Guest guest Posted December 23, 2008 Report Share Posted December 23, 2008 Dear Sreenadji, What is the purpose of this article ? I am tired of Hindu bashing, reminds me I am a Hindu and being bashed. And I am even more tired of some belligerant, ultra-right Hindus trying to defend their faith. If I remember right, there was a move to include the Jains in minorities list so that they get reservations. As I am in close contact with Jains and know them intimately, I actually abused them for making such demands when there was so much wealth in the community. The benefits of reservation should go to the poor irrespective of religion. As for the census, tell the author to get his maths right or his head checked. BTW : the Jains have the habit of categorising the world into 2 - Jain & Ajain. And Himsa is of different types .... more later Chiranjiv Mehta --- On Tue, 23/12/08, Sreenadh <sreesog wrote: Sreenadh <sreesog Systemic bias against Jainism Date: Tuesday, 23 December, 2008, 4:27 PM Dear All, The following article is from: http://knol. google.com/ k/jain-chronicle r/systemic- bias-against- jainism/1rlckfrh qdbn7/3# Love and regards,Sreeenadh============ ========= ========= ========= == Systemic bias against Jainism The question of survival of Jainism Jainism is one of the oldest religion of ancient India. Unfortunately, it is wrongly considered as an offshoot of Hinduism or vedic religion. This knol tries to analyse this bias and its politcial implications on Jainism. Bias against Jainism Contents The Bias: Argumentum Ad Populum Jainism as an offshoot of Hinduism Jainism as heterodox protestant sect Mahavira as the Founder of Jainism Vedas as the sole originator of Indian philisophical concepts Sect of Buddhism Political implicationslessmore SharePrintFavorite The systemic bias regarding Jainism in particular and non-vedic Indic religions in general, in India and world, pertains typically to the origins and historicity of these religions and their contributions and influence to the Indian philosophy. It is often believed by the majority that all the non-vedic Indic religions are offshoots of Hinduism. This bias is reflected in the world view and paradigm of the average Indian. Typically, the average Indian:- reflects a Hindu or a vedic world view; is a devout and god fearing person, but basically a tolerant person willing to absorb different philosophies; and is caught in the stranglehold of the astrologers/ godmen/ gurus/ babas and is more likely to cultivate the Hindu orthodox views on eternality of Vedas and Sanatan Dharma. This profile of the average Indian, forming an overwhelming majority, engenders a cultural bias and misconceptions about Jainism (not necessarily with mal-intentions) placing it in a disadvantageous position. This all-pervasive bias manifests itself in many ways and in different media: history text books, newspaper articles, Indian personal laws, religious discourses, encyclopedias, internet etc. As a result, this bias is accepted as conventional wisdom through incessant communal reinforcement. The Bias: Argumentum Ad Populum The world at large also views India and Indian religions from this filter of typically Hindu world view. Thus the belief of the majority, though flawed and not backed by scholarly research, becomes the gospel truth for everyone; a fodder for texts books, media and other public discussions. This has resulted in the following religious and cultural stereotyping of Jainism:- Jainism as an offshoot of Hinduism Jainism is often considered as an offshoot of Hinduism. Most people consider or rather accept, Jainism simply as a part of Hinduism. The ancient Indian scenario had many competing traditions led by the elite, of which, brahmanas and sramanas were most influential of the lot. Within, themselves, they had many sub-traditions. They were never considered as offshoots of each other. They not only competed with each other vying for royal patronages; they influenced each other, assimilating rival ideas and practices that they found congruent with their beliefs. The common man was essentially unaffected by elite discourses. To identify India with "Hinduism" is simply a gross etymological misattribution, not withstanding the fact that the word "Hinduism" did not even exist a few centuries back. To say that Buddhism or Jainism are offshoots of Hinduism is simply projecting back thousands of year, socio-political paradigm that were formed only in the last couple of centuries. When the word "offshoot" is used, one implicitly privileges one tradition over the other. As shown below, current scholarship is clear in its opinion that Jainism is a separate religion having non-vedic roots and is as old as the vedic religion, if not older. "Now it is generally accepted that Jainism is a distinct religion and that it is as old as, if not older than, the Vedic religion of the Hindus"[1] – Dr. Vilas Sangave. "Originating on the Indian sub-continent, Jainism is one of the oldest religion of its homeland and indeed the world having pre-historic origins before 3000 BCE, and before the propagation of Indo-Aryan culture."[2] – Joel Diederik Beversluis. "Jainism is a very old non-Vedic religion and some of its features go back to the times of Indus Valley Civilization. Like the Upanishads and Buddhism, Jainism was a kshatriya movement. It had its locus in a religion which was not yet touched by Brahmin cult."[3] – Y. Masih "The Jain tradition is one of the oldest traditions in India and may go back as far as Indus Valley times, that is, to the second millenium before the Common Era (2000–1500 BCE), although the precise origins of the tradition are not yet fully known."[4] – Indiana University While the common man is still wallowing in this Hindu-centric world view, this mis-categorisation of Jainism is now in disfavour in the academic and scholarly circles, although not followed in Indian political circles. Jainism as heterodox protestant sect Jainism is a heterodox sect of Vedic religion and was essentially a protestant sect. This myth stems due the certain quintessential characteristics and practices of Jainism :- § Jainism rejects the divinity and efficacy of Vedas. It also rejects the God as the creator of this universe. This had led the rival Vedic traditions to label the Sramana traditions as "nastika darsana" or heterodox traditions. In the same vein, Jainism held the vedic views, especially the animal sacrifices, as false beliefs. § Through ages, Jainism protested against the vedic rituals, sacrifices and slaughters of the animals. This led to the belief that Jainism separated from Vedic religion on account of Ahimsa after Mahavira purged the non-violent and other shamanic practices. § The Jain philosophical concepts of Karma, Samsara, Moksa, Ahimsa, Yoga etc. resembles the similar Hindu philosophicals concepts in some ways. This leads many people in presuming that Jains borrowed these concepts from vedas, which is far from truth, as shown below. § Jainism shares many mythological characters with Hinduism, leading to misconceptions that Jains adopted Hindu deities. § Certain endogamous groups are common between Jains and Hindus, especially in Gujarat and Rajasthan. As such, there was no restriction on inter-marriages between Jains and Hindus. § It is difficult to physically distinguish the Jains from their Hindu neighbours, as Jains have never outwardly displayed or advertised their religious symbols or different clothing that may distinguish themselves as Jains.. Over the time, these have added to the so-called conventional wisdom, reinforcing the heretical and protestant genesis of Jainism. However, the scholars now have come to view Jainism as an independent phenomenon having non-Vedic origins. J. L. Jaini sums up this view:[5] "As to Jainas being Hindu dissenters, and, therefore governable by Hindu law, we are not told this date of secession [...] Jainism certainly has a longer history than is consistent with its being a creed of dissenters from Hinduism." Dr. Prof. Padmanabh Jaini further states that the Jainas themselves have no memory of a time when they fell within the Vedic fold. Any theory that attempts to link the two traditions, moreover fails to appreciate rather distinctive and very non-Vedic character of Jaina cosmology, soul theory, karmic doctrine and atheism.[6] Mahavira as the Founder of Jainism Another misconception that is propagated often in history text books: Mahavira is the founder of Jainism. However, as Gerald Larson puts it, Mahavira rather than being a "founder" per se, was rather, simply a primary spokesman for much older tradition.[7] This is further attested by the fact that Parsva (877–777 BCE), the 23rd Tirthankara is now considered as a historical person flourishing 250 years before Mahavira. Vedas as the sole originator of Indian philisophical concepts It is believed that karma, ahimsa, samsara, reincarnation, moksa and other philosophical concepts were developed in the vedic and upanishadic period and then assimilated by the Jains and Buddhists into their beliefs. Hindutva revisionists claim Vedas to be eternal and seek to revitalise the Hindutva movement by propaganda of the supposedly pristine vedic-hindu roots of the Indian culture. Hinduism is thus equated with Indian nationalism. Commenting on such tendencies Jeffery Long says:[8] "Identification of Hinduism (with Indian nationalism) essentially amounts to a nationalistic assertion that India is the fountain of all primordial wisdom. Such an identification issues in a closed inclusivism, a restrictive understanding of truth, for fairly clear reason that it can, like all forms of nationalism, slide easily into an assertion that no other culture as ever done anything worthwhile, that India has much to teach the rest of the world but nothing to learn." According to Zydenbos, philiosophical concepts like – karma, moksa, ahimsa, samsara, ascetism, yoga and like – that are considered typically Indian find their origins in the Sramana school of thought. Bal Gangadhar Tilak, an eminent Indian leader and Vedic scholar has credited Jainism with introducing ahimsa in Hindu thought[9]: "In ancient times, innumerable animals were butchered in sacrifices. Evidence in support of this is found in various poetic compositions such as the Meghaduta. But the credit for the disappearance of this terrible massacre from the Brahminical religion goes to Jainism." With one or two minor exceptions there is little or no emphasis in the Vedas, on the notion of karma, re-birth and samsara, except for concepts of re-death, that is, death in afterlife after death. Sect of Buddhism Certain people used to hold the view that it is a sect of Buddhism, especially in 19th century and early 20th century. This was a period when the western world discovered Hinduism, Buddhism, Sanskrit language and Indian philosophical concepts, but Jainism largely remained an obscure and exotic philosophy. It was first proved by noted Indologist, Prof. Hermann Jacobi, that Jainism was not only a different religion, but, much older than Buddhism. Political implications The political damage to Jainism is much more severe. Here we have a case of history serving a chauvinistic and political ends. This tendency of communal reinforcement of the outdated paradigms, as well as penchant for historical revisionism amongst the Indian political class has often resulted in fallacy of misclassification of Jainism under Hinduism for the legal or political purposes. In 2005, the Supreme Court of India declined to issue a writ of Mandamus towards granting Jains the status of a religious minority throughout India.[10] The Court however left it to the respective states to decide on the minority status of Jain religion. In one of the extra-judicial observations of the Supreme Court, not forming part of the judgment, the Judges said: "Thus, 'Hinduism' can be called a general religion and common faith of India whereas 'Jainism' is a special religion formed on the basis of quintessence of Hindu religion. [..] In philosophical sense, Jainism is a reformist movement amongst Hindus like Brahamsamajis, Aryasamajis and Lingayats." These observations evoked strong protests and criticism from the Jains. Syed Shahabuddin ridiculed these observations as personal versions of Justice Dharmadikari without regard for the historical facts:[11] "His historiography is full of flaws. It confuses the sequence of event.... But the real purpose of his travel into uncharted territories without a compass becomes apparent when in the next paragraph he identifies Jainism with what he calls Hindu Vedic religion though the Jains reject the Vedas and Brahmanical philosophy, for the Tirthankaras and especially Mahavir have charted their own spiritual course, much like Buddhism.... `Hinduism can be called a general religion and common faith of India'. He thus elevates Hinduism above other religions of India and equates Hinduism with Indianness.. ... But Justice Dharmadhikari sees assimilation in Hinduism as the alternative and desirable goal of all religious groups in India, while the international community recognises multi-religiosity as the natural state of things." The political damage to the Jains was again recently demonstrated by the political misadventure of the Right-wing Gujarat BJP Government. The Gujarat government was forced to withdraw the controversial "Freedom of Religion Bill", which classified Jains as Hindus, after the wide spread protests by the Jains. The introduction of "Gujarat Freedom of Religion Bill" categorizing the Jains as Hindus is a classic example of pejorative historical revisionism, illegitimately manipulating the legal and political system to nurture a particular ideology at the cost of truth. The National commission for minorities also criticised the Gujarat Assembly's decision to club Jainism and Buddhism with Hinduism terming it to be in contravention of its October 23, 1993, notification that classified Buddhists as a "minority community".[12] The truth is, the traditional Hindu-centric historical curriculum enshrines a particular world view that considers the Vedic Hindu contribution, culture and achievements to be central and fundamental to understanding the Indian history while only nominally acknowledging the role of Sramanas and other traditions to the Indian philosophy. That late 20th Century saw the correction of the errors and misconceptions on Jainism demonstrated the mixed blessings of scholarship. However the damage was already done and it will take some time to undo the damage. It is up to the Jains as to how they protect their unique identity and heritage for the posterity. [1] Sangave, Dr. Vilas A. (2001). Facets of Jainology: Selected Research Papers on Jain Society, Religion, and Culture. Mumbai: Popular Prakashan. ISBN 8171548393. p. 14 [2] Beversluis, Joel Diederik (2000). Sourcebook of the World's Religions: An Interfaith Guide to Religion and Spirituality. Novato, CA: New World Library. ISBN 1577311213 p. 81 [3] Masih, Y. (2000). A Comparative Study of Religions. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publ. ISBN 8120808150 p. 235 [4] Larson, Gerald James. "The Controlled Strenght of the Jina". Passage to India, Module 6. Bloomington: Indiana University. Retrieved on August 28, 2008 [5] Jaini, J. L. (1916). Jaina Law, Bhadrabahu Samhita, (Text with translation ), Arrah, Central Jaina publishing House, pp. 12–13 [6] Jaini, Padmanabh (1998). The Jaina Path of Purification. New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. ISBN 81-208-1578- 5. p. 169 [7] Larson, Gerald James (1995). India's Agony over religion, SUNY Press. ISBN 079142412X. p. 27 [8] Long, Jeffery D. (2005). "Anekanta Vedanta", in (ed.) David Ray Griffin: Deep Religious Pluralism, 1st ed., Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, pp. 130–157. ISBN 066422914X. p. 152 [9] Bombay Samachar, December 10, 1904 [10] Appeal (civil) 4730 of 1999, Bal Patil & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. Supreme Court Decided on 08/08/2005 [11] Majority rules? By Syed Shahabuddin", Year 12 No.113, Combat Communalism (December 2005). Retrieved on 2008-09-11 [12] "National Commission for Minorities criticises Gujarat decision", The Hindu (Sep 21, 2006). Retrieved on 2008-09-11============ ========= ========= ========= == Bollywood news, movie reviews, film trailers and more! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 24, 2008 Report Share Posted December 24, 2008 Dear Sreenadhji,Namaste,There is a lot of controversy as to whether Buddhism and Jainism are daughter religions of Hinduism or not. Whatever be the eventual outcome of this controversy one sees definite links among these three religions. The term Hinduism has come to use quite late. The right term should be the Vedic religion. In this religion there are six theistic Darshanas. There is also the Lokayata, which is an atheistic Darshana. Now many scholars call Sankhya an atheistic Darshana but that is not correct. Sankhya just does not talk about God as the existence of God cannot be proved. Lord Buddha studied Sankhya under Allara Kalama. Lord Buddha talked about the four Satyas, according to which one can remove the cause of ones suffering by following the eightfold path and he does not advocate that one should pray to God to get the sufferings removed. Rather he says that one has to work out ones nirvana through karma, which is also the way of Sankhya. Lord Krishna also says that through Niskama karma alone one can overcome the bondage due to Karma. Lord Mahavira also does not talk about God. But he, like Lord Buddha, did believe in the Cause and Effect. There is a book written by a Jain scholar, who after great pains-taking research had shown, by reference to Jaina and Buddhist scriptures, that there is no essential difference between Jainism and Buddhism. I do not recollect the name of this scholar at this moment.Historically speaking the Rigveda was revealed not later than the fourth millennium BCE, whereas the Jaina scriptures were dated in the later part of the first millennium BCE The date of the Buddhist scriptures falls in between. However this forum may not like to digress from its main objective of Astrology to a detailed discussion on these topics.Regards,Sunil K. Bhattacharjya--- On Tue, 12/23/08, Sreenadh <sreesog wrote:Sreenadh <sreesog Re: Systemic bias against Jainism Date: Tuesday, December 23, 2008, 4:56 AM Dear Mehta ji, There was no specific purpose. A good article found, and that was forwarded to the group - that is all to it. ===> > I am tired of Hindu bashing <== That is your problem. I am also Hindu (better call a Saivaite) and don't feel that there is any Hindu bashing in the mails I forward. If at all there is any (when given by a good Hindu), like a criticism coming from within the family I will accept it. Any way, I have an equally good respect and regard for all the many religions such as Jainism, Buddhism, Sophism, Zen and so on and even about Christianity (even though I hate the nasty conversion disease they have). I don't like the conservative and orthodox Muslim cult even though I have numerous very very good and generous Muslim friends (better than any Hindu, Christian or Jain friend I have). Any way all these are my problems, but we should not feel offended when a simple article forward is done for the knowledge sharing. (Knowledge always is a combination of 2 perspectives - In support off and against!). So let us learn by understanding the perspectives of others as well. It is the same approach that you can see – when I forward the mails in support of and against astrology as well. True learning comes from a HEALTHY MIX (we should know the proportion!) of positive and negative data!!! ==>> If I remember right, there was a move to include the Jains in minorities list so that they get reservations. As I am in close contact with Jains and know them intimately, I actually abused them........ ........<== Your statement is all about current politics etc. But the article is about some HISTORICAL BIAS against Jainism - I think there is a difference that possibly one should notice. Love and regards, Sreenadh ancient_indian_ astrology, chiranjiv mehta <vchiranjiv@. ..> wrote:>> Dear Sreenadji,> What is the purpose of this article ? I am tired of Hindu bashing, reminds me I am a Hindu > and being bashed. And I am even more tired of some belligerant, ultra-right Hindus trying to defend their faith.> If I remember right, there was a move to include the Jains in minorities list so that they get reservations. As I am in close contact with Jains and know them intimately, I actually abused them for making such demands when there was so much wealth in the community. The benefits of reservation should go to the poor irrespective of religion.> As for the census, tell the author to get his maths right or his head checked. > BTW : the Jains have the habit of categorising the world into 2 - Jain & Ajain.> And Himsa is of different types .... more later>  > Chiranjiv Mehta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 25, 2008 Report Share Posted December 25, 2008 Dear Sreenadhji,Namaste,Kindly see my reply in bold below your reply.Regards,Sunil K. Bhattacharjya--- On Wed, 12/24/08, Sreenadh <sreesog wrote:Sreenadh <sreesog Re: Systemic bias against Jainism Date: Wednesday, December 24, 2008, 3:33 AM Dear Sunil Bhattacharjya ji, ==> The term Hinduism has come to use quite late. The right term should be the Vedic religion. <== I disagree. The right term should be Tantric religion rather than Vedic religion. Idol worship and temple concept is part of Tantra and NOT part of Veda. Something that could be termed Vedic religion is almost non-existent today. But from the ancient past of Sindhu-Sarasvati civilization (remember Pasupati and mother goddess) to till date Tantric religion is there in existence. ==>TO MY UNDERSTANDING PASUPATI AND SHIVA ARE THE SAME AS RUDRA OF THE VEDA. THUS THE SARASVATI-SINDHU CIVILISATION WAS NOT DIFFERENT FROM THE VEDIC RELIGION. AS REGARDS IDOL WORSHIP LORD KRISHNA SAID : "PRATIMA ALPDARSHINAM, SARVATRA SAMADARSHINAM". SO IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT PRATIMA WORSHIP WAS ACCEPTED BY THE VEDIC RELIGION. > Historically speaking the Rigveda was revealed not later than the fourth millennium BCE, whereas the Jaina scriptures were dated in the later part of the first millennium BCE == I disagree to this statement as well. The first Teerthankara as per Jain scriptures is Rishabha deva who gets mentioned in Vedas as well. Rishabha Deve, King Bharata, Nemi nadha, King Janaka all belong to the Vedic past and are considered Jain Teerthankaras. Sage Garga who belongs to BC 1100 was also thought to be a Jain sage. Thus it should be told that Jain religion is as old as the Vedic past itself. But ofcourse it is true that Jain scriptures as old as Vedas are NOT available, possibly because of the possibility that the fanatic vedic followers might have destroyed all the scriptures of the Jain and the numerous other local cults, or they might have gone into less popularity during the spread of Buddhism during Asokas period and Hinduism during the Sunga or Gupta period. The reasons could be social, religious or political. I FIND IT DIFFICULT TO ACCEPT THE ACCUSATION THAT FANATIC VEDIC FOLLOWERS HAVE DESTROYED THE JAIN SCRIPTURES. JAINISM HAD APPEARED AS SEPARATE RELIGION ONLY AFTER BHAGAVAN PARSVANATH AND LORD MAHAVIRA, THOUGH THE JAINAS TRACE THE ANTIQUITY OF THEIR RELIGION TO HOARY PAST. YOU MAY BE AWARE THAT THERE WERE QUITE SOME DISPUTES BETWEEN THE TEACHINGS OF BHAGAVAN PARSVANATH AND LORD MAHAVIRA. THAT IS WHY KESI AND INDRABHUTI MET AFTER THE DEATH OF BHAGAVAN MAHAVIRA TO SORT OUT THE DIGFFERENCES BETWEEN THE TEACHINGS OF THE LAST TWO TIRTHANKARAS. THIS DEFINITELY PROVES THAT THERE WERE NO DOCUMENTED JAIN TEACHINGS OF THE TIRTHANKARAS EARLIER TO THE LAST TWO TIRTHANKARAS.I DO NOT SEE ANY BASIC DIFFERENCE AMONG THE VEDIC RELIGION, BUDDHISM AND JAINISM == ancient_indian_ astrology, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:>> Dear Sreenadhji,> > Namaste,> > There is a lot of controversy as to whether Buddhism and Jainism are daughter religions of Hinduism or not. Whatever be the eventual outcome of this controversy one sees definite links among these three religions. The term Hinduism has come to use quite late. The right term should be the Vedic religion. In this religion there are six theistic Darshanas. There is also the Lokayata, which is an atheistic Darshana. Now many scholars call Sankhya an atheistic Darshana but that is not correct. Sankhya just does not talk about God as the existence of God cannot be proved. Lord Buddha studied Sankhya under Allara Kalama. Lord Buddha talked about the four Satyas, according to which one can remove the cause of ones suffering by following the eightfold path and he does not advocate that one should pray to God> to get the sufferings removed. Rather he says that one has to work out ones nirvana through karma, which is also the way of Sankhya. Lord Krishna also says that through Niskama karma alone one can overcome the bondage due to Karma. Lord Mahavira also does not talk about God. But he, like Lord Buddha, did believe in the Cause and Effect. There is a book written by a Jain scholar, who after great pains-taking research had shown, by reference to Jaina and Buddhist scriptures, that there is no essential difference between Jainism and Buddhism. I do not recollect the name of this scholar at this moment.> > Historically speaking the Rigveda was revealed not later than the fourth millennium BCE, whereas the Jaina scriptures were dated in the later part of the first millennium BCE The date of the Buddhist scriptures falls in between. > > However this forum may not like to digress from its main objective of Astrology to a detailed discussion on these topics.> > Regards,> > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya > > --- On Tue, 12/23/08, Sreenadh sreesog wrote:> Sreenadh sreesog [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Systemic bias against Jainism> ancient_indian_ astrology> Tuesday, December 23, 2008, 4:56 AM> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Mehta ji, > > There was no specific purpose. A good article found, and that was> forwarded to the group - that is all to it. > > ===>> > > I am tired of Hindu bashing > > <==> > That is your problem. I am also Hindu (better call a Saivaite) and don't feel> that there is any Hindu bashing in the mails I forward. If at all there is any> (when given by a good Hindu), like a criticism coming from within the family I> will accept it. Any way, I have an equally good respect and regard for> all the many religions such as Jainism, Buddhism, Sophism, Zen and so on and> even about Christianity (even though I hate the nasty conversion disease they> have). I don't like the conservative and orthodox Muslim cult even though I> have numerous very very good and generous Muslim friends (better than any> Hindu, Christian or Jain friend I have). Any way all these are my problems, but> we should not feel offended when a simple article forward is done for the knowledge> sharing. (Knowledge always is a combination of 2 perspectives - In support off> and against!). So let us learn by understanding the perspectives of others as> well. It is the same approach that you can see – when I forward the mails in> support of and against astrology as well. True learning comes from a HEALTHY> MIX (we should know the proportion!) of positive and negative data!!! ==>> If I remember right, there was a move to include the Jains in minorities list so that they get reservations. As I am in close contact with Jains and know them intimately, I actually abused them........ ........<==> Your statement is all about current politics etc. But the article is about some HISTORICAL BIAS against Jainism - I think there is a difference that possibly one should notice. > Love and regards,> > Sreenadh > > > ancient_indian_ astrology, chiranjiv mehta vchiranjiv@ ..> wrote:> >> > Dear Sreenadji,> > What is the purpose of this article ? I am tired of Hindu bashing, reminds me I am a Hindu > > and being bashed. And I am even more tired of some belligerant, ultra-right Hindus trying to defend their faith.> > If I remember right, there was a move to include the Jains in minorities list so that they get reservations. As I am in close contact with Jains and know them intimately, I actually abused them for making such demands when there was so much wealth in the community. The benefits of reservation should go to the poor irrespective of religion.> > As for the census, tell the author to get his maths right or his head checked. > > BTW : the Jains have the habit of categorising the world into 2 - Jain & Ajain.> > And Himsa is of different> types .... more later> >  > > Chiranjiv Mehta> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 25, 2008 Report Share Posted December 25, 2008 Dear Bhattacharjya ji, I still disagree to those arguments, but agree that the pointers you provided are worthy and worth the thought. Definite conclusions might be difficult to arrive at. Thanks for the worthy pointers.Love and regards,Sreenadh , Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:>> Dear Sreenadhji,> > Namaste,> > Kindly see my reply in bold below your reply.> > Regards,> > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya> > --- On Wed, 12/24/08, Sreenadh sreesog wrote:> Sreenadh sreesog Re: Systemic bias against Jainism> > Wednesday, December 24, 2008, 3:33 AM> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Sunil Bhattacharjya ji, > > ==>> > The term Hinduism has come to use quite late. The right term> should be the Vedic religion.> > <==> > I disagree. The right term should be Tantric religion rather than> Vedic religion. Idol worship and temple concept is part of Tantra and NOT> part of Veda. Something that could be termed Vedic religion is almost non-existent> today. But from the ancient past of Sindhu-Sarasvati civilization> (remember Pasupati and mother goddess) to till date Tantric religion is there> in existence. > > ==>TO MY UNDERSTANDING PASUPATI AND SHIVA ARE THE SAME AS RUDRA OF THE> VEDA. THUS THE SARASVATI-SINDHU CIVILISATION WAS NOT DIFFERENT FROM THE> VEDIC RELIGION. AS REGARDS IDOL WORSHIP LORD KRISHNA SAID : "PRATIMA ALPDARSHINAM, SARVATRA SAMADARSHINAM". SO IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT PRATIMA WORSHIP WAS ACCEPTED BY THE VEDIC RELIGION. > > > > Historically speaking the Rigveda was revealed not later> than the fourth millennium BCE, whereas the Jaina scriptures were dated in the> later part of the first millennium BCE> > ==> > I disagree to this statement as well. The first Teerthankara as> per Jain scriptures is Rishabha deva who gets mentioned in Vedas as well. > Rishabha Deve, King Bharata, Nemi nadha, King Janaka all belong to the Vedic> past and are considered Jain Teerthankaras. Sage Garga who belongs to BC 1100> was also thought to be a Jain sage. Thus it should be told that Jain> religion is as old as the Vedic past itself. But ofcourse it is true that> Jain scriptures as old as Vedas are NOT available, possibly because of the> possibility that the fanatic vedic followers might have destroyed all the scriptures> of the Jain and the numerous other local cults, or they might have gone into> less popularity during the spread of Buddhism during Asokas period and Hinduism> during the Sunga or Gupta period. The reasons could be social, religious or> political.> I FIND IT DIFFICULT TO ACCEPT THE ACCUSATION THAT> FANATIC VEDIC FOLLOWERS HAVE DESTROYED THE JAIN SCRIPTURES. JAINISM> HAD APPEARED AS SEPARATE RELIGION ONLY AFTER BHAGAVAN PARSVANATH AND> LORD MAHAVIRA, THOUGH THE JAINAS TRACE THE ANTIQUITY OF THEIR RELIGION TO HOARY PAST. YOU MAY BE AWARE THAT THERE WERE QUITE SOME DISPUTES BETWEEN THE> TEACHINGS OF BHAGAVAN PARSVANATH AND LORD MAHAVIRA. THAT IS WHY KESI AND INDRABHUTI MET AFTER THE> DEATH OF BHAGAVAN MAHAVIRA TO SORT OUT THE DIGFFERENCES BETWEEN THE> TEACHINGS OF THE LAST TWO TIRTHANKARAS. THIS DEFINITELY PROVES THAT THERE WERE NO DOCUMENTED JAIN> TEACHINGS OF THE TIRTHANKARAS EARLIER TO THE LAST TWO TIRTHANKARAS.I DO NOT SEE ANY BASIC DIFFERENCE AMONG THE VEDIC RELIGION, BUDDHISM AND JAINISM> > > > > ==> > > > > > > ancient_indian_ astrology, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:> >> > Dear Sreenadhji,> > > > Namaste,> > > >> There is a lot of controversy as to whether Buddhism and Jainism are> daughter religions of Hinduism or not. Whatever be the eventual outcome> of this controversy one sees definite links among these three> religions. The term Hinduism has come to use quite late. The right term> should be the Vedic religion. In this religion there are six theistic> Darshanas. There is also the Lokayata, which is an atheistic Darshana.> Now many scholars call Sankhya an atheistic Darshana but that is not> correct. Sankhya just does not talk about God as the existence of God> cannot be proved. Lord Buddha studied Sankhya under Allara Kalama. Lord> Buddha talked about the four Satyas, according to which one can remove> the cause of ones suffering by following the eightfold path and he> does not advocate that one should pray to God> > to get the> sufferings removed. Rather he says that one has to work out ones> nirvana through karma, which is also the way of Sankhya. Lord Krishna> also says that through Niskama karma alone one can overcome the bondage> due to Karma. Lord Mahavira also does not talk about God. But he, like> Lord Buddha, did believe in the Cause and Effect. There is a book> written by a Jain scholar, who after great pains-taking research had> shown, by reference to Jaina and Buddhist scriptures, that there is no> essential difference between Jainism and Buddhism. I do not recollect> the name of this scholar at this moment.> > > > Historically> speaking the Rigveda was revealed not later than the fourth millennium> BCE, whereas the Jaina scriptures were dated in the later part of the> first millennium BCE The date of the Buddhist scriptures falls in> between. > > > > However this forum may not like to digress from its main objective of Astrology to a detailed discussion on these topics.> > > > Regards,> > > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya> > > > > > --- On Tue, 12/23/08, Sreenadh sreesog@ wrote:> > Sreenadh sreesog@> > [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Systemic bias against Jainism> > ancient_indian_ astrology> > Tuesday, December 23, 2008, 4:56 AM> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Mehta ji, > > > > There was no specific purpose. A good article found, and that was> > forwarded to the group - that is all to it. > > > > ===>> > > > > I am tired of Hindu bashing > > > > <==> > > > That is your problem. I am also Hindu (better call a Saivaite) and don't feel> > that there is any Hindu bashing in the mails I forward. If at all there is any> > (when given by a good Hindu), like a criticism coming from within the family I> > will accept it. Any way, I have an equally good respect and regard for> > all the many religions such as Jainism, Buddhism, Sophism, Zen and so on and> > even about Christianity (even though I hate the nasty conversion disease they> > have). I don't like the conservative and orthodox Muslim cult even though I> > have numerous very very good and generous Muslim friends (better than any> > Hindu, Christian or Jain friend I have). Any way all these are my problems, but> > we should not feel offended when a simple article forward is done for the knowledge> > sharing. (Knowledge always is a combination of 2 perspectives - In support off> > and against!). So let us learn by understanding the perspectives of others as> > well. It is the same approach that you can see – when I forward the mails in> > support of and against astrology as well. True learning comes from a HEALTHY> >> MIX (we should know the proportion!) of positive and negative data!!!> ==>> If I remember right, there was a move to include the Jains> in minorities list so that they get reservations. As I am in close> contact with Jains and know them intimately, I actually abused> them........ ........<==> > Your statement is all about> current politics etc. But the article is about some HISTORICAL BIAS> against Jainism - I think there is a difference that possibly one> should notice. > > Love and regards,> > > > Sreenadh > > > > > > ancient_indian_ astrology, chiranjiv mehta vchiranjiv@ ..> wrote:> > >> > > Dear Sreenadji,> > > What is the purpose of this article ? I am tired of Hindu bashing, reminds me I am a Hindu > > > and being bashed. And I am even more tired of some belligerant, ultra-right Hindus trying to defend their faith.> >> > If I remember right, there was a move to include the Jains in> minorities list so that they get reservations. As I am in close> contact with Jains and know them intimately, I actually abused them> for making such demands when there was so much wealth in the community.> The benefits of reservation should go to the poor irrespective of> religion.> > > As for the census, tell the author to get his maths right or his head checked. > > > BTW : the Jains have the habit of categorising the world into 2 - Jain & Ajain.> > > And Himsa is of different> > types .... more later> > >  > > > Chiranjiv Mehta> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 26, 2008 Report Share Posted December 26, 2008 Dear Sreenadhji, That is okay with me. Regards, Sunil K. Bhattacharjya --- On Thu, 12/25/08, Sreenadh <sreesog wrote: Sreenadh <sreesog Re: Systemic bias against Jainism Thursday, December 25, 2008, 7:02 AM Dear Bhattacharjya ji, I still disagree to those arguments, but agree that the pointers you provided are worthy and worth the thought. Definite conclusions might be difficult to arrive at. Thanks for the worthy pointers. Love and regards, Sreenadh ancient_indian_ astrology, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote: > > Dear Sreenadhji, > > Namaste, > > Kindly see my reply in bold below your reply. > > Regards, > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya > > --- On Wed, 12/24/08, Sreenadh sreesog wrote: > Sreenadh sreesog > [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Systemic bias against Jainism > ancient_indian_ astrology > Wednesday, December 24, 2008, 3:33 AM > Dear Sunil Bhattacharjya ji, > > ==> > > The term Hinduism has come to use quite late. The right term > should be the Vedic religion. > > <== > > I disagree. The right term should be Tantric religion rather than > Vedic religion. Idol worship and temple concept is part of Tantra and NOT > part of Veda. Something that could be termed Vedic religion is almost non-existent > today. But from the ancient past of Sindhu-Sarasvati civilization > (remember Pasupati and mother goddess) to till date Tantric religion is there > in existence. > > ==>TO MY UNDERSTANDING PASUPATI AND SHIVA ARE THE SAME AS RUDRA OF THE > VEDA. THUS THE SARASVATI-SINDHU CIVILISATION WAS NOT DIFFERENT FROM THE > VEDIC RELIGION. AS REGARDS IDOL WORSHIP LORD KRISHNA SAID : " PRATIMA ALPDARSHINAM, SARVATRA SAMADARSHINAM " . SO IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT PRATIMA WORSHIP WAS ACCEPTED BY THE VEDIC RELIGION. > > > > Historically speaking the Rigveda was revealed not later > than the fourth millennium BCE, whereas the Jaina scriptures were dated in the > later part of the first millennium BCE > > == > > I disagree to this statement as well. The first Teerthankara as > per Jain scriptures is Rishabha deva who gets mentioned in Vedas as well. > Rishabha Deve, King Bharata, Nemi nadha, King Janaka all belong to the Vedic > past and are considered Jain Teerthankaras. Sage Garga who belongs to BC 1100 > was also thought to be a Jain sage. Thus it should be told that Jain > religion is as old as the Vedic past itself. But ofcourse it is true that > Jain scriptures as old as Vedas are NOT available, possibly because of the > possibility that the fanatic vedic followers might have destroyed all the scriptures > of the Jain and the numerous other local cults, or they might have gone into > less popularity during the spread of Buddhism during Asokas period and Hinduism > during the Sunga or Gupta period. The reasons could be social, religious or > political. > I FIND IT DIFFICULT TO ACCEPT THE ACCUSATION THAT > FANATIC VEDIC FOLLOWERS HAVE DESTROYED THE JAIN SCRIPTURES. JAINISM > HAD APPEARED AS SEPARATE RELIGION ONLY AFTER BHAGAVAN PARSVANATH AND > LORD MAHAVIRA, THOUGH THE JAINAS TRACE THE ANTIQUITY OF THEIR RELIGION TO HOARY PAST. YOU MAY BE AWARE THAT THERE WERE QUITE SOME DISPUTES BETWEEN THE > TEACHINGS OF BHAGAVAN PARSVANATH AND LORD MAHAVIRA. THAT IS WHY KESI AND INDRABHUTI MET AFTER THE > DEATH OF BHAGAVAN MAHAVIRA TO SORT OUT THE DIGFFERENCES BETWEEN THE > TEACHINGS OF THE LAST TWO TIRTHANKARAS. THIS DEFINITELY PROVES THAT THERE WERE NO DOCUMENTED JAIN > TEACHINGS OF THE TIRTHANKARAS EARLIER TO THE LAST TWO TIRTHANKARAS. I DO NOT SEE ANY BASIC DIFFERENCE AMONG THE VEDIC RELIGION, BUDDHISM AND JAINISM > > > > > == > ancient_indian_ astrology, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote: > > > > Dear Sreenadhji, > > > > Namaste, > > > > > There is a lot of controversy as to whether Buddhism and Jainism are > daughter religions of Hinduism or not. Whatever be the eventual outcome > of this controversy one sees definite links among these three > religions. The term Hinduism has come to use quite late. The right term > should be the Vedic religion. In this religion there are six theistic > Darshanas. There is also the Lokayata, which is an atheistic Darshana. > Now many scholars call Sankhya an atheistic Darshana but that is not > correct. Sankhya just does not talk about God as the existence of God > cannot be proved. Lord Buddha studied Sankhya under Allara Kalama. Lord > Buddha talked about the four Satyas, according to which one can remove > the cause of ones suffering by following the eightfold path and he > does not advocate that one should pray to God > > to get the > sufferings removed. Rather he says that one has to work out ones > nirvana through karma, which is also the way of Sankhya. Lord Krishna > also says that through Niskama karma alone one can overcome the bondage > due to Karma. Lord Mahavira also does not talk about God. But he, like > Lord Buddha, did believe in the Cause and Effect. There is a book > written by a Jain scholar, who after great pains-taking research had > shown, by reference to Jaina and Buddhist scriptures, that there is no > essential difference between Jainism and Buddhism. I do not recollect > the name of this scholar at this moment. > > > > Historically > speaking the Rigveda was revealed not later than the fourth millennium > BCE, whereas the Jaina scriptures were dated in the later part of the > first millennium BCE The date of the Buddhist scriptures falls in > between. > > > > However this forum may not like to digress from its main objective of Astrology to a detailed discussion on these topics. > > > > Regards, > > > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya > > > > > > --- On Tue, 12/23/08, Sreenadh sreesog@ wrote: > > Sreenadh sreesog@ > > [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Systemic bias against Jainism > > ancient_indian_ astrology > > Tuesday, December 23, 2008, 4:56 AM > > Dear Mehta ji, > > > > There was no specific purpose. A good article found, and that was > > forwarded to the group - that is all to it. > > > > ===> > > > > > I am tired of Hindu bashing > > > > <== > > > > That is your problem. I am also Hindu (better call a Saivaite) and don't feel > > that there is any Hindu bashing in the mails I forward. If at all there is any > > (when given by a good Hindu), like a criticism coming from within the family I > > will accept it. Any way, I have an equally good respect and regard for > > all the many religions such as Jainism, Buddhism, Sophism, Zen and so on and > > even about Christianity (even though I hate the nasty conversion disease they > > have). I don't like the conservative and orthodox Muslim cult even though I > > have numerous very very good and generous Muslim friends (better than any > > Hindu, Christian or Jain friend I have). Any way all these are my problems, but > > we should not feel offended when a simple article forward is done for the knowledge > > sharing. (Knowledge always is a combination of 2 perspectives - In support off > > and against!). So let us learn by understanding the perspectives of others as > > well. It is the same approach that you can see – when I forward the mails in > > support of and against astrology as well. True learning comes from a HEALTHY > > > MIX (we should know the proportion!) of positive and negative data!!! > ==>> If I remember right, there was a move to include the Jains > in minorities list so that they get reservations. As I am in close > contact with Jains and know them intimately, I actually abused > them........ ........<== > > Your statement is all about > current politics etc. But the article is about some HISTORICAL BIAS > against Jainism - I think there is a difference that possibly one > should notice. > > Love and regards, > > > > Sreenadh > > > > > > ancient_indian_ astrology, chiranjiv mehta vchiranjiv@ ..> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Sreenadji, > > > What is the purpose of this article ? I am tired of Hindu bashing, reminds me I am a Hindu > > > and being bashed. And I am even more tired of some belligerant, ultra-right Hindus trying to defend their faith. > > > > If I remember right, there was a move to include the Jains in > minorities list so that they get reservations. As I am in close > contact with Jains and know them intimately, I actually abused them > for making such demands when there was so much wealth in the community. > The benefits of reservation should go to the poor irrespective of > religion. > > > As for the census, tell the author to get his maths right or his head checked. > > > BTW : the Jains have the habit of categorising the world into 2 - Jain & Ajain. > > > And Himsa is of different > > types .... more later > > >  > > > Chiranjiv Mehta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.