Jainism: a religion of peace

[Zostrianos]

Recently, I've been looking into this remarkable religion, Jainism, whose holiest and most important commandment is non-violence, which I what I find most noble and beautiful about it:

"..nothing which breathes, which exists, which lives, or which has essence or potential of life, should be destroyed or ruled over, or subjugated, or harmed, or denied of its essence or potential. This truth, propagated by the self-knowing omniscients, after understanding all there is in universe, is pure, undefileable, and eternal. In support of this Truth, I ask you a question - "Is sorrow or pain desirable to you ?" If you say "yes it is", it would be a lie. If you say, "No, It is not" you will be expressing the truth. What I want to add to the truth expressed by you is that, as sorrow or pain is not desirable to you, so it is to all which breath, exist, live or have any essence of life. To you and all, it is undesirable, and painful, and repugnant." (Akaranga Sutra)

Another core virtue of Jainism is non-attachment: materialism is to be strictly avoided.

Although it shares external characteristics with Hinduism, it's very different, and inwardly closer to Buddhism, both having similar doctrines on living and overcoming suffering. There are no Gods; the statues in temples represent spiritual masters of the past (Tirthankaras), who are venerated as ideals. And there's no caste system. Although one particular Jain sect (Digambar) believes that women have greater imperfections than men, generally women are also seen as capable of enlightenment, and otherwise the religion is generally egalitarian.

Another interesting aspect is Jainism's outlook on reality. Before most other philosophies, it asserted the principle of conservation of matter, and proposed that the universe is eternal and uncreated. Some also denied the immmortality of the soul.

'Everybody, fool or sage, has an individual soul. These souls exist (as long as the body), but after death they are no more; there are no souls which are born again. (11)

'There is neither virtue nor vice, there is no world beyond; on the dissolution of the body the individual ceases to be.'
...the non-existent does not come into existence, but all things are eternal by their very nature (Sutrakritanga)

[Lord Daedra]

Based on what i know of it, jainism is ridiculous. A religion that is supposed to end in ritually starving yourself is stupid.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Seems that the peacefulness of it would conflict with the inherent violence of being a revolutionary anti-capitalist; I guess it would come down to in what way the religion being discussed condemns violence.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Recently, I've been looking into this remarkable religion, Jainism, whose holiest and most important commandment is non-violence, which I what I find most noble and beautiful about it:

"..nothing which breathes, which exists, which lives, or which has essence or potential of life, should be destroyed or ruled over, or subjugated, or harmed, or denied of its essence or potential. This truth, propagated by the self-knowing omniscients, after understanding all there is in universe, is pure, undefileable, and eternal. In support of this Truth, I ask you a question - "Is sorrow or pain desirable to you ?" If you say "yes it is", it would be a lie. If you say, "No, It is not" you will be expressing the truth. What I want to add to the truth expressed by you is that, as sorrow or pain is not desirable to you, so it is to all which breath, exist, live or have any essence of life. To you and all, it is undesirable, and painful, and repugnant." (Akaranga Sutra)

Problem being that there are plenty of situations in which the best course of action is to destroy life. For example, if a wild animal develops a taste for human flesh, then in order to preserve human life it must be destroyed.


Another core virtue of Jainism is non-attachment: materialism is to be strictly avoided.

Why is this a good thing in any case? I deeply distrust spiritual positions which argue that it is in any way a good thing to be dirt poor ("materially non-attached"). That sounds like a philosophy tailor-made for the ruling classes to promote and the rest to be forced to follow.


Although it shares external characteristics with Hinduism, it's very different, and inwardly closer to Buddhism, both having similar doctrines on living and overcoming suffering. There are no Gods; the statues in temples represent spiritual masters of the past (Tirthankaras), who are venerated as ideals. And there's no caste system. Although one particular Jain sect (Digambar) believes that women have greater imperfections than men, generally women are also seen as capable of enlightenment, and otherwise the religion is generally egalitarian.

So it's not as bad as some of the better-known religions. So what makes it better?


Another interesting aspect is Jainism's outlook on reality. Before most other philosophies, it asserted the principle of conservation of matter, and proposed that the universe is eternal and uncreated. Some also denied the immmortality of the soul.

'Everybody, fool or sage, has an individual soul. These souls exist (as long as the body), but after death they are no more; there are no souls which are born again. (11)

'There is neither virtue nor vice, there is no world beyond; on the dissolution of the body the individual ceases to be.'
...the non-existent does not come into existence, but all things are eternal by their very nature (Sutrakritanga)

How does one derive "conservation of matter" (actually physicists call it "conservation of energy" since matter can be turned into energy) from the above quote? I'm not seeing it myself. I also think it's disingenuous to attempt to read modern scientific concepts into pre-scientific writings.

[Lord Daedra]

My main problem with it is it's non understanding of the matter of scale. Yes its final stages of avoiding the consumption of anything and i believe not wearing anything or cleaning oneself makes a bit of sense in their belief system but there are literally millions of organisms that live within us, and God knows how many existences live within them. Killing yourself to save others makes no sense when you are killing other life as well.

[Zostrianos]

Based on what i know of it, jainism is ridiculous. A religion that is supposed to end in ritually starving yourself is stupid.

1- That's not a mandatory Jain practice
2- Even if it were, it's certainly better than religions that tell their followers to kill members of other faiths.


Seems that the peacefulness of it would conflict with the inherent violence of being a revolutionary anti-capitalist; I guess it would come down to in what way the religion being discussed condemns violence.


Problem being that there are plenty of situations in which the best course of action is to destroy life. For example, if a wild animal develops a taste for human flesh, then in order to preserve human life it must be destroyed.


Ultimately, that's one problem I see with it, the extreme non-violence can be problematic in certain situations.



Why is this a good thing in any case? I deeply distrust spiritual positions which argue that it is in any way a good thing to be dirt poor ("materially non-attached"). That sounds like a philosophy tailor-made for the ruling classes to promote and the rest to be forced to follow.


It's a good thing because what it's proposing is not necessarily being poor, but being able to live in different circumstances, with or without certain commodities. E.g., you get home from work anxious to make a nice warm meal, take a hot shower, and watch your favourite show, and then the electricity goes out: to the average person, that would be annoying as hell. A Jain when faced with a situation like that, wouldn't have a problem, as he\she can enjoy things without being overtly attached to them, and when they're taken away he can deal with it easily. So not only is it a good thing, it's a great thing



So it's not as bad as some of the better-known religions. So what makes it better?


See above.



How does one derive "conservation of matter" (actually physicists call it "conservation of energy" since matter can be turned into energy) from the above quote? I'm not seeing it myself. I also think it's disingenuous to attempt to read modern scientific concepts into pre-scientific writings.

To assert that something can't come out of nothing, that the universe is uncreated and eternal in an age when most people believed otherwise is remarkable to say the least.

[Prometeo liberado]

A prof of mine once told me that jains make up much of the banking class in India due to their supposed "honesty". Ahimsa?

[Lord Daedra]

1- That's not a mandatory Jain practice
2- Even if it were, it's certainly better than religions that tell their followers to kill members of other faiths.





Ultimately, that's one problem I see with it, the extreme non-violence can be problematic in certain situations.



It's a good thing because what it's proposing is not necessarily being poor, but being able to live in different circumstances, with or without certain commodities. E.g., you get home from work anxious to make a nice warm meal, take a hot shower, and watch your favourite show, and then the electricity goes out: to the average person, that would be annoying as hell. A Jain when faced with a situation like that, wouldn't have a problem, as he\she can enjoy things without being overtly attached to them, and when they're taken away he can deal with it easily. So not only is it a good thing, it's a great thing



See above.



To assert that something can't come out of nothing, that the universe is uncreated and eternal in an age when most people believed otherwise is remarkable to say the least.


You ignored my last post. How can you conserve life through death when your death means the end of millions of forms of life???

[Zostrianos]

You ignored my last post. How can you conserve life through death when your death means the end of millions of forms of life???

I guess they consider those organisms as part of us, so it wouldn't apply

[ind_com]

The central idea of Jainism is not non-violence, but a cycle of rebirths involving karma. And though they don't believe in gods, they believe that their 24 spiritual masters or Tirthankaras have become supernatural beings by breaking out of the cycle of births. That is equivalent to believing in gods. This kind of mysticism commands their actions. Their vegetarianism and dietary choices are also unscientific and ridiculous.

[Lord Daedra]

I guess they consider those organisms as part of us, so it wouldn't apply

Who are you to decide what should live and what should die! If one should walk a kilometer to the west to avoid crushing one ant in the east, and if one should let himself be nawed by the beasts and respond with treats, than why is it acceptable to voluntarily destroy an entire ecosystem!

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Ultimately, that's one problem I see with it, the extreme non-violence can be problematic in certain situations.

Personally I think violence is unavoidable, even if one doesn't embrace it or seek it out oneself - others will bring it to you sooner or later.

Does Jainism make allowances for the use of violence in defence of oneself or others?

I remember when I was 12 years old and reading about Sikhism, and thinking it was really cool that they had the physical protection of the poor and the weak as part of their faith.


It's a good thing because what it's proposing is not necessarily being poor, but being able to live in different circumstances, with or without certain commodities. E.g., you get home from work anxious to make a nice warm meal, take a hot shower, and watch your favourite show, and then the electricity goes out: to the average person, that would be annoying as hell. A Jain when faced with a situation like that, wouldn't have a problem, as he\she can enjoy things without being overtly attached to them, and when they're taken away he can deal with it easily. So not only is it a good thing, it's a great thing

But why is the electricity going out? If I live in area prone to serious storms like major hurricanes or tornadoes, then I should expect and prepare for blackouts. If the electricity company is at fault, then for my own sake at least I should be getting on their case.

If I were to just sit back and accept bad shit happening then my life would hardly improve ever. Which is why I don't like asceticism or fatalism either.

While yes there are certain things beyond my direct or even partial control, to accept them as they are with equanimity is to become pacified. If you're not even complaining under your breath, that is when the bastards have truly conquered you.


See above.

Science tells us that we're all the same species and that we're all ultimately related. I think that's as solid a basis for universal fraternity among human beings as you're ever likely to get.


To assert that something can't come out of nothing, that the universe is uncreated and eternal in an age when most people believed otherwise is remarkable to say the least.

1) The assertion that something cannot come from nothing could easily be deduced from observations. Even the people who thought maggots and flies were spontaneously generated knew that you had to let organic stuff go ripe first.

2) I think the Confucian view on humanity (neither inherently good nor inherently evil) is remarkable, but that doesn't mean Confucianism isn't without problems, even if it happens to have a position on overall human behaviour that is closest to reality.

[Zostrianos]

Does Jainism make allowances for the use of violence in defence of oneself or others?

It does allow for that, yes, and cases where it is unavoidable:

In this vow, a person must not intentionally hurt any living being
(plants,animals,humans etc.) or their feeling either by thought,
word or deed, himself, or through others, or by approving such an
act committed by somebody else.

Intention in this case applies selfish motive, sheer pleasure and
even avoidable negligence.

He may use force, if necessary, in the defense of his country,
society, family, life, property, religious institute.

His agricultural, industrial, occupational living activities do
also involve injury to life, but it should be as minimum as
possible, through carefulness and due precaution.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/jai/12vows.txt

[Crux]

I am fairly certain I've seen jainists quite literally argue that the world is flat.