Also my review, https://dayanandbharati.in/catholic-ashrams-adopting-and-adapting-hindu-dharma-book-review/. For a scholarly Biography see: Julius J. Lipner, Brahmabandhab Upadhyaya, the Life and Thought of a Revolutionary, Delhi, Oxford University Press, 1999.
33 …Vatican II opened up a new era in how Catholics and Hindus might relate. Nostra Aetate (“In Our Age”) briefly described the Hindu paths of action, wisdom, and love, and then stated that the Church “rejects nothing that is true and holy” in Hinduism and other religions. It adds, “Indeed, she regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men.” How can this be? It is because Jesus is “the way, the truth, and the life.” (John 14:6); from a Catholic perspective, Jesus is radiant and alive in whatever paths lead to God, whatever is true, whatever is alive.—Clooney, op. cit. p. 13.
34…The more recent figures became less concerned about metaphysical foundations in Thomism, even as they were less concerned about conversions. In light of Vatican II, perhaps, they sought to reframe the Christian engagement with Hinduism as a kind of interreligious dialogue. But as a result, such work seems to have been treated simply as a kind of dialogue or aid to dialogue – if one wanted to dialogue with brahmins – and not pertinent to the transformation of Catholic consciousness through learning from the Hindu traditions. The Hindu other was not taken seriously enough to effect a real change in the Christian heart. This made it easier for dioceses, seminaries, and mainstream theological writing to overlook work in this area, or to turn away from it when the initial optimism for (p. 42) dialogue had waned….the Jesuit tradition of the study of Hinduism was not deep enough to survive at the onset of new concerns of a rather contrary sort.…When the Jesuit study of Hinduism ceased to be central enough to most Jesuits’ consciousness, it also became much less likely to endure after the practical turn to liberation theology. The great Jesuit tradition was marginalized, even among Jesuits….(p. 43).…In the end, there was no enough shared space among Catholics themselves, much less in intellectual and spiritual communion with Hindus, for a Hindu-Christian intellectual exchange to thrive.—ibid. pp. 42-44
35 For this see Tamizhar Samayam website https://tamilsamayam.wordpress.com/tag/
36 See my review on this: https://dayanandbharati.in/judaism-and-hinduism-2/
37 Cloone, op. cit. p. 49
38. Raimundo Panikkar, Unknown Christ of Hinduism, Bangalore, F.M. Pais for Asian Trading Corporation, 1982. – This work explores the presence and understanding of Christ within the Hindu tradition, highlighting how elements of Christianity might be interpreted through a Hindu lens.
39 ‘…Hellenistic people began to see Christ in their own terms, a host of questions arose that Palestinian Jews, even those who had had a Hellenistic education and were at home in the language, felt no need to raise. Christian preaching and Christian understanding moved beyond the category of Messiah-which for many of the earliest believers must have seemed the heart of the Gospel-to embrace such categories as Logos, and Pleroma to explain the significance of Jesus— Andrew F. Walls, op. cit. p. xvii.
40 ब्रह्म सत्यं जगन्मिथ्येत्येवंरूपो विनिश्चयः ।
सोऽयं नित्यानित्यवस्तुविवेकः समुदाहृतः ॥ २0 ॥
brahma satyaṃ jaganmithyetyevaṃrūpo viniścayaḥ |
so’yaṃ nityānityavastuvivekaḥ samudāhṛtaḥ || 20 ||
A firm conviction of the mind to the effect that Brahman is real and the universe unreal, is designated as discrimination (Viveka) between the Real and the unreal.
41 Rig Veda 1.164.46, “Ekam Sad Vipra Bahudha Vadanti” means “Truth is One, the wise speak of it in many ways.” The word ‘Sad’ stands for ‘existence’, as we notice in the famous shloka in the Bhagavad Gita: “Anadimat Param Brahma Nasato Vidyate Bhava” (Bhagavad Gita 2.16) = “The Supreme Brahman is without beginning; it is said to be neither existent nor non-existent.”3 Brahman alone is existing, which some call ‘existing or non-existing’. See more on this: https://dayanandbharati.in/oh-my-god-part-five-brahman-atman-and-jagat/. This is the way I understand this verse and a Vedic scholar may disagree with me.
42 https://dayanandbharati.in/differences-make-unique/ Note also: ‘…Hindu scholar T. S. Rukmani charges that, in his eagerness to find common ground, de Smet does not sufficiently respect differences. Despite his considerable knowledge of Vedanta, she says, he still “has not been able to make a case for either the personhood of Sankara’s Advaita Brahman, nor for the origin of the seen universe, both of which differs radically from the Christian God and from (p. 37) creation ex nihilo.” [T. S. Rukmani “Dr Richard de Smet and Sankara’s Advaita,” Journal of Hindu-Christian Studies 16 (2003): 12-21, 19]….’—Clooney, op. cit. pp. 37-38
43 Arivind Sharma, ‘“The Role of Ethics in Hindu-Christian Dialogue,” Journal of Hindu-Christian Studies. Volume 21 (2008)
44 Rajiv Malhotra, Being Different: An Indian Challenge to Western Universalism, New Delhi, HaperCollins Publishers India, 2011,
45 Sitaram Goel, HISTORY OF HINDU-CHRISTIAN ENCOUNTERS, New Delhi, Voice of India, (1986) Enlarged second edition, 1996
46 Arun Shourie, Missionaries In India: Continuities, Changes, Dilemmas. ASA Publication, 1994.
47, Clooney, op. cit. pp. 49–87.
48 “The Bible trembled at the fierce battle engaged with Muttukkumaarak Kaviraayar [1780-1851]; the Bible fell down and lay unconscious when attacked by Naavalar; and now it lies dead, smitten by Tamootaram Pillai [1832-1901].” [From Eecumata-cankarpa niraakaranam (1882). We have not seen the original, but the passage is often cited in revivalist writings.]— R.F.Young and S. Jebanesan, THE BIBLE TREMBLED: THE HINDU-CHRISTIAN CONTROVERSIES OF NINETEENT-CENTURY CEYLON, Vienna 1995. Publications of the De Nobili Research Library, Edited by Gerhard Oberhammer, Institute of Indology, University of Vienna, Volume XXII. p.40. I found one interesting but scholarly rebuttle from another scholar Clooney, A Hind Theologian’s Response: A Prolegomenon to “Christian God, Hindu God”, Parimal G. Patil, Emory University, pp. 185-190to his Clooney’s book: Francis X. Clooney, S.J., Hindu God, Christian God: How Reason Helps Break Down the Boundaries between Religions, New York, Oxford University Press, 2001. And Patil ends his rebattle by saying, ‘…While Clooney has chosen to focus on similarities, we must also highlight differences. One of the lessons to be learned from Hindu traditions of philosophical theology is that attention to differences often leads to a deeper understanding of one’s own position….’—p.190
49 யாதொரு தெய்வம் கொண்டீர் அத்தெய்வமாகி ஆங்கே
மாதொரு பாகனார்தாம் வருவர் !!!! மற்றத் தெய்வங்கள்
வேதனைப்படும் பிறக்கும் இறக்கம் மேல் வினையும் செய்யும்
ஆதாலல் அவை இலாதான் அறிந்து அருள் செய்வன் அன்றே
“Whatever deity you worship,
That very deity takes form and appears there
As the One who is the Consort of the Divine Mother.”
आकाशात् पतितं तोयं यथा गच्छति सागरम् ।
सर्वदेवनमस्कारं केशवं प्रतिगच्छति ॥
ākāśāt patitaṃ toyaṃ yathā gacchati sāgaram ।
sarvadevanamaskāraṃ keśavaṃ pratigacchati ॥
Meaning:
As the water that falls down in rain from anywhere in the sky finally reaches the Ocean, the worship of any divine aspect ultimately reaches the Keshava.
Interestingly replacing Kesavam to Shiva Skandapurana says:
ekam satyaṃ mahādevaṃ śivam adhyaṣṭhitaṃ sadā
sarvadevā namaskāraḥ śivamāgatya tiṣṭhati
(The eternal truth is Mahadeva, ever established as Shiva. All worship offered to other gods culminates in Shiva.)
50https://dayanandbharati.in/antagonizing-the-gospel/
51 In their reports, instead of saying, “Ten people were baptized,” they now phrase it as “Ten people swam in the water.” Similarly, the term “Missionaries” has been replaced with “Tentmakers,” and “Missionary Organizations” are referred to as “Companies.” The latter term seems particularly fitting, given how many have evolved into “Missionary Enterprises”—especially in America.
Andrew Walls explores this phenomenon in depth in his book (op. cit., p. 221ff). Additionally, Kanzo Uchimura’s paper, “Can Americans Teach Japanese in Religion?” published in the Japan Christian Intelligencer (1926), written nearly a century ago, has become even more relevant today than in his own time.
52 See more on this: Kerry P. C. San Chirico, Between Hindu and Christian: Khrist Bhaktas, Catholics, and the Negotiation of Devotion in Banaras, Delhi, Oxford University Press. 2003
53 ….Africans and Asians proved to have been adhering to Christianity at the very time Europeans were departing from it…..—Walls, op. cit. p. 174
54 https://dayanandbharati.in/where-to-draw-the-line/
55 See notes 21 on Subbarao.
Leave a Reply