** Indian Christian interpretations of Christ**

1. 1. **Brahmabandhab Upadhyaya1** (1861-1907) was undoubtedly one of the most

brilliant and original thinkers who have taken part in the evolution of Indian Christian
theology. Some consider him as the father of Indian Christian theology.
2. Brahmabandhav Upadhyaya's (Bhavani Charan Banerji) was a disciple of Keshub
Chunder Sen and a friend of Vivekananda and Rabindranath Tagore. It was with him that
Rabindranath Tagore founded Shantiniketan. Upadhyaya came to know Jesus Christ
through Keshub Chunder Sen and through his own uncle the Revd. Kalicharan Banerji. In
1891 he received baptism from an Anglican priest but, in the same year, became a Roman
Catholic. In 1894 he became a Sannyasi and adopted the new name, Brahma bandhav
(Theophilus - Friend of God).
3. He edited Bengali and English publications like Sophia (a monthly Catholic Journal),
Sandhya (a weekly paper) and The Twentieth Century (a monthly magazine. Since 1901
he became fully engaged in the nationalist movement in Bengal. He was imprisoned by
the British and died there in 1907.
4. Upadhyaya2 found the Vedanta conception of God and that of Christian belief to be the
same. He established that *Maya* of Advaita Vedanta is the best available concept to
explain the doctrine of creation and the Vedantic concept of *Saccidananda*3 to define the
doctrine of Trinity.
5. What he discovered was that the Christian doctrines were already present in Hinduism.
Even as early as 1898 he came to the conclusion that the uniqueness of the revelation of
God in Jesus Christ is that it clarifies and affirms the main Vedanta doctrines.
6. **Nehemiah Nilkantha Sastri Goreh** (1825-1895) followed Marshman in his
interpretation of the scripture. Before his conversion, Goreh had been a Hindu Shastri, and
his deep love for and knowledge of Scripture was carried over to his new faith. A trained
scholar in the Biblical criticism of his day, he had no sympathy for Ram Mohan Roy's
scepticism. His detailed and critical examination of the Gospels led him to the conclusion
that the canonical New Testament documents are reliable.
7. Unlike Ram Mohan Roy he believed in the truth of the miracles and resurrection of
Christ. Goreh placed the Bible equivalent to the Vedas in Hinduism, that is, as the
"unquestionable authority of faith." He considered the Bible as the divine *sruti*, (that
which is heard from God), while he compared the works of the Fathers of the Church to
the *smriti* i(that which is remembered by the people).
1
He was a theologian, journalist and Indian freedom fighter. He was closely attached with Keshub Chandra Sen and
classmate of Swami Vivekananda and close acquaintances of Rabindranath Tagore. Brahmabandhab claimed
himself to be called as a Hindu Catholic, and wore saffron clothes, walked barefoot and used to wear an ebony cross
around his neck.[5] In 1898 he argued in an article titled "Are we Hindus?", "By birth we are Hindu and shall remain
Hindu till death. .. We are Hindus so far as our physical and mental constitution is concerned, but in regard to our
immortal souls we are Catholic. We are Hindu Catholic."
Brahmabandhab envisioned as indigenous church in India embracing fundamental manifestation of
Indian living. He is identified as one of the first Christians propagating Sannyasi life style in Ashram.
2
According to Upadhyaya, true Vedanta is the one expounded by Sankara. What is Vedantism? It is the religion
of the Upanishads as taught by Vyasa and expounded by Sankara.
3
his doctrine of Trinity as Sat-chit-ananda. It is the Upanisads and Sankara's writings which Upadhyaya takes as the
basis for his explanation of what Sat-chit-iinanda is. In Satikara's Advaita, Sat-chit-iinanda points to the Supreme
Being, Brahman. Brahman is Sat (Positive Being), Chit (Intelligence), Anandam (Bliss).
8. He paid special attention to the Old Testament, seeing many of its characters and events
as *types* of the New Covenant. He considered the Old Testament prophecies as
"evidences" of the divine origin and truth of the Christian faith.
9. In his interpretation of Scriptural passages Goreh always avoided allegorical
interpretations. He was influenced by his Anglican friends in his interpretation of the
scripture and did not use any specifically Indian methods of interpretation.
10. **Krishna Mohan Banerjea** (1813-1885), a professor of Oriental Studies at Bishop's
College, Kolkata, saw Christianity as the fulfilment of the "types" and prophecies of
Hinduism. He found the shastras of the different sects and traditions in Hinduism as a
clear *preparatio evangelii,* as an Indian equivalent of the Old Testament.
11. Banerjea and his friends questioned Swami Dayananda Sarasvati's (founder of the
Arya Samaj) interpretation of the Vedas, and claimed that the pure Vedic religion is closer
to Christianity than to any of the Hindu traditions.
12. In 1870, after his retirement from Bishop's college he published a book entitled, **The
Aryan Witness**, the purpose of which was to show the striking parallels between the Old
Testament, especially Genesis, and the Vedas. He wished to demonstrate that Christianity
was more or less identical with the pure and undiluted original form of Hinduism.
13. Banerjea drew parallels between Biblical and Vedic accounts of the creation and the
fall. He found similarities between the story of the flood in the "*Satpatha* *Brahmana**
and that of the old Testament account of the flood. He compared the death of Christ with
the Vedic sacrifice of *Prajapati,* the Lord of creatures, who was the sacrifice, as well as
the sacrificer. He felt that the Vedas come closer to Christianity than even the Old
Testament.
14. It was a period of serious inculturation. In Gujarat Vahalji Bechar published the
**Sources of the Kabir Religion** (1881) which has claimed that Kabir Saheb is none
other than Christ. The bhajans of the Nakalank Avatar sect in Gujarat acknowledged that
their prophecies have been fulfilled in Christ.
15. **Sadhu Sundar Singh** (1889-1929) Sundar Singh was born into a Sikh family in
Ludhiana, Punjab state. He studied at the Ewing Christian High School, Ludhiana. The
death of his mother, when he was fourteen, made him a frustrated young man. He took out
his anger on the Christian missionaries; he persecuted Christian converts, and even burnt a
Bible. Disappointed with his life he decided to end his life on a railroad track. Before he
could commit suicide he had a vision of Christ speaking to him which made him a
Christian.
16. The basis of Sundar Singh's theology was his direct experience of Jesus Christ - an
experience constantly repeated in mystical trances.
17. In the words of Burnett Streeter and A. J. Appasamy (**The Sadhu: a Study in
Mysticism and Practical Religion** 1921), his teaching was the spontaneous expression of
prolonged meditation on the New Testament. He found the message of the Bible simple,
direct and straightforward." The New Testament, which he once burned, became the most
dear possession for him as a book that pointed the way to "the Lord who is the Truth and
the Life."
18. To him the Holy Spirit is the true author of the Scripture. By this he does not mean
every Hebrew or Greek word is of divine inspiration. He writes: "When I am in ecstasy
and speak to the Angels and Saints, it is not in the language of this world, but in a spiritual
language without words which seems to come quite naturally. Before I utter a word or
move my lips the meaning is out; and this is the same language in which truth was
communicated to the authors of Scriptures. Afterwards, they tried to find words to express
what had been revealed to them."
19. As the Holy Spirit is the Inspirer of Scripture, so the help of the Spirit is needed for its
correct understanding: "The language of the Word of God is spiritual; only he who is born
of the Spirit can rightly and completely understand it: whether he is a scholar or a child."
20. According to Bishop A. J. Appasamy his friend, translator and biographer, the Bible
has been Sundar Singh's primary and decisive pramana. According to Robin Boyd, "we
may say that Sundar Singh's whole Christian experience is filled with Biblical content. His
'Indian-ness' is mainly in his method of expression rather than in the content of the faith he
expresses."
21. **P. Chenchiah** (1886-1959) like Ram Mohan Roy preferred a selective use of the
Scriptures. His interest, however, extends beyond the Gospels to the Pauline epistles,
where he finds, especially in 2 Cor. 5:17, "if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has
come," his theology of "New Creation."
22. His Christology lays great stress on the humanity - the still continuing humanity - of
Christ. God became human in Christ, and still continues his work as human. "Lo, I am
with you always" does not mean the aid of God from heaven but an installation of God on
earth. Here, we find an interpretation of this text very different from that given by the
Hindu reformers, or even by Appasamy. Chenchiah is convinced that there can be no
union with God which short-circuits Christ, "the God man."
23. He was reluctant to consider the Old Testament as scripture. He even quotes Marcion
with approval: "As for Jehovah and the father of Jesus, it requires some audacity not to
agree with Marcion that they have not even the remotest resemblance to each other." For
him, the Old Testament is far inferior to the New, and in the last resort is scarcely
necessary for an understanding of the Christian faith, and definitely unnecessary for
salvation." Though he approves the ethical teaching of the Old Testament, especially the
prophets and some of the psalms, he raises the question,"What is there in the teachings and
acts of Jesus which a Roman or Greek could not understand? Why should it be necessary
to understand the Old Testament to grasp the Sermon on the Mount?... Why should a
Hindu understand the complicated Pauline theology to follow Jesus ? He says, the Old
Testament, does not in the least help our understanding of the Incarnation, which can, in
fact, be easily grasped through Greek or Hindu thought-forms.
24. He believes that the decision of, the Council of Jerusalem against circumcision for
Gentile converts implies that Paul felt that the whole Old Testament was unnecessary for
Christians who came from a non-Jewish background. "The Law for the Gentile was not
Mosaic Law, but a law written in their hearts. The point of the whole controversy between
St Paul and St Peter was whether a Christian need be a Jew in faith in order to be a
Christian. The early Church joined St Paul in saying "no."
25. Chenchiah raises the question why the Hindu Scriptures should not be regarded as
God's chosen *praeparatio* *evangelii* for the people of India.
26. Robin Boyd is of the opinion that Chenchaiah exhibits an inadequate understanding of
the Old Testament, especially of the prophetic books. He does not attempt to understand
the underlying unity of the whole.
27. Chenchiah has doubts regarding Jesus instituting any sacraments and argues that
"baptism and the Lord's Supper may well be dropped, as barriers which- like the written
 Word - prevent the Christian from having free access to "the raw fact of Christ.'" This raw
fact of Christ is, for him, independent of both Word and Sacrament, and is in some way
communicable by direct intuition or *pratyaksa*. He asks, "If God speaks to us today,
why hear His words through a book written about twenty centuries ago?"

2. 28. **V. Chakkarai** (1880-1958) considers the Bible, Christian *sruti*. The Bible is for
him the supreme and only *pramana*, which can never be made dependent on the Church
but stands alone.
29. Chakkarai, unlike his brother-in-law, Chenchiah and many other Indian Christian
theologians, holds the Old Testament to be of great value to the Indian Church. He accepts
the Old Testament unreservedly, saying "without it I cannot understand the New."
30. As a person, deeply involved in political and civic life and in the labour movement, he
finds the Old Testament as a supreme guide for moral action and social justice. It
demonstrates "the moral government of the world by a moral governor." He speaks of the
establishment of God's righteousness in the world as *sanatana* *dharma* - so giving a
new and dynamic meaning to this concept as well as to the concept of the kingdom of
God.
31. He interprets the Pauline teaching on justificaiton by faith in terms of bhakti. The cross
of Christ is in the centre of his bhakti. He intereprets the cry of Jesus on the cross, "My
God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" (Mark 15:34), and expounds this in terms of
the kenosis of Philippians 2. He argues, "the Holy Spirit is Jesus at work in the human
personality," while interpreting 2 Cor. 3:17, ("the Lord is the Spirit"). He feels that Indian
Christians, whose minds have not been conditioned by western Trinitarian theories but
who have had a personal experience of Christ and have submitted themselves to the New
Testament, have generally felt that the Holy Spirit is, in fact, simply Christ at work within
them as *antaryamin*. This leads him to his well-known formulation: "Jesus Christ is the
Incarnation or *Avatar* of God; the Holy Spirit in human experience is the Incarnation of
Jesus Christ" (**Jesus the Avatar** 1926).
32. **A. J. ·Appasamy**(1891 - 1975) was member of the "Rethinking Christianity
Group" in which Chenchiah and Chakkarai were also members. Appasamy interpreted
Christianity as *bhaktimarga*.
33. He was influenced by Sadhu Sunder Singh's and Ramanuja's version of Advaita. From
1932 to 1936 Appasamy taught in Bishop's College, Kolkata, which enabled him to study
the neo-Hindu movements such as the Brahmo Samaj and the Ramakrishna Mission.
34. Appasamy interpreted Johannine writings in the context of Tamil bhakti poetry
(**Christianity as Bhakti Marga**,1928 and **What is Moksa?**, 1931,). For him the
classical expression of the personal experience of Christ is to be found in the Fourth
Gospel.
35. He calls "Abide in Me and I in you" (John 15 :4), the *Mahavakya*, the supreme
verse. Like Ram Mohan Roy he described the union between the Father and the Son,
similar to the union between Christ and the believer. He says, "the union in both cases is
moral rather than a metaphysical or ontological one."
36. Appasamy challenges the advaitic tendency to identify Father, Son and believer, and
turns rather to the bhakti type of *Visishtadvaita* seen in Ramanuja. He gave special
importance to the the "subordination" passage in John 14:28, "My Father is greater than I."
37. Appasamy describes the relation of God to creation with the help of Ramanuja's
philosophy that God is not identical with the cosmos, but is rather present and active
within it as Logos, related to it in somewhat the same way as the human soul is to the
body. This interpretation is different from that of Brahma Bandhab and the neo-Vedantins
who followed Sankara's advaita where God and world are identical.
38. He distinguishes the meaning of Johannine "knowledge" (Greek *gnosis* or Sanskrit,
*jnana*) from the *jnana* *marga* of Hinduism, and shows how it is much closer to the
personal relationship of *bhakti*. The way of salvation or moksha lies not in speculation
or even meditation but through personal knowledge and growing love for God in Christ.
He interprets the Last Supper in terms of communion rather than that of atonement.
39. He accepts the three traditional pramanas of Hinduism - Scripture (*Sruti*),
experience (*anubhava*) and reason (*anumana*), and among these gives priority to
Scripture. He accepts the Old Testament as valid scripture. For him, the Scriptures
themselves do not possess life. It is folly to think that there is some inherent power in them
to give us life. Their most important function is to lead us to the manifestation of the
Divine in history.
40. Many Roman Catholic thinkers like Raymond Panikkar, Abhishiktananda and Sister
Vandana tried to interpret the Bible following Sanskrit literary traditions in the post-
independent India. A method of "Integrated Christian Reading" was first proposed by
Soares-Prabhu and later by Fr Sampathkumar
41. Their assumption is that the Indian social realities like poverty, oppression and
discrimination, and its philosophical and popular religious traditions are interconnected.
The social liberation of the marginalised and the oppressed and their spiritual liberation
are also interconnnected. They further urge that the principle of *niskama* *karma* of
**Bhagavadgita** (2:47; 4:18-20) and the *shantam* of **Dhammapada** (6:7; 7:7)
must be analysed in a biblical way. Without such spiritual freedom, attempts at other kinds
of liberation will inevitably end in further bondage."
42. Bishop Paul Gregorios of the Indian Orthodox Church advocated the use of
hermeneutical principles from the Indian philosophical schools of Nyaya, Vaisesika and
Sankhya.
43. Paul Devanandan and M.M. Thomas interpreted the significance of the Gospel in the
context of Indian nationalism and nation building. M.M Thomas interpreted salvation in
the context of the politics of humanization. He has published commentaries on almost all
major books of the Bible in Malayalam, which were translated into English by
T.M.Philip.
44. M. M. Thomas connected secularising and humanising processes to the Gospel
ferment in the traditional societies. For him humanisation is inherent in the the Gospel of
Salvation in Jesus Christ.So the task of a theologian is to walk on the razors edge between
the text and context, not falling into the trap of textualism or contextualism.
45. Dalit, Feminist, and Subaltern theologians like A.P.Nirmal, Bishop Devasayahayam,
Monica Melancthon, R. S. Sugirtharaj, Sathyanathan Clark, Y. T. Vinayaraj and such
others have extensively published interpreting Bible in the postmodern context of India.

Dhvani readings of the scripture

1. What is dhvani?
Dhvani is a Sanskrit word which literally means sound, tone, echo, etc. but in aesthetics it
means evocation or a poem that evokes. As a method of interpretation, it stresses the
suggestive possibility of the text, its evocative nature and its emotional grip on the reader
or hearer.[3] It is a category of medieval Indian poetics, according to which the artistic
enjoyment from literary works is achieved not by the images that are created by the direct
meaning of the words but by the associations and ideas that are evoked by these images.
Anandavardhana elaborated the theory of dhvani in the middle of the ninth century. It
became a part of the poetics of Indian literature.[4] Many scholars have attempted to
interpret the Bible by following this method.

2 Dhvani- Indian Interpretation of the Bible

The dhvani method of biblical interpretation has been initiated by Anand Amaladass and
Sister Vandana. As we had mention above, it is a ninth-century method of interpretation
worked out by Anandvardhana.[5] Dhvani is an Indian indigenous tool that usually
employs to exegete the Bible. It is a Sanskristic method of exegesis to interpret Christian
texts. It stresses the evocative, the beauty of the passage, and its emotive grip on the
hearer or the reader.[6] There was a feeble attempt in the late 1970s which used
the dhvani method as a way of dispensing with Western methods.[7] Some issue of Bible
Bashyam, an Indian biblical quarterly journal, featured articles with exegetical examples.
E.g. Soares-Prabhu’s And there was a Great Calm: A Dhvani Reading of the Stilling of
the Storm (Mark 4:35-41) in Bible Bashyam 5 (1979). Another such example
of dhvani reading of the Bible is Sister Vandana’s essay, Water – God’s Extravaganza:
John 2:1-11 in R.S. Sugirtharajah edited work, Voices from the Margin: Interpreting the
Bible in the Third World, (1992). Jeevadhara 25 also featured R.J. Raja’s Seeking God,
Sought by God: A Dhvani-Reading of the episode of Zacchaeus (Luke 19:10) in 1995.

3 Methodology
Let’s take a look to the words of R.S. Sugirtharajah regarding dhvani reading,
“A dhvani reading of the scripture goes beyond the explicitly stated meaning to the
suggestive and evocative nature of texts, and to hold on the hearer, spectator, or reader. It
does not dispense with the gains made through the different critical methods such as
historical, literary, and rhetorical, but goes beyond them, adding not only the possibility
of aesthetic joy in the reading but also a strong commitment to social reconstruction.”[8]
The dhvani way of interpretation supposes the use of normal exegetical method of
interpreting the text. But it draws special attention to the evocative process that work
through the factors of language phenomenon. It emphasizes the role of the reader whose
cultural background and aesthetic sensibility enable his/her to gain new insights to the
textual context.[9] In simple way, we can say that in the dhvani reading, when a reader
read a scripture, normally it evokes in him/her a certain experience as well as knowledge.
It might evoke different feelings to different hearers. It gives new perspective of looking
at the reality to its readers and hearers.

4 The employment of dhvani and various literary theories and other philosophical and
logical system are utilized by Indian Christian theologians as a way of entering into
mainstream national life. Indian Christian theologians played a crucial role in creating
national consciousness by explore into ancient Hindu text to earn their acceptability as
true nationals.[10] As a result, comparative studies between Hindu religious texts and the
Bible have been made. According to Thomas Manickam, this kind of cross-cultural study
on religious scriptures has aroused re-newed interest among the scholars recently.
[11] Cross-cultural hermeneutics provide the meaning of various scriptures, and also
paved the way for many religions with one Christ.

The deployment of dhvani method are seen not only as celebrating India’s glorious past,
but also as recovering an authentic Indian identity for Christians. Such hermeneutical
endeavors have enabled Indian Christians to get rid of their antipatriotic label, but also
have enabled them to invent a self-image.[12] This is largely because Indian Christians
were seen by the majority Hindus as anti-nationals. Since Christianity had been brought
into India from foreign country, largely by colonialism, it was considered as foreign
religion, anti-national or anti-Indian. So, we can see it is positive that the Indian
Christians on their part as per the context, read and interpreted the Bible with indigenous
methods.