Christian Indians and Sharing Cultures: Key Insights and Lessons in the Context of Indian Nationalism

CHRISTIAN INDIANS AND SHARING CULTURES: KEY INSIGHTS AND LESSONS IN THE CONTEXT OF INDIAN NATIONALISM

Joseph Daniel

Abstract Being a Christian Indian in an Indian multi-religious context demands a participatory process. Christian Indians, who make up the church in India, need to take part in the life journey of their wider community in order to attain fullness of life. In this journey, the culture of the community plays a vital role in facilitating the discernment and pursuit of fullness of life. In light of this, this article attempts to examine the challenge of being Christian Indians within the contemporary Indian context of Hindutva – a context that seeks to define all Indian culture in terms of Hindu values at the expense of India’s age-old secular or pluralist values. In this article I attempt to deal with questions such as: How can Christian Indians’ witness, through the life of the church, be a true leaven in a multi- religious and multi-ethnic society, wherein each of the religions has developed its own traditional culture that comprises its distinctive philosophy, morality, ideology, and corporate life? How can Christian Indians facilitate, pursue, and discern “fullness of life” in the Indian context? The trinitarian basis as a model to address these questions is also discussed.

Author Rev. Dr Joseph Daniel is a priest of the Mar Thoma Church, a visiting faculty member, Mar Thoma Theological Seminary, India and a habilitation project researcher at the Institüt für Christkatholische Theologie, University of Bern, Switzerland.

Introduction

On March 5, 2016 an Indian television channel held a national debate on ‘tolerance is the new intolerance’ with eminent personalities participat- ing – a supreme court judge, Justice Ashok Ganguly; a noted film actor, Anupam Kher; and an eminent journalist, Burhka Dutt.1 The context of

1 See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRDgiPUlEVA.

Studies in Interreligious Dialogue 27/2, 77-94 doi: 10.2143/SID.27.2.3269036 © 2017 by Peeters. All rights reserved. 78 Joseph Daniel the topic was the contemporary Indian issue of Hindu nationalism and its intolerance to the other religious faiths and ideologies. Not only intolerance, but also aggressive expressions were made visible, at least in one of the speakers at the debate. Two speakers pointed out the growing intolerance in the country; others were trying to highlight the best in India. The noticeable fact in this debate was that while they preached tolerance and harmony, these speakers demanded that others should follow what the Hindu religious fundamentalists insist upon for the nation, including uniform civil code, dress code, eating and drinking codes. Some of the incidents illustrating the rising intolerance of the contemporary Indian context include repeated statements against religious minorities, attacks on churches, the killing of members of a tribal Chris- tian community in Kandamal, the arrest of a Jawaharlal Nehru Univer- sity (JNU) student on sedition charges simply for organizing a meeting at the University campus, which other students had tried to block, and the suicide of a PhD student whose stipend at Hyderabad University had been withdrawn on the basis of legal charges brought against him for supposedly attacking the student political wing of the the Bharatiya Janatha Party (BJP).2 What followed this incident on the campus was also disturbing. Rather than listening to the struggles and aspirations of the students, the manner of involvement and interference of local and national leaders of all political parties in the incident demonstrated the nature of the growing intolerance in this country. It is in respect to the promotion of Hindu nationalism in India that this paper considers key insights and lessons for the Christian community in its life and witness. As elsewhere, Christian life in Indian society is a participatory process – a process in which the church participates in the life journey of the community, in the light of the faith revealed to it by the Triune God. In this community journey, the culture of the community plays a vital role in facilitating the discernment and pursuit of the gospel promise of fullness of life. In this sense, Christian life and witness in India’s multi- religious and diverse cultural context is dialogical, relational, shared and conversational. It exists and takes place within the life and culture of the wider Indian community. By way of explicating a backdrop to this context, I shall look into the question of Indian Christians in the situation of Indian nationalism and particularly in the context of Hindutva. Hindutva is an ideology developed by V.D. Savarker (1883-1966) in 1922 and lately adopted by the BJP as a platform to make India a Hindu nation. Hindutva seeks to define Indian culture in terms of Hindu values

2 Bharateeya Janatha Party is the ruling political party in India. CHRISTIAN INDIANS AND SHARING CULTURES 79 at the expense of India’s age-old secular or pluralist values and milieu. It is highly critical of secular policies and its agenda is to make the Indian state a theocratic Hindu nation. Therefore, gaining some insight into the basis of Christian Indians sharing culture within the Indian context of Hindutva would potentially be of considerable pedagogical and practical benefit for enabling Christian Indians to provide resources for the transformation of Indian society toward fullness of life and the peaceful mutual coexistence of different religious communities in India. Thus this paper attempts to deal with the critical question: How can the Christian Indian church be a true leaven within Indian society, which is multi- religious and multi-ethnic, in order to keep India’s diversity and tolerance? Each of these religions and ethnicities has developed its own traditional culture that reflects and expresses the sum total of its philosophy, morality, ideology, and corporate life. How is Indian Christianity to relate to them, and share with them the task of promoting the values of secular- ity and tolerance? The more crucial question is whether the church in India can, through inter-faith rational discourse and dialogue, create at least a basic framework for a culture and scheme of values for people to build together a new life of love and respect? For the Christian, such a vision of inclusive tolerance is revealed in and through Christ. How might the church facilitate, pursue and discern fullness of life in an Indian context dominated by “two competing hegemonies of metropolitan elites and of the Hindutva movement”?3 To address these questions it is imperative to reflect on Hindutva and how it relates to Indian nationalism and its historical roots in India. The metropolitan elites and the Hindutva movement have their roots in Hindu nationalism and in the politics of othering.4 India has long been a multi- religious, multicultural and multi-ethnic society, having been the cradle of some of the world’s great religions, civilizations, cultures, and traditions. Overall, India’s record has been one of enduring peace and harmony. But the rise of Hindutva and its agenda of othering communities has deep implications for the life and witness of Christian Indians within India today.5

3 D.L. Shethi and Ashis Nandi (eds.), The multiverse of democracy, (New Delhi: Sage Publications, 1996), 23. 4 Joseph Daniel, “Growing religious fundamentalism and communalism in India today” (Malayalam), in, Spirituality in the Context of Religious Fundamentalism and Communal- ism, Mar Thoma Church Council, (Tiruvalla: Mar Thoma Church, 2017), 29-44. 5 Joseph Daniel, Different expressions, same reality: the Indian religious and culture context as a fertile ground for ecumenism and inter-religiosity, in Internationalle Kirchliche Zeitschrift – Bios (Bern International Oecumenical Studies, vol. 2 (2015), 127-141. 80 Joseph Daniel

Roots of Indian nationalism

The idea of Indian nationalism has its roots in European nationalism, which emerged within the context of the fragmentation of European societies under feudalism and the rise of nation states in the 18th century. However, Indian nationalism differs from the cultural nationalism that emerged in Europe. European nationalism aided its peoples to shift their focus from the local context to that of the wider nation state. Fur- thermore, European industrial society demanded some kind of cultural homogeneity to affirm the feeling of nationalism.6 It prompted Euro- pean nationalists to promote and work through an emotional affiliation to their respective nation. Thus patriotism emerged as a high value of identity and differentiation. Simultaneously another form of nationalism – cultural nationalism, which is interested in certain national cultural expressions through activities such as art, literature, music, dance and so on – also emerged within Europe. In short, nationalism is complex in its nature and manifestation and therefore it is difficult to define precisely what is meant by nation, nationality and nationalism.7 Since a deep study of European nationalism is beyond the scope of this paper, I will turn to how Indian nationalism differs from the European nationalism. Hindutva ideologues seek to promote Hindu culture as the only culture that must be embraced by all those who inhabit or intend to inhabit India as the normative culture that determines the way of life of all Indians. Thus contemporary Indian society is currently in the grip of two ideologies – Indian nationalism and Hindu nationalism. Indian nationalism emerged as a political ideology in the colonial setting of the 19th century. However, this nationalism became mixed with a Hindu renaissance, thus forming Hindu nationalism. Hindu nationalism seeks to keep the interest of the one major religion in India uppermost and, indeed, to make India a Hindu nation.8

6 Ernst Gellner, Nations and nationalism (Oxford: Blackwell, 1996) 39-52. 7 Benedict Anderson, Imagined communities (New York: Verso, 1996, 7th edition), 3. 8 M.M Thomas, “Religious Fundamentalism and Indian Secularism – the Present Crisis” in, M.M. Thomas, The Churches Mission and Post Modern Humanism (CSS & ISPCK, 1996), 10. CHRISTIAN INDIANS AND SHARING CULTURES 81

Hindu nationalism

What is the difference between Indian nationalism and Hindu nationalism? Indian nationalism emerged as a political ideology to counter British power and to attain freedom from British rule in India during the 19th century. The Indian nationalistic agenda was to create a unified Indian nation to fight against the British. However, paradoxically Hindutva ideology has its roots in British-sponsored communalism (divide and rule) which was applied to counter the possibility of a united Indian nationalism and the Indian freedom struggle. The divide and rule strategy aimed at safeguarding British rule in India. Furthermore, the colonial image of Indian society projected two competing nations – Hindu and Muslim – defined as monolithic religious identities and inher- ently hostile to each other. The promotion of this image was in order to make colonial rule in India easy.9 Due to the mutual hostility of Hindus and Muslims, a controlling authority from outside was required. The colonial powers considered this as a justification for their rule in India.10 “The concept of majority and minority communities identified by religion was also introduced by colonial policy. This further consolidated the idea of monolithic religions and these in turn fuelled communal politics.”11 Thus “anti-colonial nationalism and both the religious nation- alisms build on the colonial construction of Indian religion, though the first borrows much less so whereas the second make it foundational to their ideologies.”12 It was in this context that Hindu nationalism and Muslim nationalism emerged in India with a view to make India simultaneously a Muslim and Hindu nation. Thus the communalism of the 1920s and early 1930s in India was dominated by Hindu-Muslim alienations.13 Hindu orthodoxy was central to the alienation of Muslims and the untouchables (Dalit) in India during this period.14 The Hindu nationalistic agenda was to create a unified Hindu nation by developing a Hindu cultural and religious consciousness among Indians. With the weakening of liberal nationalism in India’s major political party –

9 Romila Thaper, Indian Society and the secular, (Gurgaon: Three Essays Collective, 2016) 2-20; Romila Thapper, “Indian Society and the secular” in, Sachidanandan (ed.), India Facisathilekku, (Malayalam), (Kottayam: DC Books, 2016)15-34. 10 Ibid. 11 Ibid. 12 Ibid. 13 Joseph Daniel, Ecumenism in Praxis (Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2014), 243. 14 Tejani, Indian Secularism, 4-5. 82 Joseph Daniel the Indian National Congress Party – Hindu orthodoxy found organized expression within the Hindu Mahasabha and later in the Rashtriya Swyam Sevak Sangh (RSS). Thus Hindu nationalism gained an organiza- tional base in India. The two-nation theory – that of Hindu India and Muslim Pakistan – advocated by Muhammad Ali Jinnah (1876-1948)15, who is known in Pakistan as Quaid-i-Azam (great leader) and Baba-i-Quam (father of the nation), made the Indian freedom struggle even more communalistic. Thus, during 1930s and 1940s, under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948) and Jawaharlal Nehru (1889-1964), the idea of secular nationalism was proposed as a political ideology to counter nascent communalistic nationalism and to continue India’s age-old heritage of affirming religious and cultural diversities.16

Secular nationalism

There are four main approaches to religion that have helped India frame its idea of secular nationalism to counter Hindu nationalism after India’s independence in 1947. First, there is the idea of placing religion within the private realm and advocating a philosophy of secularism that does not allow religious interference in the public life of the state or society. This is the classic form of secularism. Jawaharlal Nehru (1889- 1964) and E.M. Sankaran Nambuthiripad (1909-1998) supported this idea of secular nationalism.17 The second is the idea of toleration and equality of all religions – that Indian secular nationalism should be an expression of religious tolerance based on the doctrine of equality of all religions.18 Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948) and S. Radhakrishnan (1888-1975) advocated this idea. A third view of secular nationalism is that since the Indian constitution guarantees freedom of religion and expression, all religious communities have the right to follow their personal religious law. This idea emerged from the minority religious con-

15 Muhammad Ali Jinna was the founder of Pakistan and the first governor general of Pakistan. 16 M.M. Thomas, “Religious Fundamentalism and Indian Secularism – the Present Crisis” in Thomas, The Churches Mission, 10-20. 17 M.M. Thomas, “Meaning of Being a Secular State”, in Thomas, The Churches Mission, 22-23. 18 Ibid, 26-27. CHRISTIAN INDIANS AND SHARING CULTURES 83 sciousness of the Muslims.19 Fourth, the idea of nationalism as subaltern nationalism, that is, it seeks to bring the voices of the people of the land and marginalized sections of the society into India’s social, political and cultural realm. This was proposed by B.R. Ambedkar (1891-1956).20 Although India’s freedom movement was made up of many ideological strands, stretching from Hindu nationalism to socialism, the ideological predisposition of the Indian National Congress, the political party that headed the Indian freedom struggle, has been one of secular nationalism – the separation of religion from the state. The nationalist (communalistic) inclination was reinforced by the partition of India into Pakistan and the communal violence that followed independence in 1947. The idea of secular nationalism replaced communalist nationalism in 1947, when any idea of having a quota for religious minorities became a political anathema. Secular nationalism was thus “the idea that was supposed to secure social integration and reflect the universal character of human enlightenment.”21 Yet despite the claims of Indian secular nationalism, India was, and is still, ever dominated by Hindu ethnic groups.22 The post-independent Indian political scenario is very complex. With the later socio-political changes of the 1980’s and, in the aftermath of Emergency Rule, a resurgent communalism and the Hindutva movement took on a strident tone, and secularism per se came under attack. A national political party, the BJP, has become a more Hindu communal party. Indeed, the BJP political agenda is responsible for the shift. The party branded Indian secularism as pseudo-secularism that pampers religious minorities at the expense of the majority and demanded the with- drawal of minority rights. It engaged in a debate on Indian secularism through two voices – the voice of the Hindutva proponents and the liberal voice responding to Hindutva. Hindutva means ‘Hindu-ness’ – a quality or characteristic that those who are not Hindu by religion may possess, as long as their culture and lifestyle is Hindu in form and substance. The inherent idea is that there is an innate Hindu quality in the practice of any religion once it makes its home in the Indian sub-continent. Therefore it is expected that non-Hindus should treat India as their fatherland and motherland. This

19 Ibid, 27. 20 B.R. Ambedkar was the chairman of the Indian constitution drafting committee and the first law minister of the independent Indian Republic during 1947-1951. 21 Tejani, Indian Secularism, 5. 22 Ibid. 84 Joseph Daniel is a moderate inclusivist position of Hindutva. However, the hard-line advocates of the Hindutva movement have taken a distinctly fundamentalist stand and hold the view that India should declare itself a Hindu nation. From a softer inclusivist stance they manifest the hallmarks of impositional fundamentalism.23 Apart from the BJP, the Hindutva movement is supported by organisa- tions such as the far right Shiv Sena (Shivaji’s Army), Bajrang Dal and its parent Hindu-nationalist Vishva Hindu Parishad. These groups have poisoned Indian social space with their agenda of the Hindu nation and by their concerted socio-political and ideological efforts to destroy the secular ethos and syncretic culture which have long been a hallmark of Indian unity-in-diversity. Indeed, the RSS has advised minorities, and especially Muslims, that their safety depends upon the goodwill of the majority community.24 The politicisation of Hindu religion is the contemporary menace to the pluralistic context of India.25 There is also an attempt to subvert history, change curricula in schools, and a concerted effort to dominate the social space with the idea of an all-encompassing Hindu nationhood.26 These pose a major threat to the Indian nation and its age-old secularism.

23 See Douglas Pratt, ‘Fundamentalism, Exclusivism and Religious Extremism’, in, David Cheetham, Douglas Pratt and David Thomas (eds.), Understanding Interreligious Relations (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), 241-261. 24 The writer is referring to a resolution passed at the Bangalore conference of the Rashtreeya Swayam Sevak Sangh. “Meaning of Secularism” in, The Hindu, June 11, 2002. 25 In contemporary India, religious pluralism is a problem. The clash between Hindus and Muslims that centred on the construction of a worship place cost many lives in 1994. A carriage of Sabarmathi express, carrying Hindu activists was set on fire at the Godhra railway station in the western Indian state of Gujarat on February 2002. 58 people were burnt alive. In the weeks that followed, religious violence claimed at least 800 lives by mid-April and forced 98,000 people into refugee camps. The city of Ahmedbad, particularly in its medieval precincts, experienced a total of 24 days of rioting that took the lives of more than 324 people. Once Mahatma Gandhi’s seat for non-violence teaching, Ahmedbad has since become notorious for the frequency and intensity of its religious conflict. The pattern of violence in Gujarath stands in sharp contrast to the religious tolerance that prevailed among the medieval Hindu and Muslims in India. Sumithra Jha argues that the differences in the degrees to which medieval Hindus and Muslims could provide complimentary, non-replicable services and a mechanism to share the gains from exchange has resulted in a sustained legacy of religious tolerance. See Sumithra Jha, Trade Institu- tions and religious tolerance: Evidence from India (Stanford University Graduate Business Research School, Research Paper No. 2004. January, 2008). 26 “Rajastanil schoo patapusthakangalilninnu nehruvine Ozhivakki” (Malayalam), Malayala Manorama, May 8, 2016.See., www.manoramaonline.com/news/india/html (Accessed May 9, 2016). CHRISTIAN INDIANS AND SHARING CULTURES 85

The constricting and exclusivist communal motif is spreading, and the threat of dividing people looms large in India. Recent incidents such as the brutal murder of the noted Kannada academic and littera- teur, M.M. Kalburgi (1938-2015), by unidentified persons at his resi- dence in Dharwad,27 and the manifest intolerance to beef-eaters by advocates of Hindutva, show the rising threat to Indian secular nationalism. Kalburgi was a veteran writer, a former vice-chancellor of Kan- nada University, and a winner of the prestigious Indian Sahitya (literature) Academy Prize. He fought against the superstitions and attitudes of the right wing Hindutva proponents. The killings of the left-wing politician Govind Pansare (1933-2015)28, the rationalist Nar- endra Dabholkar (1945-2013)29, along with that of Kalburgi, could be seen as an attempt by Hindutva forces to make of India a society intolerant of otherness, and so inimical to diversity. In an incident on Sep- tember 28, 2015 at Dadri, near Delhi, a 50-year-old man was lynched, “and his 20-year-old son, Danish, grievously injured by a mob at their home in Bishahra village after rumours were spread that the family had consumed and stored beef in their house.”30 This was a planned attack, indeed a ‘planned conspiracy’ by Hindu communalistic forces, upon the liberty of Indian citizens to choose their food as well as their freedom of expression. The political arrest of Jawaharlal Nehru University student Kanhaiya Kumar, the suicide of Hyderabad University research scholar Rohith Chakravarti Vemula and the struggles of dalit students could be seen in this context. It was as if, as Sara Joseph observes: “the rising tide of intolerance has risen to such a level that individuals do not have the freedom to eat what they like or to love a person of their choice.”31 Salman Rushdie posted: “…alarming times for free expression in India.”32

27 M.M. Kalburgy was shot dead on August 30, 2015. The Times of India, September 1, 2015. 28 Govinda Pansare (1933-2015) was a left wing leader of the Communist Party of India. He was a well-known writer. The Times of India, February 16, 2015 29 Narendra Dabholkar (1945-2013) was a rationalist and a writer. He was murdered on August 20, 2013. The Hindu, August 21, 2013. 30 ‘Dadri incident a conspiracy, says Report’. The Hindu, October 7, 2015. 31 ‘Satchithanandan Quits Academy posts, Sara Joseph to return award”, The Hindu, October 10, 2015. 32 Salman Rushdie, ‘Alarming times for free expression in India’, The Hindu, October 13, 2015. 86 Joseph Daniel

In fact, Hindu nationalism has implications for Christian Indians’ inner consciousness within Hindu India. It has also the consequence of excluding non-Hindu religions from the national framework, facilitating their ‘othering’, and the side-lining of the broader project of secular, pluralist and inclusive Indian nationalism in favour of an all-encompassing Hindu solidarity. It is a strange situation in contemporary India that there have been conscious and deliberate attempts to replace Indian nationalism with Hindu communalism. In this context, there should be a conscious and deliberate line of thought and actions by Christian Indians to promote the concept of Indian secular culture, keeping in mind the wider goal of reconstructing their national identity. This new self- consciousness would help Christians to redefine Christian witness and their functions in the social and political life of India. It is in this context we may ask certain questions such as: How can morally, religiously and politically informed individuals and groups behave in ways that disturb the very moral, personal and community living? How can people who claim high level of tolerance chase others in the streets, brutally kill them and destroy their possessions? The reason is that the religious history of any religious people has a provision for justifying and condemning violence on the basis of their visions, percep- tions, and aspirations. And they make it acceptable by claiming that God is on their side in all their actions. So the nature of the society, political involvement and the religious orientations give some clue why some actions lead to intolerance, aggression and violence, while some others do not. The promotion of religious violence varies according to the secular character of the elites. In a society in which intellectuals are influential, normally religion tends to be more contemplative, and the intellect chains violence and subjects it to calculated legal process. In a society dominated by a stratum of warriors, however, fate and destiny, passion and strong heroes are all-important, allowing violence to be always imminent. The sad side of today’s Indian elite is that the political process of the country is controlled by the strategies of warriors. They are capable of invoking and instilling passions in their supporters and fear among those who stand against them. Therefore intolerant and violent actions are always imminent. It is in this context that the challenge of Christian Indians is to make adequate efforts to help the wider community, inclusive of religious sub-communities, to overcome power struggles, dominations, intolerance, violence and terrorizing tendencies. CHRISTIAN INDIANS AND SHARING CULTURES 87

Hindu nationalism and its challenge to the Indian Church

The focus of Christian Indians on Christo-centrism and mission activities, particularly the task of conversion, have been vehemently attacked by Hindutva leaders. Furthermore, the Hindutva advocates attempt to create a corporate identity with a view to forming a monolithic and homogenous Hindu culture by assimilating, or else excluding, the various ethnic and religious minorities. If successful, this would mean Christian Indian identity would mark Christians out as permanent others and poten- tial enemies – either to be driven out or annihilated. In support of this view, P.B. Mehta argues that Hindu nationalism is not so much about defending a way of life, as it is about creating a litmus tests of true allegiance. These litmus tests are designed in such a way that it is almost over determined that minorities especially Christians and Muslims will fail. They remain the permanent other of Hindu identity that either need to be encompassed by bringing them under the sign of a common ethnicity, or else remain, on this view a permanent threat to Hindu identity and claims.33

The Hindutva ideology promotion of an insider and outsider bifurca- tion of Indians seeks to promote the idea that the outsider is entitled to exist in India only at the will and consent of the insider. This way of thinking in India is a transition from its earlier governing conceptual categories – a synthesis of Christian–Hindu models, orientalists’ recon- struction of India’s glorious past, and the indigenous Indian reform movements – to that of clearly countering colonialism and Christian missionizing. Thus Hindu nationalism has serious implications for Christian Indians and their place in Hindu India. It is a strange situation that, in contemporary India, there has been conscious and deliberate attempts to replace Indian nationalism with Hindu communalism. It has the consequence of excluding non-Hindu religions from the national framework, facilitating their othering, and side-lining the broader project of a secular, pluralist and inclusive, Indian nationalism in favour of an all-encompassing exclusive Hindu solidarity. In this context, from the perspective of the inner life of the Christian community, there needs to be a conscious and deliberate line of thought and action of Christian Indians sharing in Indian secular culture in order

33 Pratab Bhanu Mehta, ‘Introduction to the Omnibus’, Hindu nationalism and Indian politics [Three books in one volume edition], (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2004), xiii. 88 Joseph Daniel to reach the wider goal of reconstructing an inclusivist-pluralist secular national identity. Such self-consciousness of intent and action would help Christians to redefine their function in the social and political life of India.

Dual allegiance of Christian Indians

Christian Indians form a visible social entity in India. They are com- mitted to their call to exercise Christian discipleship by their affirmation of the Bible, Church traditions, and the Church’s participation in the cultural, spiritual, political and social life of the secular Indian state. From a theological perspective, they owe this allegiance to the life and work of the Trinity, as witnessed in the Bible and the traditions of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church. In this context, knowledge of the historical Jesus can be a potent source of understanding the nature of Christian witnessing. Christian life is essentially the task of the church, which stands on its Trinitarian foundation. This provides theological impetus for Christian witnessing and social relations, modes of dialogue and sharing in the cultural expressions in India. In this process of Chris- tian witnessing, cultural sharing is considered a requirement in engaging India’s multi-religious and pluralistic context. Jesus sought the transformation of his social world. Jesus’ ministry was for the renewal of his community. “Not only is he witness to the reality of the Spirit as an element of experience, but his passionate involvement in the culture of his own time – this social world – connects two realities which Christians have frequently separated.”34 Jesus was concerned about creating a new community within his social world, one whose corporate life reflected faithfulness to God.35 Jesus shared much in common with other Jewish charismatics of his time. He also differed from them in a number of ways. Jesus shared his culture, climaxing in a final journey to Jerusalem, which was the center of their cultural life.36 Jesus shared the social world of his time. The social world refers to the total social environment of a people at particular time in their history, including economic conditions, technology, mixture of population isola- tion and exposure to foreign culture. A ‘social world’ also refers to the

34 Marcus Borg, Jesus a new vision (London: SPCK, 1993), i. 35 Ibid, ii. 36 Ibid. CHRISTIAN INDIANS AND SHARING CULTURES 89 socially constructed reality of the nonmaterial canopy of shared convic- tions that every human community erects and within which it lives, and which is known as ‘culture’. It is this world of shared ideas that makes each culture what it is.37 Culture consists of the shared beliefs, values, meanings and laws, customs, institutions, rituals and so forth by which a group orders and maintains its world. The social world of Jesus was that of Judaism, situated within the total social environment of first century Palestine.38 Jesus tried to transform this culture. He was a transformative sage, but also a subversive sage who challenged the popular wisdom of the day. Jesus thus stood in the tradition of subversive wisdom. His teaching involved more than a subverting of conventional wisdom. He affirmed another vision and another way.39 He taught an alternative way of being, and an alternative consciousness shaped by the relationship of spirit and not determined primarily by the dominant consciousness of culture.40 Jesus effectively created a sectarian renewal or revitalization movement within Israel – the Jesus movement. The relationship between the renewal movement and culture, or the social world, is one of both affirmation and advocacy for change. It is in light of this theological context that we need to search for the way of witnessing in the context of Hindutva. The Hindutva movement with its political mandates “seeks to subjugate and homogenize ethnic pluralities by establishing the hegemony of an imagined cultural mainstream”.41 As a result, “the political space for an alternative thinking and practice for democracy in India has shrunk rather suddenly”.42 Globally, the church faces new challenges. Recent developments in econ- omies, the media, and unipolar world politics, are affecting our value systems and relationships. The rise of fundamentalism, for instance, is a manifestation of these tendencies that distorts the essential nature of the apostolic faith, spirituality, and community. This phenomenon demands a broader Christian critique of the religion-culture matrix within the Indian context. It is in this context that we can discern at least four ways to view and respond to culture.

37 Ibid, 79. 38 Peter Berger, The Sacred Canopy (New York: Doubleday,1967) 39 Borg, Jesus, 115 ff. 40 Ibid., 116. 41 Shethi and Nandi, The multiverse of democracy, 23. 42 Ibid. 90 Joseph Daniel

Christians and Culture: Four Responses

The four possible responses that Christians can make to culture as such include, first, simply accepting culture as it is, without judgement. Second, reject culture on the basis of a negative judgement, such as considering culture as manifesting ‘spiritual darkness’. Third, seeing Christianity as the endorser of the central values of any given culture. Here there is a presupposition of a basic harmony between one’s cultural values and the value of one’s religion. Finally, culture can be construed as a set of societal attributes transformed by the power of the Holy Spirit. As responsible Christian Indians, we might regard a basic harmony to exist between Indian secular cultural ethos and values on the one hand, and the value of Christian witness and service on the other. Arguably, in this regard a primary task of the Church in India is to transform the present fundamentalist cultural context through Christian witness and service.

A balance sheet

Having identified the dominant challenges that the Christian Indians face today, and the need to transform the Indian fundamentalist line of separating the community and culture to that of a life-affirming culture of unity in diversity, I shall respond to questions that were raised at the beginning of this paper, with a view to equipping the church to meet the challenges that it faces. My reflections will be centred on three questions: 1). How can Christian discipleship, including witnessing through the life of the church, be a true transforming leaven within multi-religious and multi-ethnic Indian society? 2). Can Christian discipleship, through inter- faith rational discourse and dialogue, create at least the basic framework for a culture and scheme of values for people to build together a new life of respectful fullness, as revealed through Christ? 3). How can we be Christ’s disciples in facilitating, pursuing and discerning this fullness of life in the contemporary Indian Hindutva context? The question of Christian discipleship – witness and service – through the life of the church finds, in Trinitarian understanding, a key theological perspective, namely that of inter-relationality. Perichoresis is a key idea in the concept of the Trinity. Perichoresis denotes the inner relationality or intimacy of the Trinitarian persons constituting the singularity of the Triune God. It can be taken as the key hermeneutical principle in explor- ing the task of Christian witness and service in the Indian multi-religious CHRISTIAN INDIANS AND SHARING CULTURES 91 and cultural context. For instance, Christian Indians are expected to share with the people and cultures the new quality of life that Jesus brought to humanity. This message became good news to the unacceptable in the society and culture of his time, and ever since. Jesus and his disciples challenged the popular wisdom of the day. Jesus stood in the tradition of subversive wisdom that seeks to transform society. Thus he critically assessed the religious and political realm, and provided an alternative life and witness in the society. He affirmed another vision and another way and showed this by his own journey from Bethlehem to Golgotha and to the Mount of Ascension. In light of the trinitarian concept, wherein the three persons co-inhere in mutually affirming relationality, so may the Church, as the body of Christ making this relationality manifest in time and place now, see its life and witness as necessarily involving inter- relationship with the religious and cultural ‘others’ that, all together, are constitutive of the society in which the Church seeks to proclaim fullness of life and make it a reality. Perichoresis is thus a model and a motive for Christian Indian life and witness. Secondly, and in light of the above, participation and co-relation are considered central to the understanding of Trinity. Hence Christian witness and service in India is and should be grounded in the reality of God in Trinity – Unity in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity. The Trinitarian basis helps Christian Indians to discern God’s will, and challenge and subvert demonic traits that continue to manifest in violence, in and through the praxis of othering communities and perpetuating injustices that thwart India’s democratic and secular constitutional base. Furthermore, regard- ing the second question, that of creating, at least, the basic framework for a culture and scheme of values for people to build together a new life that is revealed through Christ, what should be the Christians’ stand? I suggest Christian Indians need to be an open community. To be sure, the Indian cultural context can create a basic framework for India’s common culture through ecumenism and inter-religious rational dialogue. However, two major ideas, which are common among all religions, need here to be mentioned. First, all religions and cultures conceive love as the ultimate moral law of human perfection and profess the formation of a community of love as its final goal.43 Secondly, all religions seek – and indeed provide – the means to reach that goal. The fundamental idea is that there is a common goal for different religious communities. Indian culture provides a unitive vision of human life and

43 Ibid. 92 Joseph Daniel in this vision karma44 is the motivating force. In this vision, different religious experiences have their own space. The perfect ethics of nishkama karma (unselfish work for self-realisation) and the relative ethics of artha (purpose), kama (self) and dharma (duty) have both been posited in the sanadhana dharma concept.45 There is space here for plurality in both these ethical contexts to allow for common existence and growth. But, in fact, in upholding of the ideal of secularism in India some sections in all religions assert an exclusive or fundamentalist position. A critical question thus emerges. If plurality is what Indian culture speaks of, why has contemporary religious fundamentalism flourished in India? When the majority community perpetuates fundamentalism with a view to gaining political power, minority communities feel insecure. There is today an awareness of the difficult destiny of the marginalized communities, and their life struggles, in India. It is in this context that we need to affirm the plurality, or intrinsic diversity, of God’s creation and consciously create an atmosphere for dialogue and mutual interaction in relation to that. For this, Christian disciples need to show openness: openness to God, and openness to society are both needed. The three-ness of the divine persons and the oneness of God’s essence is the major affirmation of the Trinity. It is in this context that the Nicene-Constan- tinopolitan creed provides fuel for our journey. The creed never allows the annihilation of the distinction between the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit in the Trinity, nor any tendency to divide the indivisible essence of the Trinity. Unity and diversity are held together in the Trinity. This is the essence of the divine life and being. It is the model for Christian life and witness in contexts of plurality such as exist in India. Thirdly, how can we be Christ’s disciples in facilitating, pursuing and discerning this fullness of life in the contemporary Indian Hindutva context? To address this, we need to affirm the age-old cultural trend of the affirmation of plurality in India as something which is also deeply consonant with Christianity. The Indian cultural trend has ever been the affirmation of pluralism – that different religious expressions are valid, whether equally or varyingly, in respect to some notion of universal divine reality. It is in this context that the “mystery of the Trinity should be the deepest source, closest inspiration and the brightest illumination of the meaning of life that we can imagine.”46 The affirmation of the

44 The Sanskrit word, karma, means action. 45 M.M.Thomas, The Church’s Mission and Post-Modern Humanism, op.cit., 1-9. 46 Leonardo Boff, Trinity and Society (London: Burns and Oats/Search Press, 1988), 160ff. CHRISTIAN INDIANS AND SHARING CULTURES 93

Trinitarian doctrine is that God is one, God is three; God is diversity, and God is unity. God is relational and, further, shares the divine life with and in the social life and culture of the people of the creation. For instance, relationship with God is made available to the world in Jesus Christ, who himself was born in a Jewish cultural setting.

Conclusion

To be a Christian Indian is not to merely imitate Christ on a moral level. It is to become Christ-like by grace so that our life, both individu- ally and corporately, is a manifestation and revelation of the presence of Christ within society. Thus as Christian Indians we not only imitate the behaviours of Christ at some external level, but seek to incorporate the life of Christ organically into our own unique personal being, entering into a real union with the divine, and translating that union into Indian society to achieve that fullness of life we believe is what both our faith and the deepest traditions of India together uphold as right and proper for Indian society. Following the model of Jesus’ witness, Christian Indians can stand in the tradition of subversive wisdom with a view to transforming society towards the affirmation of plurality and diversity. This ‘subversive wisdom’ helps the Christian Indians to critically assess contemporary Indian religious and political realm, and provide an alternative life and witness in the society immersed in love. The goal of Indian Christian witness is real transformation towards the fullness of life for India – a life expressive of divine justice, love and mercy; the affirmation of diversity in unity.

Literature

Anderson, Benedict. 1996. Imagined communities, 7th impression. New York: Verso. Borg, Marcus. 1993. Jesus a new vision. London: SPCK. Berger, Peter. 1967. The Sacred Canopy. New York: Doubleday Boff, Leonardo. 1998. Trinity and Society. London: Burns and Oats/Search Press. Cunningham, David S. 2000. These Three are One: The Practice of Trinitarian Theology. Massachusetts: Blackwell. Daniel, Joseph. 2014. Ecumenism in Praxis. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. Daniel, Joseph. 2015. ‘Different expressions, same reality: the Indian religious and culture context as a fertile ground for ecumenism and inter-religiosity’, in Angela Berlis and Douglas Pratt (eds.), From Encounter to Commitment: 94 Joseph Daniel

Interreligious Experience and Theological Engagement IKZ-bios, Vol. 2 (Bern: Stämpfli 2015), Daniel, Joseph. 2017. ‘Growing religious fundamentalism and communalism in India today’ (Malayalam). Spirituality in the Context of Religious Funda- mentalism and Communalism, Tiruvalla. Mar Thoma Church Council. 29-44. Gellner, Ernst. 1996. Nations and nationalism, Oxford: Blackwell. Holen, Andrew. 2009. Religious cohesion in times of conflict. London: Contin- uum. Jha, Sumithra. 2008. Trade Institutions and religious tolerance: Evidence from India. Stanford University Graduate Business Research School, Research Paper No. 2004. Kelley, JND. 1978. Early Christian Doctrines. San Franscisco: Harper and Row. Mehta, Pratab Bhanu. 2004. ‘Introduction to the Omnibus’, In Hindu nationalism and Indian politics. Three books in one volume edition. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Pratt, Douglas. 2013. ‘Fundamentalism, Exclusivism and Religious Extremism’, In Understanding Interreligious Relations, edited by David Cheetham, Douglas Pratt and David Thomas. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 241- 261. Shethi D.L, Ashis Nandi, eds. 1996. The multiverse of democracy. New Delhi: Sage Publications. Thomas, M. M. 1996. ‘Religious Fundamentalism and Indian Secularism – the Present Crisis’, In The Churches Mission and Post Modern Humanism edited by M.M Thomas. CSS & ISPCK. Thaper, Romila. 2016. Indian Society and the secular. Gurgaon: Three Essays Collective. Thaper, Romila. 2016 ‘Indian Society and the secular’. In India Facisathilekku, (Malayalam), edited by Sachidanandan. Kottayam: DC Books.