Talk:Jainism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Wikiproject_Jainism This article is part of WikiProject Jainism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Jainism. Please participate by editing the article Jainism, or visit the project page for more details on the projects.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Jainism article.
Archive
Archives
  1. Archive 1

Contents

[edit] Huh? Did I miss something in the count?

In the section on the Nine Tattvas, there are ten listed. What's going on here?

  • Fixed. Someobdy changed it to seven, which is technically true, but I changed it to the generally accepted nine. The same person gave a note as to why it is seven with very bad grammar, and I modified the note and left it. I also got rid of the atrociously horrific spelling notes. --queso man 20:59, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Split the Article Up?

This article is about double the preferable size. Could an experienced person split off parts of the article into new articles and add this template

Main article: Article name here
to link this page to them? For example, if the new main page is "Karma in Jainism", then the template should look like
Main article: Karma in Jainism
and should be in this article. --queso man 21:20, 3 September 2006 (UTC)


Legalese 15:58, 22 September 2006 (UTC) I tried to learn, and Wiki is easy. Splitted the page and did what was suggested here. More experienced users may please look for the aesthetics and etc. Will continue again, tommorrow.

[edit] Recent Changes

59.95.165.50 18:12, 20 September 2006 (UTC) Help Help ! SoS- Someone is trying to vandalise this page's contents. I have taken pains in assimilating the legal analysis, but someone tried to just delete the whole thing. Could something be done by a more experienced user?

Rishabh Sancheti- I am not a registered user, hence i cannot split the page.

I did not try to vandalize this page.
Vandalism is any addition, deletion, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. (Wikipedia:Vandalism)
I deleted the whole thing because this is an article about Jainism and not about the Constitution of India. I agree that something should be done by more experienced users. --Danogo 06:41, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry Danogo. :) I was a bit concerned because there is a lot of scuffle going on regarding this debate. I said so because I could not verify your bonafides. I agree the article is on Jainism, however the content posted has much to do about understanding Jainism. Though I also agree, that at a few places, it becomes too technical to fit in the basic page. But I hope you will appreciate that not being so experienced, and moved with the urge to bring this crucial information to light, I had to put the content on this page itself. I am now trying to make myself better versed with Wiki so that I can myself split it.

59.95.176.205 09:15, 21 September 2006 (UTC) THe recent legal debate on Jainism, is authored by Rishabh Sancheti, any comments are welcome. rsanchetiATgmailDOTcom. Copyleft! BUT "moral rights" reserved. :)


59.95.164.38 09:22, 28 August 2006 (UTC) I have added two headers containing information on the legal debate of the status of Jainism, and the illustrations brought before the Supreme Court of India discussing Jainism and other religions, specially Jainism and Hinduism. It is important to note that in one of its judgments, the Supreme Court had found that "in a philosophical sense, Jainism is a part of Hinduism" ( See Bal Patil v. Union of India, 2005, link available on main page). However, such a statement, with deference to the Court, was undermining the status of Jainism as a religion in its own right. Jainism, as the Jain tradition holds, has been continuing for an infinite number of years. Religious beliefs are not a matter of ascertainment of their factual accuracy, otherwise they would become FACTS first, and beliefs later. In any case, in a later judgment, the Supreme Court has given an opinion which holds that Jain religion is not a part of Hindu religion. In India, it becomes important to understand in the context that if Hinduism is taken as a culture, it could be found more or less in every religion. However as religions Hindu religion and Jain religion are fundamentaly and philosophically distinct. (with deference to Supreme Court, there are a few, who BEG to disagree).

-rishabh sancheti-

I have removed the mention of Hinduism in Universal History and Jain Cosmology.[1] Previously there was "unlike creationist Hinduism", then "unlike Hinduism" and then "like Hinduism". If someone wants to revert to any of these versions, then a citation would be appropriate.

Also I have removed "these notions of time and the universe conflict with various sciences, such as the aforementioned archaeologies. Also, for example, Darwin's theory of evolution does not exist in Jainism. The concept of infinite time with no beginning or end demands the notion that all actions, thoughts, events, relations and situations for and between all souls have occurred an infinite number of times." Presuming the intent was to imply that Jainism is not compatable with archaeology or evolution, then a citation would again be required. Addhoc 15:54, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

59.95.167.128 11:23, 27 August 2006 (UTC) I have changed the description of the Image. The person is not a shwetambar jain doing a "pooja", but is instead a Pujari who is doing the daily cleaning of the idols. Shwetambar jains would generally wear only white clothes [or light shades] while doing the Pooja. Also, the sheer absence of a "pooja thali" and other "devices-chandan [sandal paste] flowers" etc. in his hand go on to show that he is not a person doing pooja, and has to be a pujari, who can be regularly seen doing the same thing everyday.

[edit] More Vandalism

IP 70.90.145.29 posted a slew of nonsense and copied previous edit titles to make it look legit. I've reverted all changes (to Bakasuprman), but since this isn't my area of expertise, I'll have to ask the regulars to keep an eye out. Tirdun 14:15, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jainism, Orissa, Hathi Gufa, King Kharvel, Udaygiri, Khandgiri

Jainism, Orissa, Hathi Gufa, King Kharvel, Udaygiri, Khandgiri. Reader of this article are requested to add some suitable refercence in the main Article.
vkvora 16:33, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Elephant Cave

Location:-It is on the high Khandgiri hill at distance of 6 Kilometers from Bhuvaneshvar.
To the west of Bhubaneswar are the twin hills of Khandagiri and Udaygiriand The Udaygiri hill is just in front of the Khandgiri hill.
The inscription of the Elephant Cave here is regarded to be the oldest of all inscriptions. It has archaeological significance. It is nearly 2300 years old. They were the work of the first known Orissan ruler, King Kharavela, and probably begun in the first century BC. Kharavela was a king of the Mahameghavahana dynasty, who is known for expansion of the Kalinga Empire. A number of inscriptions and artistic idols carved in the caves here are very fascinating and spectacular. The ancient idols in the caves of both these hills are hardly seen elsewhere.
As you approach the site, Khandagiri, with its 15 caves and four Jain temples will be on the left and Udaygiri will be on the right. The 18 caves of Udaygiri include the famous Hathi Gumpha ('Elephant Cave') with its famous inscription of Kharavela. From the inscription, we learn much about Kharavela's military exploits, and also that his royal city had gate towers, bathing and drinking tanks, and was the scene of formally organized music and dance performances, as well as sporting and social events. The city, says the inscription, "was made to dance with joy". Kharavela was evidently a skilled musician, and it seems as if he created a remarkable center of the arts.
The history of this pilgrimage is believed to belong to the times of Adishvar. The Vedic people called the people of this place, Anarya Karakandu; the king of this place was a disciple of Bhagawan Parshvanath. He was a staunch follower of the Jain religion. In olden times, this was called the Kaling region. Many brave and strong Jain Kings ruled here. They inspired unbroken faith and devotion to the Jain religion Bhagawan Parshvanath often came here wandering about. There is a mention that the samavasarana of Bhagawan Mahavir was set up here.
All of the caves are small, and follow the natural configurations of the 'living rock'. The sculpture throughout exhibits a strong, lively folk element, which has been executed with a sure and confident hand. Already, the spaces are filled with animal, human, and divine personages and decorative details, showing at an early stage the love of the Orissan artist for richly elaborated scenes.
vkvora 17:46, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Animals as Gods?!

In the first paragraph of the article there is the following statement: "[Jainism] worships animals as gods and the people sweep in front of them so they don't kill bugs." First of all, if my understanding is correct, there is no concept of God or gods at all in Jainism, even Tirthankars being seen as role models, not divinities. Second, animals are treated with respect not because they are worshipped but because the doctrine of ahimsa forbids the harming of any living things, all jivas being viewed as equal. Finally, it is only the monks, not Jains in general that use a brush to sweep away insects so as not to harm them. Could someone check on this?

Well, you are correct to a great extent, but may I submit that its not just the Monks who sweep. Lot of Jains do it, in a varying fasion. Would try to pull out more details and put here.

It's a practice during Samiyaka or Pratikamana before you sit down you have to sweep using a special brush, which I do not remember the name of, to sweep the germs and small insects away so you do not kill them. Also this is done when getting up and then sitting down.

[edit] Article

This is a pretty good article I think that it has too many external links, do you think we could take some off.--Seadog.M.S 12:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comment Well taken

Greatpenetration (Talk | contribs) (Sentence omitted which reflects distorted and subjective perspective on Hinduism.)

[edit] Appropriate Change

"Here Jainism is categorically different from Hinduism and many other religions". I'm adding this here, which does not give any opinion on other religions but only Jainism.


[edit] Perspectives on Santhara

Legalese 21:05, 28 October 2006 (UTC)It will be appreciated if users discuss here first, their perceptions regarding the practice of Santhara and its legality, before writing anything they feel like in the main page. I found a user wrote "the practice of Santhara is illegal". On what basis did he or she arrive to this conclusion is questioned, since the matter is already pending before the High Court of Rajasthan, and it is not too wise to give a conclusive statement beforehand. Moreover, such blanket statements, which are not reasoned, hurt the religious sentiments of Jains, and the users must keep this in mind. While Freedom of Speech is a liberty, the Freedom of Conscience is an equally available right, and hence, keep in mind that the use of one does not curtail the scope of the other. in Solidarity, Rishabh

I like the replaced edit of the Santhara paragraph which states, "…where in the State of Rajasthan, a lawyer has filed a writ petition seeking the High Court of Rajasthan to hold that Santhara is an illegal practice." However, I have two suggestions:
First, WP:FAITH. No, I am not a Jain scholar but virtually every non-Jain source I've found on the current controversy says that the practise of fasting unto death (the core external element of Santhara) is technically illegal but that the laws are rarely enforced out of respect to the internal, religious aspects of the Jain practise.
The following passage from the Chicago Herald-Tribune is typical of dozens upon dozens of articles: "Hunger strikes are allowed to go only so far. In India, such strikes are a common form of protest. But if someone fasts to the point of danger, that person is sent to the hospital, given a feeding tube and slapped with a criminal charge." If you will reread my original edit you will find that the word, "suicide", did not appear. I did not state that Santhara was illegal as suicide, but that it was illegal in India to attempt to fast unto death. I do not think that my original post was inaccurate, misleading or unfair, but I agree that your edit is better.
Second, I propose that the debate over the legality, context and content of Santhara be moved to Santhara. The single paragraph, with your change, seems to provide an adequate summary that frames the debate in terms of Jainism (the subject of this article). The general content (if not, perhaps, the tone) of two paragraphs that follow it are more appropriate to the detailed article instead of the Jainism article.
I added the paragraph because Santhara has reached international news, and those seeking information about the practise within Jainism found nothing in this article that even mentions it. My perception, Rishabh, is that to ignore or minimise the controversy or to aggressively assert that the practice cannot be illegal (and especially to state that it is "not comprehensible" that anyone could see Santhara is illegal or that no question [can exist] regarding its illegality) is rather heavily POV. I recommend that those paragraphs be struck from this article, rewritten as NPOV and placed in the Santhara article instead.
As for your assertions about my ability to reason, my apparent motives, whether I am "learned", the effect of an open discussion on Santhara on the sentiments of Jains, and what all editors need to "keep in mind", I will address those issues on your talk page and mine where (I humbly submit) such discussion belongs. Kevin/Last1in 02:19, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jain rituals and festivals

Folks working on this article might be interested in taking a look at that one. It could use some cleanup. I was also wondering it it ought to be a) merged into this article, b) noted as the "main article" for a section or two, c) split into 'rituals' and 'festivals'. Thoughts? --Alynna 08:53, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] external links

Do you think we could pare down the external links, or at least organise them? There's quite a few at present, and I'm not sure how many are necessary or relevant. --Alynna 18:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../j/a/i/Talk%7EJainism_a1cc.html"