Talk:Jiva
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Hinduism. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
|
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance for this Project's importance scale. |
 |
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 Jiva, or visit the project page for more details on the projects.
|
|
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
Contents |
[edit] soul
sorry, I don't mean to be difficult, but christians by no means have exclusive domain to the word soul. Sam Spade 04:58, 26 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- I didn't say they did, although one could argue that the word has strong Abrahamic connotations. What bothers me about your wording is that it seems to imply that "soul" would be an acceptable translation for "jiva". None of the English-speaking Hindus or Jains I know would use the word "soul" other than to refer to the western concept of soul, which is distinct from the vedic concept of jiva. Mkweise 10:36, 26 Mar 2004 (UTC)
[edit] JIVA
What are they similarities and differences betweem the concept of jiva and of atman? Are they the same or just related?
[edit] Atman and Jiva
This article appears to have been written (conscientiously, to be sure) by someone (probably with a backround in Christian theology) to whom the term being defined, and the relevantly related terms, are foreign, alien, or both.
Atman is the immortal essence of the living being. Jiva is a soul-mind complex. The idea is that presently the soul is in a knot with the mind, it being the latter which contains our memories, desires and aversions and so forth (the soul i.e. Atman being pure, untaintable), in harmony with which we are experiencing separation from God (Brahman).
Speaking of Atman is speaking of the reality of the self; speaking of Jiva is speaking of the plight of the soul as it sojourns alone in strange worlds. The similarity between the terms is superficial. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rflacco (talk • contribs) 03:23, 13 February 2007 (UTC).
[edit] Translating vs. Communication
Many Vedantic and even Sufi words have no perfect western counterpart. For instance the western word "God" with all its Abrahamic connnotations, falls very far from approximating Shankara's "Brahman." However, we are in a new era where east and west are trading notes so to speak, and some in the west are keen to try to grasp eastern philosophy. To make this easier it is useful to reference a western term that at least approximates the eastern usage of another term -- comes closest. I think the article is currently clear that "soul" and "jiva" or "atma" are by no way exact correlaries, but certainly approximately analogous. Meher Baba was one person who tried very hard to create a trio-lexicon that could be useful for encouraging cross-overs in communication of esoteric mystical philosophy and incite discussion across traditions. See a useful discussion of this subject at Talk:Godman (disambiguation)
