Jainism???

B

bodhi_mindisfree

Well-Known Member
Messages
81
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Dallas, NC
I was watching the Discovery Channel (as I often do, but the History Channel is better) and they were explaining the universe. Their explanation is that the universe is not all atoms, there has to be some other form of existence that creates gravity in order to hold galaxies together. Model after model shows that there is not enough mass in a galaxy to hold it together, and in models galaxies simply fall apart. This may be apart from this forum, but by my understanding of the jain view of Karma is like a sticky substance which sticks to a soul. Could this sticky stuff be what is holding our galaxy together(just something to think about)?

This may not relate to this forum, so I'm asking why have Buddhist in the past spoken out against Jainism? If I'm not mistaken, some Bikshus in the time of Shakyamuni were murdered by Jain Digambaras (I think sky-clad monks-nude men walking around) because they claimed Jains were being reborn in the Hell realms.

What would be the cause of a type of fued between the followers of Mahavira and Shakyamuni, since they were both Shramanas rebelling against the Brahmans?

Sorry, this just seems interesting.
 
What would be the cause of a type of fued between the followers of Mahavira and Shakyamuni, since they were both Shramanas rebelling against the Brahmans?
Click to expand...
Rebelling is what people do when they think that someone else is responsible for their suffering. Buddha has said this to be delusional.

Other groups of ascetics resented the Buddha because his order received all the respect and patronage of the king and the lay people.
 
Other groups of ascetics resented the Buddha because his order received all the respect and patronage of the king and the lay people.
Click to expand...

Please state your source...All areas where this is presented in my history and religious textbooks are represented from a Buddhist perspective. The hindu perspective is different, and the Jain and Sikh perspectives are different.

The Jain religion seems to me (I have no sources) to be older that Buddhism. They claim to have existed during the Vedas period (centuries before the Buddha). Therefore, why did Buddhist Bhikkshus claim the Jain path would cause people to be reborn in the hell realms? It seems to me that Buddhist started the whole fued, hence this thread. I am simply a Buddhist trying to understand an ancient fued that seems to have been forgotten about. I'm trying to understand how two religions based on Non-violence (ahimsa) came to criticize and murder one another.
 
In the Majjihima Nikaya, the Buddha has a discourse on how Jain practise is wrong. I know Jainism is that of extremes (hence digambaras, nude monks), but why would the Tathagata criticize others? Why not practise listening deeply as in Thich Nhat Hanh's book "Freedom wherever we are," instead?
 
Namaste Bodhi,

thank you for the post.

to whom was that Sutta spoken?

the simple truth of the matter is that the Buddhist Suttas contain many teachings which are direct and to the point and state, unequivocially, that other points of view are incorrect.

as is often the case, what is presented to a new audience tends to be presented in a way which, often, lacks the authentic traditions emphasis. in the case of the Buddha Dharmas introduction to the Western Hemisphere, there was a great deal of it which was not known to those that brought it and, further, what was brought was not taught in an authentic manner.

nevertheless, as is the case in all our Suttas, one must understand the audience to whom the teaching was given and determine if you are the sort of being to which it would reply.

in terms of rebirth destinations and so forth... when asked about the Dog Duty ascetics (another sect of asectic practice) the Buddha answered that they would be reborn in the states of woe as an animal.

as for why the teachings are not presented in the manner that Thay does, i can only offer that Thich Nat Hahn is not a Buddha, nevertheless, he uses Upaya to reach beings most effectively.

metta,

~v
 
Please state your source...All areas where this is presented in my history and religious textbooks are represented from a Buddhist perspective. The hindu perspective is different, and the Jain and Sikh perspectives are different.
Click to expand...
You can find this in the Digha Nikaya.

The Jain religion seems to me (I have no sources) to be older that Buddhism. They claim to have existed during the Vedas period (centuries before the Buddha). Therefore, why did Buddhist Bhikkshus claim the Jain path would cause people to be reborn in the hell realms?
Click to expand...
I don't recall ever seeing a direct reference to Jains, although in his notes to the Digha Nikaya, Maurice Walshe connects Mahavira with one of the Buddha's contemporary ascetics.
Nevertheless, the Buddha simply said he sees with his divine eye those who follow the path of these ascetics reborn in a pleasant place, in a good bourn, in heaven. Likewise, he sees those who follow the same path reborn in a terrible place, a bad bourn, in hell.

It seems to me that Buddhist started the whole fued, hence this thread. I am simply a Buddhist trying to understand an ancient fued that seems to have been forgotten about. I'm trying to understand how two religions based on Non-violence (ahimsa) came to criticize and murder one another.
Click to expand...
It's not that simple. The terms "Jain" and "Hindu", nebulous as they are today, were meaningless at the time of the Buddha. They represent a collection of ideas and practices that have been in the washing machine of the Indian sub-continent for thousands of years.
If you want to really understand what happened, read the ancient scriptures.
 
In the Majjihima Nikaya, the Buddha has a discourse on how Jain practise is wrong. I know Jainism is that of extremes (hence digambaras, nude monks), but why would the Tathagata criticize others? Why not practise listening deeply as in Thich Nhat Hanh's book "Freedom wherever we are," instead?
Click to expand...
Are you asking why the Buddha gave discourses?
 
to whom was that Sutta spoken?
Click to expand...

The Buddha spoke to Bhikkshus to refute the Nigantha (Jain) point of view. The whole Sutta is explaining how the Jain view of striving is fruitless. This is found in the Devadaha Sutta (part of the Majjhima Nikaya).

I have this book I will mail to anyone willing to read it. "A Practitioner's Study Guide" to the Majjhima Nikaya. Ask Toujour_333...I will mail it for free.
 
bodhi_mindisfree said:
The Buddha spoke to Bhikkshus to refute the Nigantha (Jain) point of view. The whole Sutta is explaining how the Jain view of striving is fruitless. This is found in the Devadaha Sutta (part of the Majjhima Nikaya).

I have this book I will mail to anyone willing to read it. "A Practitioner's Study Guide" to the Majjhima Nikaya. Ask Toujour_333...I will mail it for free.
Click to expand...

excellent!

the question become, Bodhi... are you a Bhikku or do you have the same level of realization as they?

any view that falls to the extreme of eternalism or nihlism is incorrect and the Jain view is one that advocates eternalism. this is one, but not the only, reason that such is spoken against.

As Samabudhi pointed out, the term "Jain" had no real relevance when Buddha Shakyamuni was walking about.. it was their philosophical view towards phenomena and reality which was being critiqued and found, in the Buddhist view, to be wanting.

metta,

~v
 
Bodhi you told that budhhist monks killed by digambar monks but i also heard in US that from many researches found that budhha is at one time follwer of Parvnath,the 23rd tirthankars of jains and then didn't bare to that monk as jain and they facilitates the religion try to eat meat and other thing related new religion budhha u know? this extreme fact? and jains r coming from the first earliest religion so u can't prove on behalf of u r narrow knowledge of jainism rules and views first u practice it then i tell u definately get result of it
with regards jimmy
 
well, who knows if the buddha said it at all, or whether this "sly dig" at the jains came later, when the first texts were written down...
 
ur effort towards religions r considerably good but if u don't know i'll tell that jainism is now spread all over the world . All know that it is only in india but past Greek scriptures and many idols related to jainism is told that before mughals the jainism is only religion which live on earth very greenly :) so it called not easten religion but also western ok for further queries u should also check out this link jainism is oldest religion in the world!!:)

Hellens
Other religions of world borrowed from Jainism - Jain Jinvani Forums
 
jainism is oldest religion in the world!!


I disagree. The first religions are not known by anyone. No one knows why people first started digging graves for their dead some 10,000 years ago. No one clearly understands why cave paintings appear in southern France. Though historians believe these are evidence for the earliest religions, neither you or I know which was the first or even in the catagory of the first 1000 religions.

Kind regards,

bodhi_mind
 
not easten religion but also western

It's kind of hard to live a life of austarity (I can't spell) in a land of plenty. Plus, I've never seen a Digambara monk walking around. Nude men aren't taken too well in my city.
 
Namaste Jimyec,

thank you for the post.

jimyec said:
but i also heard in US that from many researches found that budhha is at one time follwer of Parvnath,the 23rd tirthankars of jains
Click to expand...

i'd be pleased to read a source for this view since, clearly, the Buddha Shakyamuni refuted the prevailing philosophical views which became codified in the Jain Dharma system.

metta,

~v
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top