"But I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself."
Intro
Manilal C. Parekh was born in 1885 in Rajkot, western Gujarat, India, belonging to the Bania Jain community. He was attracted to Christ when during in illness when in 1903 after entering University he read the book Imitation of Christ. During this period he admired greatly the writings of Keshaub Chandra Sen and his Christ centered outlook. Parekh fell ill again with tuberculosis and he read the Bible and came to a point of personal faith in Christ. After his belief in Christ, Parekh was baptized February 6, 1918 from an Anglican priest in Bombay. From the time of his baptism he thought of himself as a Christian Hindu, though he interpreted Hindu as derived from the name of the river Indus in a national and cultural rather than a religious context.
Below is a summary of positions that Manilal Parekh held on various important subjects. Also included is a summary of his important article, The Christian Religion and the Jains followed by some conclusions drawn from his life and ministry.
On the Church
After his baptism Parekh kept only a lose tie with the Anglican Church. He raised objections regarding the traditional concept of the Church as a separate religious community. Instead Parekh advocated the possibility of the House Church as a fellowship of the believers within the broad-based Hindu religious, cultural, social framework. “The Hindu church will not be the “hyper-organization” now existing as Church, but more as the Satsang (the informal gathering of truth-seekers for sharing and fellowship) as in the Hindu tradition.” 1 He felt that the established church was failing to appeal to the higher social economic groups. He founded the “Hindu Church of Christ” free from Western influence. He gave his home in Rajkot the name “Oriental Christ House.”
On Christianity
The westernized and meat-eating Christian community was not to the liking of his Jain traditions. He was soon disillusioned by the Christian community, which he felt to be westernized, mercenary, quarrelsome, and depressingly permeated by people of low caste origins. He was bitterly critical of the Westerness of Christianity in India. He felt Christianity in India failed to face the challenge of vegetarianism.
On Community
He was against Christians virtually becoming a separate caste-group. After his baptism he stayed in his Jain family and sought to build Disciples of Christ within Hinduism. He felt that Christian discipleship should not necessitate the cutting of ties with family and caste-community. He felt Hindus should remain as “Hindu Christians” in their own community, as he did. His Jain community and family showed tolerance toward him, and never excommunicated him.
On Baptism-
In 1924 he wrote on baptism. He felt that baptism should be an expression of the spiritual discipleship of Jesus Christ and the public testimony of salvation given in Jesus Christ and appropriated through faith; and that it should not be associated with severance from one’s own family and caste and the Hindu community. He saw a misunderstanding of baptism that was an entrance to a new and distinct social and legal communal entity, the Christian community. He was against giving up baptism because he saw it as integral to Christian discipleship, and was instituted by Christ. He held that the church regarded baptism too much as a social rite, the act of joining a different community. He was of the opinion, proselytism has made it impossible for cultured Hindus to accept baptism and made the Church primarily a body of outside converts, with mixed spiritual and unspiritual motives.
Evangelism-
He took on the role of an itinerant evangelist when in 1924 Stanley Jones provided him with the support for carrying out an evangelism program all across India. Parekh draws a clear distinction between evangelism, the proclamation of the Gospel to individuals, and proselytism (by which he meant mass-conversion). To voice his dissatisfaction with the Mass Movement approach to evangelism he wrote a book in reaction to Bishop Pickett’s, Mass Movements in India book. Parekh was surprised Stanley Jones supported Pickett’s ideas and approach to evangelism.
On the Cross-of Christ.
He believed the Jain doctrine of ahimsa (non-killing or nonviolence) is a preparation for accepting the work of Christ on the cross. He said that Jains can see that at the cross, Jesus won the greatest and final victory over himself and the world and became an authentic Jain (i.e. the conqueror, from which Jainism arose). Parekh speaks of the cross as the manifestation of swahimsa (the destruction of self for the good of others), which goes beyond ahimsa.
How he finished-
During later years he lost all connections with the organized Anglican churches. In 1939, at 54 years of age he began a shift of Christology, to what he called Bhagavata Dharma, religion of personal theism, and changed the name of his house from “Oriental Christ House” to “Harmony House”. “By the time he writes his book about Jesus in 1953, A Hindu portrait of Jesus Christ, He seems to have lost sight of the living Christ who earlier meant so much to him.” 2 He suffered much through his life with illness especially his tuberculoses. Manilal Parekh Died at the age of 82 in Rajkot in 1967.
Summary of “The Christian Religion and the Jains”
By Manilal Parekh, (National Christian Review, March 1926 PP.138-145)
The Jains of all the communities of the land have had the least to do directly with Christianity. Of all the religions of the world, the Christian religion is perhaps nearest to Buddhism and Jainism. But whatever spiritual kinship there may be between Buddhism and Christianity, there is more of it between Jainism and Christianity. If this is not realized, it is because Jainism is so little known and has suffered from being overshadowed by Buddhism. But it is now universally accepted that Jainism was the first in the field, and that for centuries it was prevailing in this land, almost as much as Buddhism, if not more. It is also true that it is more positive and spiritual than Buddhism, and possibly it is due to this that is has continued to live in Hindustan, whereas Buddhism as been practically exiled from the land of its birth.
Some of the essential (Jain) qualities are very well summed up in the following passage form an address given by His Highness the Maharaja of Mysore, at the All India Jain Conference held in his territory last year (1925). A passage particularly valuable inasmuch as it bears the impression of the mind of one of the most scholarly men in the country.
“No less memorable have been the services of Jainism to the evolution of India’s spiritual and philosophical life. Jainism has cultivated certain aspects of that life which have broadened India’s religious outlook. It is not merely that Jainism has aimed at carrying ahimsa to its logical conclusion undeterred by the practicalities of the world: it is not only that Jainism has attempted to perfect the doctrine of the spiritual conquest of matter in its doctrine of the Jina,-what is unique in Jainism among Indian religious and philosophical systems is that it has sought emancipation in an upward movement of the spirit towards the realm of Infinitude and Transcendence- that it has made Power, Will, Character, in one word Charitra, an integral element of Perfection side by side with Knowledge and Faith.
At the other end of the scale, in its rock-shaped sculpture, Jainism created a new style and carried it to a pitch of excellence which places the glories of Mount Abu side by side with the Taj among the architectural wonders of the world.
That the influence of Jainism has been very widely and deeply felt among the people of this land during the last 2,500 years admits of no doubt. As testified in the above-mentioned address, it has broadened the religious outlook of the Hindus, and it has filled much of what we now called Hinduism with much of its ethical content.
It is among a people professing and practicing such a faith as this that the claims of Christ have to be shown for what they are worth. Is it any wonder if the majority of them stumble at the very first step in their understanding of the Christian religion, when they find meet eating and himsa so universal among Christians? There are people among the Jains who would not kill an ant for the gift of the British Empire. In fact, these are for more consistent believers and practisers of non-violence than even Mahatma Gandhi.
About a year back the writer of this article met a Jain Sadhu, himself a Brahmin covert to Jainism, who told him that he would have been a Christian but for the universal practice among Christians of meat eating. This is not at all to be surprised at, for many among the Hindus of the upper castes have felt the same difficulty.
To many earnest Jains the fact that Christ gave fish to the people to eat and that He took both fish and meat has been a real difficulty in their acceptance of Him as the perfect Teacher.
What appeals most to the Jains is the self-denying aspect of the Christian faith, which has been emphasized, and rightly so by Catholicism and which unfortunately is often so much undervalued in Protestantism. The Jain sadhus and sashavis i.e., monks and nuns, are the most self-denying of their kind in the world.
It is for these reasons that the sermon on Mount, the Beatitudes, the councils of perfection have an appeal to the Jains But ordinary Protestantism which very often wants to make the most of both worlds and which is so self-satisfied with its own righteousness, has very little chance of whining Hindus, mush less the Jains, whose spiritual susceptibilities are finer.
The Jains can see that at the cross, Jesus won the greatest and final victory over Himself and the world and became a veritable Jaina (i.e. the conqueror, from which the word Jain arose). According to Jains every true teacher must show himself victorious over and through them. The remarkable forbearance on the cross are just the qualities that He should have shown, and so they confirm His authority as the Teacher.
Jesus Christ went to the furthest extent in teaching and practicing love, so much so that it became swahimsa (the destruction of self for the good of others), which goes beyond ahimsa. In it lies the advance of the Christian religion over others. “There is no greater love than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends’ is what Jesus not only preached but practiced even to the extent of the Crucifixion.
If we are to manifest the same in our life we must follow Jesus command. Then will Christ be lifted up in our lives again and it is He who shall draw all men to Himself, and among them also the Jains.
Conclusion
1. Parekh claimed that the Jains have had the least to with Christianity than any community in India. This is an important observation and will probably hold as true now as it was when he made this observation almost eighty years back. This also calls us to understand some of the factors why Jains have had little to do with Christianity and his observations as a Jain on what would be the most appealing aspects of Christ to his fellow Jains.
2. Parekh said that the Jains could see that at the cross, Jesus won the greatest and final victory over Himself and the world and became a veritable Jaina (i.e. the conqueror, from which the word Jain arose). This is a brilliant insight from Parekh. Rather than avoiding the cross in discussing Jesus with the Jains and using a redemptive analogy from the Old Testament we can present Christ and his work on the cross as an introduction to the life and work of Christ to the Jain.
3. Another very important insight from Parekh for helping Jains understand the person of is his statement that Jesus Christ went to the furthest extent in teaching and practicing love, so much so that it became swahimsa (the destruction of self for the good of others), which goes beyond ahimsa. To consider the cross in terms of ahimsa and swa-ahimsa (swa means self) brings a point of appreciation and connection for the Jains to the person of Christ and his work on the cross.
4. Parekh felt Jains should remain in their own community as believers in Christ, as Parekh himself did. He was against Christians virtually becoming a separate caste-group. His idea of a “Christ House” could go a long way in overcoming the community and dietary issues Jains have with the Christian community. We can find New Testament evidence that believers such as Cornelius, the Philippian Jailer, Lydia met in their homes and very possibly preserving their community identity.
Footnotes
1 Thomas, M. M, Thomas P. T., Towards an Indian Christian Theology, Life and Thought of some Pioneers
P. 161
2 Boyd, Robin ed., Manilal C. Parekh and Dhanjibhai Fakirbhi page 8
Bibliography
Boyd, Robin, An Introduction to Indian Christian Theology. ISPECK, Delhi, 2000
Boyd, Robin ed., Manilal C. Parekh and Dhanjibhai Fakirbhi. Christian Literature Society, Madras 1974
Parekh, Manilal, The Spiritual Significance and Value of Baptism. NCC Review Sept 1924
Parekh, Manilal, The Christian Religion and the Jains. NCC Review Mar 1926
Parekh, Manilal, A Hindu Portrait of Jesus Christ. Rajkot, 1953
Thomas, M. M, Thomas P. T., Towards an Indian Christian Theology, Life and Thought of some Pioneers. Christava Sahitya Samithi, Tiruvalla 1998
