October 3: Hindu views / Yogananda on Jesus the yogi / Miracles
Assignment
Read Yogananda, The Yoga of Jesus, Preface and Part 1 (“Jesus the Christ–Avatar and Yogi”) (pp. vii-xii and 1-40).
- Rather than disputing the canonical Gospels’ portraits of Jesus, Yogananda transposes them into a very different conceptual framework, and this seems to give everything the Gospels say a new meaning.
- What are some key words or ideas about Jesus from the Gospels that get transposed?
- Are Yogananda’s reinterpretations too drastic to be plausible? Can you see how they would make sense from the perspective of his background and mental framework?
- Yogananda makes some historical claims about Jesus. How might we evaluate those? What might have motivated them?
- Yogananda also gives his own assessment of the traditional Christian interpretations of Jesus. Let’s assess his assessment: is it historically or morally justifiable?
Then read Gregory Barker & Stephen Gregg, Jesus Beyond Christianity: The Classic Texts, pp. 153-199.
- What basic attitudes and strategies toward Jesus are represented by these authors? Which ones reject, modify, selectively approve, embrace, or even claim Jesus as their own?
- Can you detect how the colonial relationship between the British and Hindus affected the latter’s interpretations of Jesus?
- Why do you suppose Barker did not include Yogananda’s interpretation of Jesus in this anthology?
Then write and post a first draft of your gospel’s account of Jesus’ miracles, with explanatory comments. You could select one or more canonical or extra-canonical miracles to retell; you could invent original miracles; or you could have Jesus not do miracles at all but do something else instead. Please comment as well on the drafts that others post.
Notes from class
We see Yogananda doing three things with his interpretation of Jesus:
- He is showing his fellow Hindus how Jesus can be assimilated into their own framework.
- Yogananda’s framework of Hindu concepts is unfamiliar to us, and we don’t entirely understand it yet. We’ll study it more next time. Or maybe we’ll find that it’s just not all that coherent.
- Two clear examples: seven is taken as a reference to the seven “trap doors” in the spine, rather than as a number of completion; and straight is taken as an obvious reference to the spine.
- He is taken as “just one more avatar,” which gives him a place in Hindu thought.
- We debated whether this is a tolerant approach that affirms Jesus as a legitimate path, or an exclusivist approach that “steals” Jesus and insists he is only legitimate if he teaches Hinduism.
- Yogananda even presents himself as on a level with Jesus. This strikes us as rather brash, but maybe it makes sense in a Hindu context to say that lots of holy people are on a level with Jesus.
- He is showing the colonizers that India invented religion, including what is best in Christianity.
- The claim that Jesus studied in India is given some historical-sounding (but historically useless) evidence.
- This makes Jesus’ message come from India.
- This shows the colonizers that they aren’t the most enlightened, at least not in the area of religion, but that they are dependent on India, and even lesser than India since they don’t properly understand their own religion.
- He is critiquing institutionalized Christianity and its interpretations of Jesus.
- He criticizes ritualism, doctrinalism, and institutionalism. Of course, lots of Christians would critique those things too, so the Christianity he critiques is a bit of a straw man.
- Although he affirms Jesus, he says Christians have totally missed the point of his teaching.
We then saw the Hindu writers in the anthology doing the same three things, including even identifying themselves with Jesus.
We noted that all three religions we have studied so far have spent a lot of effort claiming Jesus as their own–even the Talmud that was bent on criticizing him! Everyone wants to own Jesus, or own the discourse about him.
Recent Comments in this Document
December 12, 2017 at 12:47 am
As previously stated, it is an invitation for all, regardless of race, to believe in Jesus as the Savior of all mankind. The reader should see that all those around him/her have that same opportunity as they do to come to the knowledge of Jesus’ divine power to save.
See in context
December 12, 2017 at 12:45 am
Here, I attempt to show the reader that Thomas is believing because Jesus is present with him. That belief goes away the same time Jesus goes away. Thomas is holding onto this idea that if Jesus goes away, His power and divinity disappear as well.
See in context
December 12, 2017 at 12:43 am
Traditional site of Thomas’ martyrdom
See in context
December 12, 2017 at 12:42 am
Robert Frykenberg notes, “What had begun with the Thomas Tradition–belief that the Apostle brought the Gospel to India in AD 52–remains extremely strong, whatever the historicity of this tradition may be. Thomas Christians continue to respond to sceptics that the evidence for Thomas coming to India is as strong as the evidence for Peter coming to Rome. The presence of the Gospel in India, from this perspective, antedates any canon, creed, or council in the West” (Christianity in India: From Beginnings to the Present).
See in context
December 12, 2017 at 12:37 am
See Matthew 28:19
See in context
December 12, 2017 at 12:27 am
This is not to be seen as Jesus chastising Thomas. It should be seen as an internal struggle. Thomas is asking himself, “Why did I not believe?” “What is wrong with me?”
See in context
December 12, 2017 at 12:25 am
As discussed in the opening comments, this is directed towards those who desire tangible evidence of Jesus’ divinity. It brings the concept of faith in the picture. I agree with the definition of faith given in Hebrews 11:1 which reads, “Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.”
See in context
December 12, 2017 at 12:21 am
This final chapter on the resurrection of Jesus is addressed to those who hold atheist or agnostic views. These two traditions are generally thought of wanting tangible evidence or proven by science. Therefore, I felt it was key to use Thomas who lacked faith and wanted tangible evidence that Jesus indeed lived again. It also shows that even the most stubborn of people stuck in their ways can accept Jesus as the Savior of all mankind. With the desire for tangible evidence it also brings in the concept of faith and its importance.
The latter portion of this chapter reiterates the message of the previous chapter. Jesus is the Savior of the world regardless of race. For this purpose it was important to include Thomas’ travels to the subcontinent of India.
See in context
December 12, 2017 at 12:12 am
Although brief, this verse should give purpose to Jesus’ death. If this had not been included the reader would question why Jesus had died. He had to have a purpose in dying or a reason or it would simply imply the Pharisees finally caught up to Jesus.
See in context
December 12, 2017 at 12:08 am
I speculate that this was done in secret as the Roman soldier is wary of the penalty of such an act. I am not familiar with Roman law but I think the consequences would be heavy should he be caught conversing with the Jews.
See in context