Shaivism and Jainism

[Guest guest]

INDOLOGY, VAgarwalV@c... wrote:

 

> QUOTE

> Richard Davis is not the author I refer to. His article came out in

> 1998 and appears to emphasize Saivite borrowing from Jainism as a

one

> way street. The book I referred to was authored by someone else. He

> was perhaps a Colombia University professor (Morton Klass???) who

> published in the early 1990s and argued that Saivism and Jainism go

> back to an earlier shared paradigm which defined them both.

>

> Mr. N. Ganeshan appears to pay a lot of emphasis on Saivite

> persecution of the Jains (where the latter were impaled on the

> stakes). There are perhaps two or three references in the Tevaram to

> this incident in response to what the Jains had earlier persecution

> perpetuated on the Saivites.

 

There is evidence that Saivite tradition emphasizes what happened to

the Jainas. I have an old edition of campantar tEvAram, a 1920's

reprint (of a late 1800's edition, I think) published by the Saiva

Siddhanta kazakam. It is old and full of microscopic drill holes

viz., Rama's Arrow. It has a very realistic picture of the Jainas'

impalement titled "pANTiyan2 camaNarkaLai kazuvil ERRiyatu". It's an

old, faded painting which has been reproduced in this book. Many of

these paintings appear to be rather traditional representations of

the legend of campantar.

 

The other illustrations in this book include campantar as a baby by

the temple tank with Siva and Parvati in the background, campantar

reviving the dead pUmpAvai, campantar debating in the pANTiyan2 court

etc. Btw, the pUmpAvai painting is identical to the one in the

prAkAram of the Kapaliswarar Temple in Madras.

 

Hope this helps,

 

Lakshmi Srinivas

[Guest guest]

The note by the unnamed Sri Lankan scholar is interesting.

 

> Mr. N. Ganeshan appears to pay a lot of emphasis on Saivite

> persecution of the Jains (where the latter were impaled on the

> stakes). There are perhaps two or three references in the Tevaram to

> this incident in response to what the Jains had earlier persecution

> perpetuated on the Saivites.

 

It will be intersting to know about the "earlier persecutions".

 

The impalement of Jains is very hard to understand. The kings of

India generally protected all religions. There are are some

well known exceptions to this. Some of the supposed persecutions

in India are not supported by historical evidence.

 

The impalement of Jains in Tamilnadu should be carefully studied.

It seems to me that more than any actual impalement, the annual

festival celebrating it and several painting depicting it, have

hurt the Jains of Tamilnadu.

 

> age group into the Buddhist clergy. The Confucianists subjected

> Buddhism to extensive restrictions in 9th century China, 13th

>century Korea and 19th century Japan.

 

There is some truth to that. The modern Korean script Hangul

was actually invented by a Buddhist monk. But officially the

credit has almost always been given to a king. The government

in Korea had been anti-Buddhism for several centuries.

 

In China the emperors supported both Buddhism and Confucianism.

However I have read that no descendant of Confucius (with last name

Kung) has ever become a Buddhist monk.

 

It should be mentioned that Japan is even today mostly Buddhist.

In Japan there are very few who are exclusively followers of

Shintoism. In fact often Shintoism in Japan and Taoism in China

finds supports from Buddhist institutions. Buddhism and other

Indian traditions have generally been inclusive and accepting.

 

> It might be useful to also explore the inadvertent and unintended

> contribution of Buddhism to the hardening of untouchability.

 

This appears really far fetched.

 

> King Ashoka, likewise, banished those who earned

> a living from selling meat to the outskirts of the city. This was to

> prevent the killing of animals in the city limits but also

represents

> the first recorded instance of officially mandated segregation on

> occupational lines.

 

Is this from one of Ashoka'a edicts? Which one?

 

Asoka's Rock edict 1 suggests that he was planning to become

vegetarian. I'm not sure if he actually became one. His 5th piller

edict declared protectation for some animals, but cleary allows

killing of animals. Buddhism has always allowed eating of meat

by lay Buddhists. It has also always been allowed for the Theravad

monks to eat meat if given.

 

In Thirukkural (work of a Jain), there is criticism of considering

flesh acceptable, even if someone else had done the killing.

 

Yashwant

[Guest guest]

INDOLOGY, lsrinivas wrote:

> There is evidence that Saivite tradition emphasizes what happened to

> the Jainas. I have an old edition of campantar tEvAram, a 1920's

> reprint (of a late 1800's edition, I think) published by the Saiva

> Siddhanta kazakam. It is old and full of microscopic drill holes

> viz., Rama's Arrow. It has a very realistic picture of the Jainas'

> impalement titled "pANTiyan2 camaNarkaLai kazuvil ERRiyatu". It's an

> old, faded painting which has been reproduced in this book. Many of

> these paintings appear to be rather traditional representations of

> the legend of campantar.

 

I've some books from the 19th century - what's interesting

are the woodblock prints. Mayilai AruNAcala MutaliyAr's

periyapurANam edition has the woodblock prints

of Jains getting impaled. The same book's pictures

came in D. Hudson's paper on violent Nayanmars

in Criminal gods and demon devotees (ed., A. Hiltebeitel).

Like ANDAL's tiruppAvai, it will be good to collect

and reprint some rare woodblock printed books.

 

Regards,

N. Ganesan

[Guest guest]

INDOLOGY, ymalaiya wrote:

> The note by the unnamed Sri Lankan scholar is interesting.

>

>> Mr. N. Ganeshan appears to pay a lot of emphasis on Saivite

>> persecution of the Jains (where the latter were impaled on the

>> stakes). There are perhaps two or three references in the Tevaram

>> to

>> this incident in response to what the Jains had earlier

>> persecution perpetuated on the Saivites.

>

> It will be intersting to know about the "earlier persecutions".

>

> The impalement of Jains is very hard to understand. The kings of

> India generally protected all religions. There are are some

> well known exceptions to this. Some of the supposed persecutions

> in India are not supported by historical evidence.

>

> The impalement of Jains in Tamilnadu should be carefully studied.

> It seems to me that more than any actual impalement, the annual

> festival celebrating it and several painting depicting it, have

> hurt the Jains of Tamilnadu.

>

 

There are no inscriptions about the impaling in TN,

partly because the Nattukkottai Chettiar kumbhabishekams

of 19th century erased most inscriptions in the Madurai

temple. Old walls were replaced, cut new etc.,

 

In AbalUr, Karnataka, I read that inscriptions

do mention impaling of Jains by Veerashaivaites.

This must be few centuries later than Campantar's times.

 

There are 1000s of Tevaram poems, In almost every decad,

in the 8th or 9th stanza, Jains and Buddhists are

condemned. The rise of Brahmin-Vellala alliance and landlordship

in Kaveri delta is glorified in the Tevaram songs

(Cf. the late B. Stein's works). Prof. A. Veluppillai

has written about portions possibly missing in the Periyapuranam

where the Jains on stakes is described. The text breaks

at those places and very brief.

 

Several centuries later, oTTakkUttar, a Chola court poet,

eulogizes Sambandhar as Murukan's avatAr, and claims

Jains climbed the stakes on their own accord.

 

Jeevabandhu Sripal, a Jain scholar, went the Madras high

court and got an order to stop the annual festivals

in temples like Madurai, CIrkAzi, .... showing Jaina

impalement.

 

Note that it's not just Jains who brought Sanskrit/Pali

words in Tamil. What about Brahmins in sangam period?

 

Also, Indian monks went to China in first millennium AD,

and not to Japan. While untouchability didn't develop

in China, it did in Japan. This shows the indigenous

roots for untouchabilty in Japan. The concept of "imi"

and the fear of spirits can be compared with the

purity-pollution (pulai vs. maTi in tamil) polarity

of Indian caste (jAti).

 

Regards,

N. Ganesan

[Guest guest]

INDOLOGY, ymalaiya wrote:

 

>

> > It might be useful to also explore the inadvertent and unintended

> > contribution of Buddhism to the hardening of untouchability.

>

> This appears really far fetched.

 

 

It is not far fetched at all, there are many published papers on this

very subject already. Easily avaialble one being,

 

The Burakumin: The Complicity of Japanese Buddhism in Oppression and

an Opportunity for Liberation

 

By Leslie D. Alldritt

Northland College

Ashland, Wisconsin

lalldritt

 

ISSN 1076–9005

Journal of Buddhist Ethics 7 (2000)

 

archived at

http://jbe.la.psu.edu/7/alldritt001.html

 

Regards

Raveen Satkurunathan

[Guest guest]

On this subject, two questions come to mind.

 

1. In Tamilnadu, in addition to regular Tamil Jains, there are

people who have some connection to both Shaivism and Jainism.

Does anyone know about them and their views?

 

2. In Karnataka a major Shiva temple (Manjunath) has been headed

by a Jain family for perhaps 800 years. How has this been

accepted by Shaivites and the Jains?

 

Yashwant

[Guest guest]

>I agree that Jain contributions to Tamil literature were considerable.

>But I would not describe it as a 2000 year contribution. The Jain

>impact was for a few centuries and led to the wholesale influx of

>Sanskrit and Prakrit words into the Tamil language, a fact that the

>"Dravidian nationalists" would prefer to ignore.

 

Buddhists probably brought more Pali and Sanskrit,

part of the reason for total disappearance of Buddhism in TN

compared to Jainism is Jains fostered Tamil unlike

Buddhists and their pAli was not understood.

 

Not only the earliest Tamil Brahmi inscriptions of the

Sangam era is full of Jains, even TolkAppiyar and Valluvar

works betray their Jain innfluence.

 

As an index of Jain influence, there stands 700-year old

nan2n2Ul, the Tamil grammar book followed even now.

The Jain community is in the forefront to preserve and

propagate Tamil books. A Jain professor is running

VardhamAnan Pathippakam to print sangam and other tamil

works. They do this by seeking preprint subscriptions

to pay for the publications, and VardhamAnan press

books are the *only* available old Tamil books in the

market, - this can be considered when even Universities

don't publish books. Part of the reason why Jain books

survived is the shAstradAnam tratition among them.

 

U. V. Saaminathaiyar perfected his method of editing

Tamil classics after he labored for long to understand

a Jain kAvya, the first edition of his in late 19th

century:

 

"Aiyar was confident he could read anything in the

Tamil of any period. Yet he found that, with all his

learning, he could not understand much of the manuscript.

It was a lesson in humility. He knew the words but

they seemed to mean something he couldn't guess at.

He didn't know the stories. Familiar names refered

to unfamiliar characters. He read what he could

to the judge, and they struggled with it together

for six months. He had by now gathered that it was

not a Hindu text at all, but a Jain text,

the CIvakacintAmaNi, and he began to make enquiries

about it. ...

The entire [Jain] community knew the text that

Aiyar has been laboring for months. They revered

it and lovingly studied it as their forenears had done

in earlier times." (A. K. Ramanujan, Classics lost

and found, from The Collected essays of A. K. Ramanujan, OUP).

 

tEvAram's portrayal of Jains and Buddhists in dark light

have been analyzed. PeriyapurANam breaks abruptly

while narrating the Jain stakes episode.

 

1) Indira V. Peterson, "Srama.nas against the Tamil way:

Jains as Others in Tamil "Saiva literature, p. 163-186

in Open Boundaries, Jain communities and cultures

in Indian history, ed., J. E. Cort, SUNY, 1998

 

2) A. Veluppillai, "The Hindu Confrontation with the Jaina and the Buddhist=

..

Saint Tirunanacampantar's Polemical Writings", The Problem of Ritual, ed.

T. Ahlback ( Åbo: The Donner Institute for Research in Religious and

Cultural History, 1993), pp. 335- 364.

 

 

Regards,

N. Ganesan

[Guest guest]

Valerie J Roebuck .> wrote:

 

ymalaiya wrote:

> >2. In Karnataka a major Shiva temple (Manjunath) has been headed

> >by a Jain family for perhaps 800 years. How has this been

> >accepted by Shaivites and the Jains?

 

> some fine metal images of Buddhist subjects now worshipped under

the names

> of Hindu Gods in the Mañjunaatha (now S'aiva) temple at Kadri,

Mangalore.

 

Actually I was thinking about the Manjunatha temple at

Dharmasthala:

 

http://www.bangalorenet.com/dharma/index.htm

 

It does have some historic link with Manjunath temple of Kadri near

Mangalore.

 

Yashwant

[Guest guest]

INDOLOGY, naga_ganesan@h... wrote:

>

> Jeevabandhu Sripal, a Jain scholar, went the Madras high

> court and got an order to stop the annual festivals

> in temples like Madurai, CIrkAzi, .... showing Jaina

> impalement.

 

 

Has the court order to stop these festivels been implemneted?

 

I wholly support the moves to ban religious or other occasions which

celebrate persecutions done in past ages

[Guest guest]

V.C.Vijayaraghavan wrote:

 

>INDOLOGY, naga_ganesan@h... wrote:

>>

>> Jeevabandhu Sripal, a Jain scholar, went the Madras high

>> court and got an order to stop the annual festivals

>> in temples like Madurai, CIrkAzi, .... showing Jaina

>> impalement.

>

>Has the court order to stop these festivels been implemneted?

>

>I wholly support the moves to ban religious or other occasions which

>celebrate persecutions done in past ages

 

Shri Vijayaraghavan:

 

A religious event by those associated with the -inflictors- of persecution

celebrating their past infliction of persecution is a rare thing today. I

assume you do not want to ban religious events by the -victims- of

persecution celebrating or mourning their victimization, for example, Easter

(celebrating the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ), Muharram (deaths

of Hussain and Hasan), or prayer before the Wailing Wall (destruction of

Jerusalem and the Temple).

 

But in a democratic country one has a right to practice one's religion as

one pleases, so long as one does not violate laws that apply equally to

everyone.

 

Moreover, under any system of law based on reason, every law, to be

constitutional, must --at least-- have a basis in reason. For example, a

law requiring vaccination of children would be held constitutional (under

this basic test) despite a religious belief against vaccination because the

reasons likely to be given by the government for the law--failure to

vaccinate can result in sickness or death and transmission of illness and

epidemic--are, in fact, reasonable. (In the U.S., the constitutional tests

are -much- more demanding of the government when fundamental rights such as

freedom of speech, freedom of association, and freedom of religion are in

issue, and probably so in India as well, I imagine.)

 

What reasons could be given for a law banning such festivals? Do these

festivals offend only the sensibilities of Jains and others, or do they

cause an actual injury, or advocate an actual and immediate breach of the

law, or cause some other socially undesirable, but religiously neutral,

result?

 

I can appreciate the distress Jains (and non-Jain observors) feel. But mere

offensiveness cannot be a reasonable basis for a law restricting religious

practice, or the "right" of freedom of religion would be reduced to majority

opinion. What is holy to one can be abhorrent to another. Something more

substantial must support a law restricting freedom of religion, or the state

will end up being used by the majority religion to suppress minority

religious views or practices the majority religion finds offensive.

 

I also would agree that any practice of religious belief which promotes or

causes coercion of others is socially intolerable, whether the victims are

women, dalits, or Hindus, and whether the coercion is done by Muslims,

Hindus or Christians. But it is the -coercion- the law must aim at, not

merely an offensive belief or offensive practice. People have a right to be

free to believe as they choose, and to practice any religious belief they

choose, so long as their -actions- do not violate laws that are

constitutional. A law banning coercion in matters of religion would

certainly be constitutional, because coercion negates freedom of religion,

and can, should, and, indeed, must be prevented and punished by a government

through its laws.

 

Hence, were one able to show that these festivals in celebration of ancient

coercion are still coercive in nature today (a fact to be demonstrated), the

coercive element in them (though perhaps not the festival itself) could

constitutionally be banned by law. I certainly would agree with your

proposal in that event.

 

But unless such or other facts exist, a democrat must defend their right to

hold such celebrations, offensive though they are.

 

imho,

 

David