Photograph of Anil Chawla


Author - Anil Chawla

My article A Hindu's View of Jesus Christ attracted some interesting comments. I reproduce here all the comments received. My reply, if any, is given below the comment.

With Best Wishes and Regards,

Anil Chawla

16 January 2007

From: Selvaraj

Dear Anil, you have delivered a better sermon than what I have heard in my church in a long time.

You are probably right in your assumption that Jesus Christ was deeply influenced by Indian thought. The bible speaks of the three wise men from the east even at the time of his birth. Buddhism was already 500 years old when Jesus Christ appeared on the scene. If we grouped religions together, Judaism, Islam and Christianity (Old testament) would fall in one group, while Christianity (New Testament) and Indian religions would fall in the other group.

While meaning no disrespect to Judaism and Islam, as far a Christianity goes, the New Testament is more modern in its percepts. Indeed if Jesus Christ were to reappear today I am convinced that he would look at the world with fresh eyes, as he did 2000 years ago. He would question the manner in which we have over populated our planet with humans and forced other life forms to the edge of extinction.

He would I believe perhaps have questioned the central theme of Genesis that God made man in his own image. While there is no harm in this imagery in the aesthetic sense, when it is interpreted literally as it is being done by our religions and indeed by our scientists too (who have this puffed up idea about science, which no doubt derives from this superiority complex which extols human beings and belittles the rest of nature), we have a sure recipe for troubles ahead.


From: M. N. Buch

My dear Anil,

I have gone through your thought-provoking article on Jesus Christ. Actually the person who propounds the Word of God never really writes the scripture, or gospel. For example, the Quran was written several years after Prophet Mohammed died, though it had been revealed to him by Allah and had been propagated by him. The Hadith, or sayings of the Prophet Mohammed, were penned by other people and it is difficult to say at this stage how many of them cover the original sayings of the Prophet.

All religions have to have some continuity because one builds from the starting point. All religions also converge at some point of time on the universal truth. For example, when we depart this world to some other world if we are believers and to a great nothingness if we are atheists, there is only one door through which we pass and that is the door of death. No religion claims that there is a separate door exclusive to its followers. That is why the Old Testament is considered the first part of the Bible, with the Jews being arrested at the stage of the Old Testament, the Christians having a New Testament in continuation of the Old, dating back to the birth of Christ and the Muslims having a revealed Quran which is very largely Old Testament based. Even the Hindus trace back the origin of Sanatan Dharma to the four Vedas, with the Upanishads, the Shrimad Bhagavat and various other Hindu texts being in continuation thereof, partly by way of interpretation and partly by way of addition. Even the Quran has a concept of Ijtehad, or discussions on aspects of religion at an Ijma, or congregation of Ulema, the learned ones, similar to a Dharma Sansad of the Hindus.

Trouble arises when religions become static or rigid. Islam has not held an Ijma for the last four hundred years. In the Christian church ecumenism is paid lip service but nothing substantial emerges. The Sanatan Dharma has had Reformist Movements whenever aberrations, deviations and perversions have crept in, for example, the Buddhist revolt against Brahmanical religious and ritualistic extremism, the Advaitya philosophy of Adi Sankara, the Reform Movement of Ramakrishna Paramahans, the iconoclastic revolt of Swami Dayanand Saraswati against idol worship. But here, too, we seem to have cried a halt to meaningful religious discussions and are drifting into a dangerous, intolerant, exclusive form of Hindutva as advocated by the present day VHP. We need to guard against this.

I am aware of the conflict in the Christian church between the Unitarians and those who consider the Holy Trinity to be central to the religion. I am aware of the fact that Jesus as the Saviour and the Son of God was accepted by Christians only after his death. At the same time Jesus himself knew that he was the Son of God because in his dying moments on the Cross he prayed to God the Father in these words, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do”. Hindus believe in a trinity of the Creator, the Preserver (saviour) and the one who takes them beyond this world to the next world. Christians also believe in God the Father as the Creator, Jesus the Son as the Saviour and the Holy Ghost who represents the very spirit or soul of Christianity. Islam accepts Jesus as a prophet but not as the Son of God because to Muslims that spells plurality of divinity. Hindus believe that Vishnu manifests Himself on earth as an incarnation in human form to save mankind in its hour of need. Therefore, for Hindus to accept Jesus as the Son of God or an Avtar seems quite logical and appropriate. Those Hindu extremists who view the church with suspicion because of a perception that it is out to proselytize all non-Christians, forget that Jesus is precisely that saviour, the messenger of love to whom you refer in your article. In any case Hinduism is too powerful a religion to face extinction because of the church. I would like to see a complete cessation of hostility between Hindus and Christians, a goal towards which we must strive.

May I carry you to the ninth Avtar of Vishnu, Gautam Buddha? He fought against ritualistic Brahmanism and gave to the world Buddhism which is based on love and Ahimsa. Look at the perversion which has crept into Buddhism, which has made the Chinese a violent people, the Japanese an aggressive race, the Sinhalas a xenophobic nation and the neo-Buddhists an angry people violently seeking a place in India’s political sun. These are perversions, not the original message of Buddha. The Christian Church, like Islam and the Sanatan Dharma, has also been subject to extremism, deviationism and perversion, but that does not make Jesus irrelevant to Christianity.

The death of Jesus on the Cross is by way of symbolism, as is the death of Krishna by the arrow of a hunter or the Jalsamadhi of Ram. That does not mean that Krishna and Ram are not Avtars or Jesus is not the saviour. A religion ultimately is a set of rituals, a discipline meant to focus the conscience and the attention of men towards a particular belief. What is fundamental to religion is that it brings a message of civility and humanity to mankind, it preaches love and gives people a symbol, an icon, a focal point which reminds them that there is an universal truth which applies to each one of us.

I have enjoyed reading your article. It is a fine exercise in honest, philosophical metaphysics and I congratulate you for it.

With warm regards,

Yours sincerely,

M.N. Buch

Mr. M.N. Buch retired as an I.A.S. officer. He is a well-known author. He writes on various subjects including urban development.

From: Dilip Bhagat


Nice of you to look at Jesus from a Hindu perspective. This is what Paramhansa Yogananda also did. From the Hindu perspective, Jesus becomes another Guru, Rishi or Swami, who went around spreading his message of love. Now, if only the whole world would look Jesus (and Christianity) from the Hindu perspective.

Unfortunately, the rest of the world is not looking at Jesus' love from the Hindu perspective, but rather looking at him as a Saviour of the world. They want to bring the world to this Saviour. Nothing wrong still. However, in their view, once you come to Jesus you have to give up your exisiting "false" religion. Well, not only give up, but destroy your existing "false" religion.

Now this is where the problem is.

The North East of India is now Christian and there is a separatist movement ongoing. Violence, death, killings. Once cannot perform a Hindu arti in public. It is banned. There Jesus the man of love has become Jesus the Jihadi (or Crusader). Of course, this is nothing new. The Dark and Middle ages of Europe are filled with instances of violence and death in the name of Jesus. The killing of the Incas, Mayas, Native American was all in the name of Jesus. Present day Africa is the same way.

Thus one has to be careful in what one wants to promote. Sometimes, you may invite a loving man in your house, but with him come his followers, who maybe revolutionaries, and may destroy your house. History is replete with such examples, where Christianity has massacred millions in the name of Jesus. Christianity has not left a single Pagan religion in tact. Jesus is just a ploy to get into your house. (Did you know that historically there is no proof that Jesus existed? )

So as Indians, let us stick to Indian. India has done quite well with its Gurus, Rishis, Swamis, Tirthankars. India's past has been full of people spreading love. I can think of numerous, starting with Shiva, Krishna, Buddha, Mahavir, Mirabai, Tulsidas, Gandhi etc. etc. Even today India has the Dalai Lama, Swami Ramdev, Amma, Sri Sri, Sai Baba etc. etc. India also has the technology of peace (yoga, meditation, bhajan, kirtan) . Yoga has become a world wide phenomenon, and so has meditation. Culture is flowing from India to the rest of the world. This is just the beginning I hope.

The world needs more of India and its ancient traditions. With Jesus there is too much manipulation. With the Dalai Lama there is no manipulation. With Sri Sri, with Swami Ramdev, with Amma, there is no manipulation.

So I say the world needs less of Jesus, and more of the likes of Swami Ramdev, Sri Sri, Amma etc.

Dilip Bhagat

Dilip Bhagat graduated from IIT Bombay in 1980. My reply to him is as follows.

Dear Dilip Bhagat,

I am thrilled by your reply. I had always known you as a happy-go-merry-go guy. Receiving such a reply indicates that you have grown in a direction that is indeed marvellous.

I am also glad that at least you did not accuse me of getting converted to Christianity. Your reference to Paramhansa Yogananda is also laudable. He also writes about Jesus and compares Jesus to other Hindu seers.

The difference between you and me is one of approach. You and many other Hindus who see themselves as defenders of the faith always adopt a defensive approach. They criticize Christianity and all that it has done to pagan religions across the world, but the approach is always defensive - let us stop the march of christianity and save ourselves and many others whom missionaries are trying to convert. The initiative is always with the missionaries and we are only trying to stop their wrongdoings.

My article takes a step beyond. I am offensive, not in the sense of the west where one wins territories and converts by sword. My offensiveness is philosophical and based on love. All the basic tenets of Christianity, as propounded by the Church and which give legitimacy to the church have been rejected by me in my article. While the missionary has been trying hard to win poor souls in India, I have gone ahead and converted Jesus himself to Hinduism. Surprisingly, my Hindu friends, instead of congratulating me on this are actually accusing me of becoming a Christian.

Another point that I shall like to draw attention to is about the staement in my article saying "Jesus as a Son of God who brought to us the message of love". This is not acceptable to any Church. Their contention is that "Jesus is the Son of God" The difference between "A son of God" and "The son of God" is a vital difference.

My message is simple. All the wrongdoings of the Church (destruction of pagan religions in a most brutal manner, colonialism, imperialism etc.) are unpardonable. To fight the church, it will help to have Jesus on our side, who cannot be accused of or held responsible for any of the misdeeds of the church and clergy.

Hope that I have been able to clarify my view point.

Thanks & regards,

Anil Chawla

From: Rakesh Koul

Dear Anil,

Great reading, it clears a lot of things for me and help me to a new perspective on things.

Jesus was full of love and ready to die for love, let us say that is basically what it is.

These type of articles and exchange of information are so much in need in our society in India and let us say every where.

Thank you again and Wish you a very Happy new Year.


Rakesh Koul, MD

From: Kalavai Venkat

Dear Anil Chawla,

I hope you take my criticism constructively.

You indeed make some correct observations such as the gospels were written much later than the time of Jesus. Indeed, the canonical gospels had not come into existence until the second century CE, and attained their current shape in the fifth century CE. As Bart Ehrman demonstrates, The Bible has over 200,000 variants, making it, in the words of Freke and Gandy, the product of the Holy Forgery Mill. You are partly correct that there is not much evidence outside the Bible about Jesus. There is enough though, in the criticism of Pagan philosophers, Nag Hammadi Library, Qumran Scrolls, Tolodot Yeshu etc. You are also correct that the concept of trinity was invented in the fourth century CE.

Any Hindu perspective must be based upon truth for "satyam vada - speak the truth" is the Hindu dictum. So, I am going to point out where all you are entirely wrong.

Jesus as an embodiment of love is a fiction the church invented, not unlike the Islamist humbug of Islam as the religion of peace. The above texts I cited, as well as the sayings in the Bible, present Jesus as an unedifying character. All messages of love and compassion found in the Bible have been copied, often word to word, from earlier Buddhist texts. The writings of Zaccharias Thundy, Roy Amore, and Holger Kersten, among others, provide a thorough discussion of this theme. When stripped of these borrowings, Jesus comes across as a vengeful, hate-filled, violent character.

The Bible alone has over 450 antisemitic passages, many of those uttered by Jesus himself. This resulted in the persecution of the Jews for 2,000 years, and culminated in their ordeal in the Nazi-Christian gas chambers during the Holocaust. Please see for details. You may also want to consult my article, "From the Holy Cross to the Holocaust," in the recently published book, "Expressions of Christianity."

Jesus was far from compassionate. A compassionate person would not have irrationally cursed a fig tree, massacred innocent pigs, or called a woman that pleaded with him to save her child a dog just because she was not Jewish. These are signs of a mentally deranged paraphrenic, as scientific studies have shown. Please see for details.

Jesus suffered from serious mental disturbances arising from the fact that his contemporaries considered him an illegitimate child. His mother Mary was not only married twice, to Joseph and his brother, but she was also involved in a scandalous relationship with the Jewish-Roman soldier, Pantera. Further, in the entire Bible, there is not one place where Jesus expresses love for his mother. Instead, he is very obtuse. One likely reason is, as Michael Jordan thoroughly documents in "The Historical Mary," Mary was a qdesha (temple prostitute) and Jesus resented that.

Jesus indeed set up hierarchy. He designated his brother James as his successor, and Peter as one of his two assistants. Please see James Tabor's "The Jesus Dynasty" for details. He never opposed the Old Testament. He did not challenge any established religious system. He merely fancied himself in the messianic mould. In fact, he vouched for it. It was Paul, almost certainly a Roman spy, who spewed hatred against the Old Testament and the Jews. The Qumran Scrolls describe Paul as "The Liar" and indicate that he massacred James. Please see Michael Baigent's "The Dead Sea Scroll Deception."

Early Christians were not persecuted. This is a Christian myth. There were only two such cases until the third century. On both occasions, Christians indulged in treason and the Romans punished them. The Pagans never indulged in religious persecution. Please see Jonathan Kirsch's "God Against the Gods" for details. On the other hand, it was Christians that systematically persecuted Gnostics, Pagans, Jews, and later on Cathars, Gypsies, and Hindus.

In short, Jesus was a paraphrenic, and a failed and falsified messiah. His legacy is one of hatred. The Jews paid a heavy price for his hateful teachings. We cannot afford another Jesus or his falsified second coming. Christianity, like Islam, is adharma. The ideology must be exposed and destroyed. We need dharma, reason and love in this world.

Since you claim to present a Hindu view point, you should form such views based upon facts, and not upon an imagined Jesus. Please read "Jesus Christ - An Artifice For Aggression" - for facts instead of imagining a Jesus that is historically untenable.


I have not replied to the above long letter. My reply to all those who speak with hatred against Christ is contained in my reply to Mr. Vir Gupta. Regarding KV's quoting "satyam vada - speak the truth", let me just add that three basic foundations of Hinduism are "Satyam, Shivam, Sundaram" (Truth, Goodness, Beauty). Pursuit of truth while neglecting social good can have disastrous consequences.

From: Vir Gupta

Dear Friends:

I am sending this e-mail to Anil Chawla also so he could read it and respond. Rather than criticizing Mr. Chawla, I would like him to respond to my e-mail so our readers can understand why he loves Christianity and that should help us all in understanding why people like Chawla are looking for this faith. I am sure Mr. Chawla has read enough of Jesus and Mr. Patwardhan's talk may enlighten him more about this faith.

I am going to discuss here the reason why people turn to Christianity. I find Mr. Chawla fairly educated, but his write up on Christianity does not tell me why he is leaning towards that faith. I am going to present my own reasons and Mr. Chawla can tell his own story.

There may be many reasons why people turn to Christianity.

  1. They are married to a Christian spouses, and most likely the spouse is white woman.

  2. Their own childhood is very traumatic and there were no listening ears to their tale of woe.

  3. They had tragedy later in life (loss of child, handicap child birth etc.) and our Indian community failed to provide the support they needed.

  4. They were abused by some member of the family and their own life was full of misery. These people are loners and public can not understand their lonliness.

  5. They are rejected by the society because of their low caste.

  6. The parents have not instilled the confidence in them about their own scriptures.

  7. They need money for education, and missionaries provide them free education.

I have come across some people who have been married to white women and had agreed to baptize their children as Christians. Slowly and slowly they also converted to the Christian religion. One interesting example is of Mahindra Singhal who lives near Chicago. His father was a wealthy business man. He was sent to Dehradoon school where he met a White girl and fell in love with her. This white girl was from England and was there to study to become a nun. So after making love to this girl he became Christian. He started to make fun of Bhagwad Geeta, his own father, and became more and more influenced by Christian writing against Hinduism and Buddhism. During his one hour talk in my hometown, he spent about 25 minutes criticizing his own father. He told his childhood experience with father and criticized every of his action. He told that his dad was phony who went to temple only to show how has religious but never did go to the temple with a view to connect with God. He criticized Buddhism as religion of Emptiness, but he had no knowledge of Buddha's teachings.

There was another Hindu from Nepal who had become a Christian. He had written against Bhagwad Geeta and when I questioned him, he was not able to answer.

I have come across a Sikh from Ludhiana Mr. Balwinder Singh. He is now called Ben. This Sikh gentleman had a handicap daughter and he could not get sympathy from his own family members or Sikh gurudwara. So he decided to go to church in California where priests listened to him and gave him comfort. Now he talks about Jesus all the time. He told me that Sikhism is good, but it lacks compassion and community support, and now he send almost half of his income for charitable causes.

There are many low caste Sikhs in Punjab who have embraced Christianity because upper caste Sikhs will not give them the same privilege in Gurudwara. Missionaries are providing scholarships and turning them against Sikh faith.

I am almost certain one of the reasons should apply to Anil Chawla. I would very much like to hear from him.

Vir Gupta

One more letter from Mr. Vir Gupta is reproduced here in abridged form.

Dear Anil:

You wrote that Jesus is a son of God which should be true for all of us if we go by our Upanishads which declare "Aham Brahma Asmi" or "Tat Tvam Asi." Jesus cannot be exclusive son of god, as Christians claim.

You say that Jesus brought to us a message of love. If you read Sermon on the Mount, you will get that impression, but what about the rest of the New Testament? Jesus used the words like "you slithering snakes", "you hypocrites", "you fools" several times throughout the New Testament. He curses Judas for deceiving him. He turned the tables in tabernacles; he cursed the fig tree for not giving him fruit when he was hungry. I can cite several other instances, but my bible is not in front of me at this time. If I am wrong, please tell me.

If you were looking for a historical figure who is a symbol of love, there are many in India. Rama had profound love for his brothers, mothers and father. His ideals have influenced many in India and abroad. I have not come across even a single person in history who accepted the verdict that he should be banished for 14 years and his brother Bharat should be put on the throne. He never uttered any words of contempt against his step mom for such a demand. He silently suffered for 14 years, lost his wife, and ate the stuff which were worth for eating by animals only.

How about Asoka the great? If you have not read his rock edicts, please do so. No other king has done so much as Asoka did. He worked tirelessly to build roads, bridges, dig wells, plant trees, import herbs, export herbs, opened 3 universities in Kalinga, and even sent his own children to spread Buddha's message of love.

What about Buddha himself. I am an admirer of Buddha and have several dozen books on him. He changed the course of Indian history. Buddhists have opened at least 2 dozen universities in India and abroad. Then there were thousands of Viharas which were the centers of great learning. Buddha showed compassion to Ajatsatru even when planned to kill him. He changed Angulimala for ever. Buddha is a historical figure.

I wish you could read Jatakmala. You will find great compassion in every story. In one story, monkey king lets all monkeys jump over his back so they could escape to the other side of river. In another Jataka, a golden deer had compassion on the person he saved, but that ungrateful person tells the king where to find the golden deer. In another Jaataka, Sudhana, gives away all the wealth, his wife and children to show god that he has crossed the river of attachment.

I can write on and on about Indians who had much deeper love than Christ, but for the time being it is good enough.

As I pointed out in my previous e-mail that Jesus was a myth. Only 2% of the words can be attributed to Jesus as per Christian scholars. Forget about the Sermon on the Mount. That was a much later addition. So when you say Jesus preached love, are you talking about mythical Jesus.

Dear Anil, I do not know if you live in India, or USA, or some other country. You have not told me why you are getting attracted to Christianity. My experience tells me that one of the 9 reason (including 2 from Janet Naidu) are the main reasons for attraction to Christianity. I would like to know what is the real reason for your transformation. I am not defensive about my faith, but I do not want to be a follower of fictional faith. Moreover, Christians are the worst hypocrites themselves.

If you read the history of invasion of Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos etc. you wll find that French exploited that area very much. Militant Catholics grabbed land from Buddhist temples and gave to churches. Thousands were forced to become Christians. Even they installed a Christian king to look after the subjects. When they needed the help of America, they were given the end of the stick. Buddha was called a demon whose poison has spread all over Asia. This was written by Catholic priests and approved by the pope.

In Cambodia alone, America threw more than 1.6 billion pounds of bomb. Several Buddhist temples were destroyed in Vietnam and Cambodia. America used mustard gas and Napalm bombs to kill more than 3 million Vietnamese. Some 1.6 million people were killed by Pol Pot who was fully supported by USA. According to one source, USA bombing of Cambodia killed more than 150,000 civilians. Why? Because poor people wanted independence and live in dignity?

Now this country honors Vietnam veterans for all the killings and leaving behind millions of land mines which are maiming thousands of Cambodians every year.

Let us talk about India. You know "Francis Xavier." This xxxxxx destroyed several Hindu temples, and later some 620 Hindu temples were destroyed by Portuguese around 1550.

If you want to help India, you do not need to imitate Christians. Serve India with love as Geeta demands and do not make a big show of this.

Please do respond to this e-mail and tell me why you have love for Christianity.


Vir Gupta

Dear Vir,

I am not attracted to Christianity in any way. I am as aware of all the wrongs that Christianity has done as anyone else. I live in India and am active in various Hindu organizations. You can read my other works at So, please do not accuse me of being attracted to Christianity.

You have quoted extensively from Bible, while I reject the Bible as something that was written ages after the passing away of Christ. Probably, your belief in Bible is more than mine.

You tell me about Ram and various other Indian great persons. I do not understand the relevance. Hindus accepted Gautam Budha as an incarnation of Vishnu. That did not in any way dilute the importance of earlier avatars. Similarly, just because I am willing to pay respects to Jesus that in no way dilutes my regards and devotion to all other devatas, devis and avatars.

You say that Jesus is a myth and not a historical person. May be you are right. Assuming that you are right, how does that come in the way of accepting Jesus as a symbol of love. If Jesus is a myth, all his revengeful character described in the Bible is also a myth. So, let us purge the mythical Jesus of all undesirable characteristics and just look at the parts that are worth looking.

Dear Vir, by spitting venom one does not win any friends or converts. We have to build bridges of love and understanding with Christianity. Our effort should be directed towards being able to convert millions to Hinduism.

Thanks & regards,

Anil Chawla

From: Shravan

Every Hindu should make copies and distribute it to any missionary(s) visiting their doorsteps.



From: Atul Rathore

Hi Anil

I read your article and found it interesting. These days my wife is doing PhD (here in London) in Comparative Religious Studies and I do get involved in various discussions.

I am trying to understand religion from various perspectives including Science, Music etc.



From: Viji


While I do appreciate your good intentions, I really not see the need to know about Jesus, when we Hindus, Sikhs, Parsees, Jains have our own gods.


1. Nobody for sure knows if Jesus existed.

2. We should not take bits and pieces of Jesus' message.

Acccording to Jesus all our Gods are devils and evil incarnate.

He is very explicit that those who do not accept Jesus as saviour are going to hell forever.

So according to Jesus's love both you and me and the vast members of this group are destined to purgatory.

This would make it most cruellest religion in the worldd. Since the most heinous crimes have been committed during crusades, conversion in Europe, Africa and other places.

Hell, I do not need such a god at all. On the contrary Hinduism accepts all Gods. So why do I have to take some words of wisdom from Christ, Christianity or the bible when Hinduism has more love, tolerance and mutual accomodation in it!

You should have read this article before your wrote yours WHY I AM NOT A CHRISTIAN----Bertrand Russell Bertrand Russell's classic analysis of Christianity.

Christian Response, Cruelty and Violence in the Bible ... Scorners (skeptics?) should be condemned; fools should be beaten. ...

Take care and wishing you a very happy new year.


From: Rex

  1. A person does not become a Christian just because he was born to Christian parents or has Christian name or attend Church. This implies, all Christians are not bound to heaven, if they are not Christians as per the teachings of Christ.

  2. Crusades and the so-called killings in the name of Christianity cannot be considered as part of Christian faith or beliefs.

  3. Being a Christian means a personal experience of Christianity and Christ's teachings.

  4. And, there cannot be many gods, but only one God. Monotheistic religions like Christianity, Islam and Judaiam all belive in a single omnipotent God and do not buy the concept of many gods.


The letter of Rex is in response to Viji's comments.

From: Pathmarajah Nagalingam

When I read the Gospel of Judas recently and saw the documentary by National Geographic where it is shown Jesus behaves like a simple innocent child, laughing in ecstatic love (experiencing satchitananada), having visions (transductive perceptions) (many of his disciples had visions and dreams too), spending many hours or even whole days all by himself in solitude (tavam/maunam), and saying things like 'sacrifice the man that clothes me', 'each of you have your own star (destiny/god's will), 'For there exists a great and boundless realm', 'for there exists a great invisible spirit that no angel has seen' (satchidananda), "no thought of the heart has ever comprehended that great unseen spirit' (the transcendent parasiva), 'in accordance with the will of the Spirit', 'and the stars that brings matters to completion', 'the Self-Generated' (svayambhu), etc., it is clear that he saw himself as a soul clothed in a physical body, and that as a soul he had before exclaimed 'I and my Father are one', 'the kingdom of God is within you', 'seek (the kingdom) and ye shall find', 'the mansion of god has many rooms', 'your god is within you', etc.

It was clear to me and I exclaimed, 'only a Hindu could have said that', not a Jew or a buddhist. It is clear that both Jesus and Judas were realised souls.

True, there is no justification for dualism in the life and sayings of Jesus, and that Jesus' message was just one of love of god, prayers, solitudeness and selfless service. But it also appears he believed in predestination and acceptance of all for what it is.

Whereas all the established churches, christians, bibles and jews teach what is ridiculous, who don't have a clue of spiritual life and must be ignored. There is nothing for us to learn from christians in any dialogue, nor is there anything about self realisation as that is not taught.

Surrender to god, worship and selfless service to mankind as the road is already there in Hinduism, if only the people practise it. If there is no enlightenment it is because one or all of these is not present in their lives. I don't see anything new taught by Jesus.


For the original article A Hindu's View of Jesus Christ, Please click here.

Please write to me your comments about the above discussion.

ANIL CHAWLA is an engineer by qualification but a philosopher by vocation and a management consultant by profession.

Website developed and managed by

MF-104, Ajay Towers, E5/1 (Commercial), Arera Colony,
Bhopal - 462016 INDIA

Subscribe to Samarth Bharat mailing list
Powered by

© All Rights Free