A Religio-Cultural Proposal for Building Communities in Asia
 K. P. Aleaz[1]

There is a need for us Christians to seek forgiveness for the damage done to other religious faiths and that is our first proposal. The second proposal is that we should have our mission conceived as to proclaim the liberative elements in other religious traditions, when such elements are destroyed by vested interests. The third and final proposal calls for a reconception of our theologies of religions into a perspective called Pluralistic Inclusivism, for the very transformation of our faith-experience with the help of other faith-experiences.

Seeking Forgiveness  

In order to become qualified to proclaim the liberative elements in other religious traditions as well as to receive enrichment from them, the first step needed is repentance for sins, committed in the past by Christians, of destroying other religions and cultures as well as of deliberately misrepresenting other religious tenets. Early missionary undertakings were accompanied by the exploitation of indigenous people, genocide, land theft, slavery and oppression, and the WCC at the Canberra Assembly exhorted its member churches to conversion, active and ongoing repentance and reparation for past sins as a prelude to reconciliation.[2] The Assembly rightly called upon member churches

To negotiate with indigenous people to ascertain how lands taken unjustly by Churches from indigenous people can be returned to them;

To support self-determination and sovereignty of indigenous people, as defined by them, in church and society;  

To protect burial grounds and sacred sites of indigenous people from desecration and destruction and to work towards the return of ancestral remains, artifacts, sacred objects and other items belonging to indigenous people;

To protect the freedom of indigenous people to practise their traditional religions.[3]

The damage done by Christian missions was not only to indigenous people of various lands but to peoples of all the different religions by distorting their religious teachings. In a lecture delivered to the Western audience, Swami Vivekananda lamented: "You train and educate and clothe and pay men to do what? To come over to my country to abuse all my forefathers, my religion, and everything. They walk near a temple, and say, 'You idolaters, you will go to hell'"[4]

Misinterpretations of theological concepts of other faiths by Christian missionaries and theologians have been a common feature in India and today there is a need for us to seek forgiveness for this. A. G. Hogg[5] misinterpreted the doctrine of karma. P. D. Devanandan had the arrogance to say that the classical Hindu theology is incapable of giving an ideological basis for the new anthropology emerging in Independent India and where it is failing to find a solution the revelation of God in Jesus Christ has got an answer to give. He was for a Christian apologetic which would explain the difference between the Christian and the Hindu understanding of religious fundamentals.[6] According to Surjit Singh, Advaita philosophy, the foundation on which,the structure of the Indian world still rests,[7] is largely ahistorical, apersonal and atemporal[8] and his effort is to indicate a way to safeguard the reality of personality, human and divine, of history, of time, and of the world by recapturing the New Testament significance of the person and work of Jesus Christ.[9] Asian Christians henceforth will endeavour to put an end to such misinterpretations as these.

There are some theologians in India who have tried to correct such Christian misinterpretations of Hinduism and there is a need for us to strengthen their hand. For example, Samuel Rayan, through his exposition of Bhagavadgita has rejected the criticism raised against Hinduism by some people that it does not give sufficient importance to the historical dimensions of human life. For Gita "history is time open to God and on the move, maturing towards its own wholeness which is already present in the presence of its Lord within its heart."[10] The road of death is samsara which is cyclic time and the path of life is history which is time open to Krishna's love and ripening into life with him. We have also tried to show elsewhere that in Advaita the ecological, historical and social dimensions are theologically asserted and thus the ontological understanding of the structure of Being is properly related to the problems of life on earth, of life in relation to earth.[11] Brahmabandhav Upadhyaya, P. Johanns and R. V. De Smet have explained to us that Nirguna Brahman does not mean Impersonal Absolute; rather it corresponds to the Christian notion of God. Nirgunam only means that the attributes which relate the Infinite to the finite are not necessary to His/Her being.[12] It means Absolute Personality or Supreme Personality.[13] It denotes the Fullness of all perfections in absolute simplicity.[14] By affirming interpretations such as these Asian Christians have the responsibility to assure our extra-Christian brothers and sisters that we will no more be un-Christian destroyers and manipulators.

Mission to Proclaim Liberative Elements in Other Religions

Asian Christian is not any more for pointing out defects in other faiths to be corrected by Christian faith, as if Christianity is free from all defects. Rather, he/she stands for the correction of the defects of other faiths by those faiths themselves. He/She is no more to condemn other religions, rather to affirm the liberative elements in them, overcoming the existing misrepresentations of these by their own adherents of vested interest. Today we condemn only the misuse of religion. For example, caste and communalism are two evils manifested in the Indian society in the context of Hinduism. It is easy for us to condemn Hinduism for the evils of caste and present the gospel of God in Jesus as an alternative to Hinduism. This has been done, for example, by J. N. Farquhar who said that caste cannot provide equality, social freedom and social justice and it is remarkable that these social principles spring directly from the teachings of Jesus on the Fatherhood/Motherhood of God and the universal brotherhood/sisterhood of humans.[15]

Rather than doing this, the Christian theologian is to proclaim the gospel that the caste factor can be corrected through resources from within Hinduism itself. He/She proclaims that the serious problem of Dalit oppression can be countered with Advaitic resources.[16] Advaita Vedanta stands for a rejection of caste system and this we know from the Practical Vedanta of Swami Vivekananda: One who is established in the bliss of the Infinite will feel the whole sentient and insentient world as one's own Self. Then that person cannot help treating all people with the same kindness as he/she shows towards himself/herself. This is what the Swamiji meant by Practical Vedanta.[17] The atman is absolute, all pervading and infinite and each individual soul is part of that Universal soul. Therefore in injuring one's neighbour, a person actually injures oneself.[18] In the Atman there is no distinction of sex or Varna or Ashrama, or anything of the kind.[19] Hence, if the Dalit theologians hold that the sufferings of the Dalits should be the basis or starting point of Dalit theology, Swami Vivekananda is inspiring them to add to it the basis of the one Innermost Atman shared by all alike as well.[20] Thus the 21^st century Asian Christian upholds the liberative elements in other faiths to fight against the evils manifested today through a misrepresentation of those faiths. Right interpretation of the tenets of other religions to remove social evils is an important aspect of our duty or mission today.

Religious communalism[21] is the other evil manifested in India today in the context of Hinduism through the activities of the Sangh Parivar. Hinduism has an inherent power to tackle this evil from within and the duty of the theologian in this context is to proclaim that power for the benefit of all.[22] While understanding the use of religion in communal politics we should note that religion is neither the cause nor the end of communalism, but only its vehicle. Religion is made to serve politics as a garb or rationalization. In communalism religion plays an entirely extraneous role or a role of a mask because we find communalists to be both non-practising religionists and shirkers of theology. We have to distinguish between religion as an ideology or a belief system, and the ideology of religious identity which is communalism. In fact, to understand communalism or the ideology of religious identity we have to go outside the sphere of religion and explore the spheres of economics and politics. Religious difference is a basic element of communal ideology and politics and it is used by the communalist as an organizing principle and to mobilize the masses. However, religious difference is not the cause of communal ideology and politics.[23]

The glorious fact that contemporary Christians can proclaim is, Hindu religion as an ideology nullifies the ideology of religious identity which is communalism because in Hinduism religious pluralism is theologically accepted.[24] Already in the Rig Veda (1.164. 46), by pointing out that Sat (Truth, Being) is one but sages call it by different names, Brahmanism tried to solve the clash between one religion and another. The Bhagavadgita faced with the possibility of many margas (paths to God) suggested that those who worship other gods in reality worship Krishna (9.23, 24; 7.21; 4.11). Orthodox Hindus argue for religious pluralism saying that plurality is rooted in the diversity of human nature itself, in the principle of adhikarabheda (difference in aptitude or competence) and therefore the question of superiority or uniqueness of any one dharma over others does not arise. Further, Advaita Vedanta and Syadvada of Jainism promote harmony of religions. The Christian theologian can make such meaningful proclamation as these if he/she is also willing to listen to the interpretations of Christ and Christianity provided by people of other faiths. Liberative religious utterances are authentic only in the context of mutuality.

 The Way Forward: Pluralist Inclusivism

Pluralist Inclusivism inspires each religious faith to be pluralistically inclusive. On the one hand, each living faith is to become truly pluralistic by other faiths contributing to its conceptual content and, on the other hand, Inclusivism is to transform its meaning to witness the fulfillment of theological and spiritual contents of one's own faith in and through the contributions of other living faiths. It is a perspective in which religious resources of the world are conceived as the common property of humanity. It envisages a relational convergence of religions. A growth in the richness of religious experiences through mutual sharing is understood again as the outcome of this perspective. This perspective consequently can enrich not only Christian theology but also the theology of other faiths and it is different from the perspectives of Exclusivism, Inclusivism and Pluralism in theology of religions.[25]

The age of considering different religions as isolated, self-contained compartments is over. The age of considering other faiths as inferior to one's own is also over. Mutual interaction and enrichment on an equal footing is the inevitable reality for today and all the days to come. Different religions will contribute to each other in arriving at the content of the faith-experience of each. The different 'paths' are no more entirely different, isolated paths. Each becomes a path by receiving insights from other paths. The question of the uniqueness of one path as compared to other paths does not arise any more. What we are now interested in is the unique blending of two or more paths together for the emergence of the creatively new in each of the earlier paths. This is dynamic interaction. In addition, conflict between different paths cannot have the last word. There is a possibility for a natural growth from relational divergence to relational distinctiveness to relational convergence of religions.[26]

Pluralistic Inclusivism gives significance to the process of hermeneutics or understanding and interpretation. It is the hermeneutical context or the contextual socio-politico-religio-cultural realities which decide the content of our knowledge and experience of the Gospel. Knowledge is formulated in the very knowing process and understanding the Gospel of God in Jesus is a continuous integrated non-dual divine-human process. Nothing is pre- given or pre-formulated. We cannot accept some timeless interpretation from somewhere and make it applicable to our context. Understanding and interpretation belongs exclusively to us and to our context, and there is the possibility for the emergence of new meanings of the gospel in the process.[27] One important aspect of Asian context is religious plurality and Christian pilgrimage is progressive integration of the truth that is revealed to others in one's own experience of the story of Jesus. We have a duty to identify the glorious ways in which God's revelations are available to us in other religious experiences which can help in our experience of new dimensions of meanings of the gospel of God in Jesus.[28] Rather than evaluating other religious experiences in terms of pre-formulated criteria, we have to allow ourselves to be evaluated by them in our understanding of the gospel. They in Holy Spirit will provide us with new meanings of the person and function of Jesus, rather than we dictate to them always. From particular Jesus we have to come to the universal Jesus.[29] Universal Jesus belongs to the whole of humanity in Holy Spirit.

How we can arrive at an authentic understanding of Christ or the Christian gospel is an important question. Who decides the content of the meaning of Christ and the gospel is a fundamental question. The meaning of Christ and the Christian gospel has to emerge in the process of an inter-religious communication. Nobody is giving the Christian theologian alone the authority to decide the content of an 'authentic gospel'. People from diverse religio-cultural backgrounds will, in terms of their contexts, decide the content of the gospel. There are diverse ways in which the gospel has been experienced by people of other religious faiths, especially of Asia. For example, in spite of the missionary aggression on their religion, Hindus could experience the gospel of God in Jesus in terms of Neo-Vedantic thought.[30] Neo-Vedanta proclaims the gospel that Jesus had a non-dual relation with God and he is inspiring all  humans to have the same relation with God through the renunciation of the lower self. Neo-Vedantic Christology is of course just one among the many developments in Indian Christian Theology. Similar line of development of understanding of Jesus and the gospel are there in other Asian countries undertaken by those who are members of a church as well as those who are not in the context of diverse religious experiences. Here there is a need to question the very conception that Christians are the sole custodians of the Gospel of God in Jesus. Jesus transcends Christianity. We very badly need the help of diverse religious faiths in arriving at the meaning and message of Jesus. There is a need to attempt a comprehensive analysis of the gospel as interpreted by all the diverse religious experiences of the world and this has to be carried out in terms of expositions by both those who are outside and inside the church.[31]

Pluralistic Inclusivism wholeheartedly supports the view expressed by both Aloysius Pieris and Raimundo Panikkar that in Asia cultural incursions have religious consequences. Asia stands for enreligionization. Pluralistic Inclusivism would hold that Inculturation or Indigenization or Contextualization implies Inclusivism in theology of religions which is defective and which is the official standpoint of both the Roman Catholic Church and the World Council of Churches.[32] Inculturation or Indigenization or Contextualization denotes certain misconceptions.[33] These include the following: that the gospel is external and alien to Asians; revising the language of the unchanging gospel is what is needed; there is a dichotomy between message and context; we can judge our religious traditions from inside and those of others from outside; we can artificially make indigenous that which is not indigenous; Christian gospel which is foreign has to be translated in each country; and God the Creator is a foreigner in one's own country and culture. It is high time for Christian theologians to take note of the fact that in Asian context religion and culture are integrally related. There is no way of removing religion from culture and then inculturate the Western cultural Gospel in the illusion that it is sui generis.[34]

The dialogical theologies of Brahmabandhav Upadhyaya, P. Chenchiah and K. Subba Rao are a practical demonstration of theological construction in terms of Pluralistic Inclusivism. Brahmabandhav Upadhyaya[35] was of the view that the Vedantic conception of God and that of Christian belief are exactly the same and that Maya of Advaita Vedanta is the best available concept to explain the doctrine of creation. Though he was honestly actualizing his primary assumption that the function of Vedanta is to supply a new garb to an already formulated Christian theology, Upadhyaya did not reinterpret either of the Vedantic concepts of Saccidananda and Maya to serve as explanations of a readymade Christian theology. Rather he showed that Saccidananda is Trinity and that Maya expresses the meaning of the doctrine of creation in a far better way than the Latin root Creare. Chenchiah[36] discovered the supreme value of Christ not in spite of Hinduism but because Hinduism had taught him to discern spiritual greatness. For him theology was based on direct experience of Jesus and this experience varies as per the background and context of the believer. Hence, there is a possibility for new interpretations of Jesus. His own experience was that Christianity is not primarily a doctrine of salvation but the announcement of the advent of a new creative order in Jesus, namely, the Kingdom of God where the cosmic energy or Shakti is the Holy Spirit. We are incorporated in the new creation of Jesus today through the Yoga of the Holy Spirit which is in line with the integral Yoga of Sri Aurobindo. Kalagara Subba Rao[37] was of the view that in following Jesus the Gurudev, our foundation has to be Jesus Christ alone, beyond doctrines and rituals; and he gave expression to his experience in confronting Jesus through Advaita Vedantic categories. Jesus died to the body and ego through self-sacrifice and he calls us to follow his way through his grace. We are in reality Spirit; ignorance (ajnana) of this fact makes us servant of the body and that is Fall; and the fallen state is sin. Jesus leads us from ajnana to jnana (knowledge); from the material realm to the spiritual realm.

Our theological endeavours also have been in terms of a method derived from Pluralistic Inclusivism. We have tried to make the very content of the revelation of God in Jesus truly pluralistic by elaborating the contributions of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta to it.[38] We discovered the possibility of understanding the person of Jesus as the extrinsic denominator (upadhi), the name and form (namrupa), and the effect (karya) of the Brahman's delimitation (ghatakasa) as well as the reflection (abhasa) of Brahman. We could show that Advaita provides an ideological basis form the self-sacrifice of Jesus: it is Being (Sat) alone who is perceived in a form other than His/Her own namely Jesus and hence we should not make any assumption of anything other than Being at any time or place. The total negation of Jesus is the total affirmation of Being. We have to sacrifice ourselves as Jesus did to discover our reality in Being. We could also suggest a possibility to interpret the function of Jesus as re-presenting the all-pervasive (sarva - gatatvam), illuminative (jyotih) and unifying (ekikritya) power of the Supreme Atman; as to manifest that the Supreme Brahman as Pure Consciousnes (pragnanaghanam) is the Witness (saksi) and the Self of all (sarvatma); and as to proclaim the eternally present (nityasiddhasvabhavm) human liberation. If Christian thought in the past had distorted the religion of renunciation and realization of potential divinity of Jesus, into a secular dogmatic religion of the innate vileness of human nature and atoning sacrifice of Christ it is such an Indian interpretation of the function of Jesus which can rectify that distortion. The work of Christ is conceived here going beyond the atonement theories.

We have again indicated an Indian Christian epistemology[39] in terms of the Indian philosophical schools, especially Advaita Vedanta. We identified the important meanings of all the six Pramanas (sources of valid knowledge) of Indian Philosophy, namely, Perception, Inference, Scripture, Comparison, Postulation, and Non-cognition in order to discover these Pramanas as sources of valid knowledge in Indian Christian theology so that an authentic Indian Christian theological method as well as understanding of Indian Christian sources of authority may be clarified for the benefit of all Indian Theological constructions. If Scripture (sabda) can be classified under revelation, the other five Pramanas come under reason and there is an integral relationship between reason and revelation in Indian epistemology and consequently in Indian Christian thought. Perception (pratyaksa) proclaims the integral relation between humans, nature and the Innermost Reality, Atman, and makes theology rooted in day to day experience. Inference (anumana) challenges us to identify the invariable concomitances (vyaptis) in Christian theological issues in terms of present day Indian context. A word (sabda) signifies the universal class-character (jati or akriti) over against the particular (vyakti) and so we have to cross over from the particular Bible to the universal Bible. On perceiving Jesus to be like the person pointed out by the Old Testament and the Upanishads, we come to know that the Old Testament and the Upanishads definitely point to Jesus through comparison (upamana). By means of postulation (arthapatti) we can arrive at theological statements that explain seemingly inexplicable phenomena in Christian theology and non-cognition (anupalabdhi) recommends an apophatic Indian Christian theology.

We could also indicate[40] how Advaita Vedanta can dynamically enrich Eastern Christian thought in its further developments. For instance, the insight that Brahman/Atman pervades, illumines and unifies all levels and layers of human personality as well as the whole of creation enables Eastern Christian theology to arrive at new insights regarding the energies of God through which God is knowable and through which deification is actualised. The neti neti theology of Advaita, the experience of Brahman/Atman as the subject and knower of all and everything and which cannot be known, enables Eastern Christian theology to develop its apophatic theology. The Orthodox conception of deification is enriched through Advaitic insights. Deification is in terms of the implantation (mayah) of the Atman in the five human sheaths. The luminous Atman (atmajyotih) imparts His/Her lustre to the intellect and all other organs and thus deification is effected. Brahman/Atman unifies everything and everyone in His/Her homogeneity (ekarasata) and the result is again deification. Brahman/Atman as Pure Consciousness and Witness pervades, illumines and unifies the whole human person by means of His/Her reflection in it. The awareness that Brahman/Atman is reflected at all  levels of our personality gives new vigour to the interpretation of human person as created in the image of God, taught by Eastern Christian theology. The divine willing, the idea of created things, the logoi, the words, are in the energies of God and not in God's essence. The Advaita Vedantic view that before creation this universe pre-existed in Brahman as potential seed (bijasaktih) and undifferentiated name and form (avyakrtanamarupa) clarifies this understanding of creation in the energies of God.

Conclusion

If in the name of mission Christian imperialists have attempted to destroy local religions and cultures, and Christian thinkers have misinterpreted the doctrines of other religions, the first step in building communities in Asia is to seek forgiveness for the damage done and to eliminate all the prevalent misinterpretations. Christians are now to be for the correction of the defects of other religious faiths by the resources of those faiths themselves. They are to affirm the liberative elements in them, eliminating the existing misrepresentations of these by vested interests. For example, caste and communalism in India can be demonstrated as destroyable by the resources of Hinduism itself. Building communities are again through a reconceived perspective in theology of religions called Pluralistic Inclusivism which is different from the perspectives of Exclusivism, Inclusivism and Pluralism. In Pluralistic Inclusivism all the diverse religious resources of the world are conceived as the common property of humanity for mutual enrichment, relational convergence and growth. According to it, it is the hermeneutical context or the contextual socio-politico-religio-cultural realities which decide the content of our knowledge and experience of the gospel. The meaning of Christ and the Christian gospel has to emerge in the process of an inter-religious communication. People from diverse religio-cultural backgrounds will, in terms of their contexts, decide the content of the gospel. God's revelations are available to us in other religious experiences, which can help in our experiences of new dimensions of meanings of the gospel of God in Jesus. Trinity therefore may be conceived as Saccidananda and the function of Jesus, going beyond the Atonement theories, can be experienced as pointing to the pervasion, illumination and unification of all levels and layers of human personality as well as the whole creation by the Supreme Atman.

_______________________
Notes:

[1] Revd Dr. K. P. Aleaz < [email protected] > is Professor of Religions at Bishop's College and Dean of the Doctoral Programme of North India Institute of Post-Graduate Theological Studies in Kolkata, India.

[2] Michael Kinnamon, (ed.), World Council of Churches. Signs of the Spirit. Official Report. Seventh Assembly Canberra, Australia, 7-20 February 1991 (Geneva: WCC, 1991), pp. 216-19.

[3] Ibid., pp. 276-78.

[4] Swami Vivekananda, The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. VIII, 5^th Edn. (Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama, 1971), pp. 211-12.

[5] A. G. Hogg, Karma and Redemption. An Essay toward the Interpretation of Hinduism and the Restatement of Christianity (London: CLS, 1909); The Christian Message to the Hindu[Duff Missionary Lectures for 1945 on the Challenge of the Gospel in India] (London: SCM Press, 1947).

[6] P. D. Devanandan, The Gospel and the Renascent Hinduism, London: SCM Press, 1959, p. 55; The Gospel and the Hindu Intellectual. A Christian Approach, Bangalore: CISRS, 1958, pp. 25-27; Preparation for Dialogue. A collection of Essays on Hinduism and Christianity, ed. by Nalini Devanandan and M. M. Thomas, Bangalore: CISRS, 1964, pp. 38-40, 164-68.

[7] Surjit Singh, "Ontology and Personality" in Indian Voices in Today's Theological Debate, ed. by Horst Burkle and Wolfgang M.W.Roth (Lucknow: LPH/ISPCK/CLS, 1972), p. 74.

[8] Ibid., pp. 75-87; Surjit Singh, Christology and Personality (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, n. d.), pp. 19, 139, 143-51, 140-41, 151-58, etc.

[9] Ibid., pp. 19, 143-90, etc.; Surjit Singh, A Philosophy of Integral Relation (Samyagdarsanam) (Madras/Bangalore: CLS/CISRS, 1981), pp. 29-35, 44, 56. For misconceptions of Hinduism by Schweitzer, Bouquet and Zaehner Cf. D. S. Sarma, Renascent Hinduism (Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1966), pp. 70-81.

[10] Samuel Rayan, "Indian Theology and the problem of History" in Society and Religion. Essays in Honour of M. M. Thomas, ed. by Richard W. Taylor (Madras/Bangalore: CLS/CISRS, 1976), p. 175.

[11] K. P. Aleaz, "Vedic-Vedantic Vision in Indian Christian Theology of Nature", Bangalore Theological Forum, Vol. XXV, No. 1 (March 1993), p. 36.

[12] B. Upadhyaya, "Notes", Sophia, Vol. I, No. 4, July 7, 1900, p. 6; "Notes", Sophia, Vol. I, No. 2, June 23, 1900, p. 7; Summary of the lecture by B. Upadhyaya, "Hinduism, Theosophy, and Christianity�, Sophia, Vol. IV, No. 12 (December 1897), pp. 1-2.

[13] P. Johanns, "To Christ through the Vedanta", Light of the East, Vol. IV, No. 5 (February 1926), p. 5; Ibid., Vol. III, No. 8 (May 1925), pp. 3-4.

[14] R. V. De Smet, "Ancient Religious Speculations" in Religious Hinduism. A Presentation and Appraisal ed. by R. V. De Smet & J. Neuner (Allahabad: St Paul Publications, 1968), p. 46.

[15] Cf. J. N. Farquhar, The Crown of Hinduism (London: Oxford University Press, 1913).

[16] Cf. K. P. Aleaz, "The Convergence of Dalit-Advaitic Theologies: An Exploration", Indian Journal of Theology, Vol. 36, No. I (1994), pp. 97-108.

[17] Swami Vivekananda, The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda,Vol. VII, 7^th Edn. (Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama, 1969), p. 163. Cf. Pp. 91, 197; Vol. I, 13^th Edn. (Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama, 1970), pp. 364, 389-90.

[18] The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. I, pp. 384-85; Vol. III, 10^th Edn. (Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama, 1970), p. 425; Vol. II, 12^th Edn. (Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama, 1971), pp. 414-15.

[19] The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. VI, 8^th Edn. (Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama, 1968), p. 327.

[20] K. P. Aleaz, Harmony of Religions. The Relevance of Swami Vivekananda, op. cit., pp. 222-23.

[21] Cf. Bipan Chandra, Communalism in Modern India (New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House, 1989); Asghar Ali Engineer, Communalism and Communal Violence in India[special issue of Islamic Perspective Vol. IV] (Bombay: Indian Institute of Islamic Studies, 1988); S. K. Ghosh, Communal Riots in India (New Delhi: Ashish Publishing House, 1987); P. R. Rajagopal, Communal Violence in India (Delhi: Uppal Publishing House, 1987); R. Thapar et. al., Communalism and the Writing of Indian History (Delhi: People's Publishing House, 1969); M.S.Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts (Bangalore: Vikram Prakashana, 1966); S. Arulsamy (ed.), Communalism in India. A Challenge to Theologising (Bangalore: Claretian Publications, 1988); S. Lourdusamy, Religion as Political Weapon (Calcutta: Multi Book Agency, 1990).

[22] In the context of Hindutva the new paradigm for mission then is not dialogue as G. R. Singh conceives. Christian faith need not come into the picture at all for reconciliation. The power for reconciliation has to emerge from within Hinduism itself. Cf. G. R. Singh, "Hindutva and a New Paradigm for Mission", The South India Church Man (October 1993), pp. 2-4.

[23] Bipan Chandra, op. cit., pp. 158-90.

[24] S. J. Samartha, "The Cross and the rainbow: Christ in a multi-religious culture" in Christian Faith and Multiform Culture in India, ed. by Somen Das (Bangalore: United Theological College, 1987), pp. 22-29; Ramesh Chandra Majumdar, Indian Religion (Calcutta: University of Calcutta, 1969), pp. 54-62.

[25] Cf. K. P. Aleaz, "Religious Pluralism and Christian Witness - A Biblical-Theological Analysis", Bangalore Theological Forum, Vol. XXI, No. 4 and Vol. XXII, No. 1 (December-March 1990), pp. 48-67; Harmony of Religions. The Relevance of Swami Vivekananda (Calcutta: Punthi-Pustak, 1993, pp. 162-165; Theology of Religions. Birmingham Papers and Other Essays (Calcutta: Moumita, 1998), pp. 168-199.

[26] K. P. Aleaz, Dimensions of Indian Religion. Study, Experience and Interaction (Calcutta: Punthi Pustak, 1995), pp.262-63; Felix Wilfred, "Some Tentative Reflections on the Language of Christian Uniqueness. An Indian Perspective", Vidyajyoti, Vol. 57, No. 11 (November 1993), pp. 652-672; K. P. Aleaz, "Dialogical Theologies. A Search for an Indian Perspective", Asia Journal of Theology, Vol. 6, No. 2 (October 1992), pp. 274-291.

[27] K. P. Aleaz, The Gospel of Indian Culture (Calcutta: Punthi Pustak, 1994), pp. 177-282.

[28] Cf. K. P. Aleaz, Jesus in Neo-Vedanta-A Meeting of Hinduism and Christianity (Delhi: Kant Publishers, 1995); An Indian Jesus from Sankara's Thought (Calcutta: Punthi Pustak, 1997).

[29] K. P. Aleaz, The Role of Pramanas in Hindu-Christian Epistemology (Calcutta: Punthi Pustak, 1991), pp. 99-100.

[30] Cf. K. P. Aleaz, Jesus in Neo-Vedanta.A Meeting of Hinduism and Christianity, op. cit.

[31] Cf. M. M. Thomas, The Acknowledged Christ of Indian Renaissance (Madras/Bangalore: CLS/CISRS, 1970).

[32] K. P. Aleaz, The Gospel of Indian Culture, op. cit., pp. 99-176.

[33] Ibid., pp. 129-133.

[34] K. P. Aleaz, "Hope for the Gospel in Divers Religious Cultures: A Response to the Salvador Conference on World Mission and Evangelism", Asia Journal of Theology, Vol. 11, No. 2, (October 1997), pp. 263-81.

[35] K. P. Aleaz, Christian Thought Through Advaita Vedanta (Delhi: ISPCK, 1996), pp. 9-38.

[36] Cf. G. V. Job, P. Chenchiah, V. Chakkarai et al., Rethinking Christianity in India (Madras: A. N. Sundarisanam, 1938).

[37] K. P. Aleaz, Christian Thought Through Advaita Vedanta, op. cit., pp. 45-62.

[38] Cf. K. P. Aleaz, An Indian Jesus from Sankara's Thought, op. cit.

[39] Cf. K. P. Aleaz, The Role of Pramanas, in Hindu-Christian Epistemology, op. cit.

[40] Cf. K. P. Aleaz, A Convergence of Advaita Vedanta and Eastern Christian Thought (Delhi: ISPCK, 2000).