| This article is of a series on |
| Criticism of religion |
|---|
 |
| Part of a series on |
| Jainism |
|---|
 |
Jainism has been engaged in debates with the other philosophical and religious traditions, in which its theories and its followers' practices have been questioned and challenged.
Padmanabh Jaini, after researching the scriptures of the Digambara sect described several points of critique: - [1]
Nalini Balbir has criticised the Digambara views on liberation of women and advocates for a more inclusive and gender-equal interpretation of the scriptures. She lists her criticism in the following manner: -
"The Digambara sect's view that women cannot achieve liberation in their present birth is a 'biological determinism' that is not supported by Jain scriptures. This view is a 'patriarchal interpretation' that has been 'superimposed' on the original teachings of Mahavira." - Nalini Balbir in "Women in Jainism" (2005) [6] Kristi L. Wiley, a scholar of Jainism, has also criticized the Digambara sect's views on liberation of women. Specifically, she highlights the following points of critique: - [7]
Scriptures of other religions and schools of thought such as Buddhism, Islam, and Sikhism also criticize and condemn public nudity followed by Digambara monks. [8] [9] [10]
The Jain theory of Karma has been challenged from an early time by the Vedanta and Sāṃkhya branches of Hindu philosophy. In particular, Vedanta Hindus considered the Jain position on the supremacy and potency of karma, specifically its insistence on non-intervention by any Supreme Being in regard to the fate of souls, as nāstika or atheistic. [11] For example, in a commentary to the Brahma Sutras (III, 2, 38, and 41), Adi Sankara argues that the original karmic actions themselves cannot bring about the proper results at some future time; neither can super sensuous, non-intelligent qualities like adrsta —an unseen force being the metaphysical link between work and its result—by themselves mediate the appropriate, justly deserved pleasure and pain. The fruits, according to him, then, must be administered through the action of a conscious agent, namely, a supreme being (Ishvara). [12] [note 1]
Jainism's strong emphasis on the doctrine of karma and intense asceticism was also criticised by the Buddhists. Thus, the Saṃyutta Nikāya narrates the story of Asibandhakaputta, a headman who was originally a disciple of Māhavīra. He debates the Buddha, telling him that, according to Māhavīra (Nigaṇṭha Nātaputta), a man's fate or karma is decided by what he does habitually. The Buddha responds, considering this view to be inadequate, stating that even a habitual sinner spends more time "not doing the sin" and only some time actually "doing the sin". [13]
In another Buddhist text Majjhima Nikāya , the Buddha criticizes Jain emphasis on the destruction of unobservable and unverifiable types of karma as a means to end suffering, rather than on eliminating evil mental states such as greed, hatred and delusion, which are observable and verifiable. [14] Buddha also criticises the Jain ascetic practice of various austerities, claiming that he, Buddha, is happier when not practising the austerities. [15] [note 2]
While admitting the complexity and sophistication of the Jain doctrine, Padmanabh Jaini compares it with that of Hindu doctrine of rebirth and points out that the Jain seers are silent on the exact moment and mode of rebirth, that is, the re-entry of soul in womb after the death. [16] The concept of nitya-nigoda, which states that there are certain categories of souls who have always been nigodas , is also criticized. According to Jainism, nigodas are lowest form of extremely microscopic beings having momentary life spans, living in colonies and pervading the entire universe. According to Jains, the entire concept of nitya-nigoda undermines the concept of karma, as these beings clearly would not have had prior opportunity to perform any karmically meaningful actions. [17]
Jain Karma is also questioned on the grounds that it leads to the dampening of spirits, with men suffering the ills of life because the course of one's life is determined by karma. [18] It is often maintained that the impression of karma as the accumulation of a mountain of bad deeds looming over our heads without any recourse leads to fatalism. However, as Paul Dundas puts it, the Jain theory of karma does not imply lack of free will or operation of total deterministic control over destinies. [19] Furthermore, the doctrine of karma does not promote fatalism among its believers on account of belief in personal responsibility of actions and that austerities could expiate the evil karmas and it was possible to attain salvation by emulating the life of the Jinas. [20]
The doctrines of anekāntavāda and syādavāda are criticized on the grounds that they engender a degree of hesitancy and uncertainty, and may compound problems rather than solve them. Critics submit Jain epistemology asserts its own doctrines, but is unable to deny contradictory doctrines, and is therefore self-defeating. It is argued that if reality is so complex that no single doctrine can describe it adequately, then anekāntavāda itself, being a single doctrine, must be inadequate. [21] This criticism seems to have been anticipated by Ācārya Samantabhadra who said: "From the point of view of pramana (means of knowledge) it is anekānta (multi-sided), but from a point of view of naya (partial view) it is ekanta (one-sided)." [22]
In defense of the doctrine, Jains point out that anekāntavāda seeks to reconcile apparently opposing viewpoints rather than refuting them.
Anekāntavāda received much criticism from the Vedantists, notably Adi Sankarācārya (9th century C.E.). Sankara argued against some tenets of Jainism in his bhasya on Brahmasutra (2:2:33–36). His main arguments center on anekāntavāda: [23]
It is impossible that contradictory attributes such as being and non-being should at the same time belong to one and the same thing; just as observation teaches us that a thing cannot be hot and cold at the same moment. The third alternative expressed in the words—they either are such or not such—results in cognition of indefinite nature, which is no more a source of true knowledge than doubt is. Thus the means of knowledge, the object of knowledge, the knowing subject, and the act of knowledge become all alike indefinite. How can his followers act on a doctrine, the matter of which is altogether indeterminate? The result of your efforts is perfect knowledge and is not perfect knowledge. Observation shows that, only when a course of action is known to have a definite result, people set about it without hesitation. Hence a man who proclaims a doctrine of altogether indefinite contents does not deserve to be listened any more than a drunken or a mad man.
— Adi Sankarācārya, Brahmasutra, 2.2:33–36
However, many believe that Sankara fails to address genuine anekāntavāda. By identifying syādavāda with sansayavāda, he instead addresses "agnosticism", which was argued by Sañjaya Belaṭṭhaputta . [24] Many authors like Pandya believe that Sankara overlooked that, the affirmation of the existence of an object is in respect to the object itself, and its negation is in respect to what the object is not. Genuine anekāntavāda thus considers positive and negative attributes of an object, at the same time, and without any contradictions. [24]
Another Buddhist logician Dharmakirti ridiculed anekāntavāda in Pramānavarttikakārika: [24] "With the differentiation removed, all things have dual nature. Then, if somebody is implored to eat curd, then why he does not eat camel?" The insinuation is obvious; if curd exists from the nature of curd and does not exist from the nature of a camel, then one is justified in eating camel, as by eating camel, he is merely eating the negation of curd. Ācārya Akalanka, while agreeing that Dharmakirti may be right from one viewpoint, took it upon himself to issue a rejoinder: [24]
The person who criticises without understanding the prima facie view is acting like a jester and not a critic. The Buddha was born a deer and the deer was born as Buddha; but Buddha is adorable and deer is only a food. Similarly, due to the strength of an entity, with its differences and similarities specified, nobody would eat camel if implored to eat curd.
Jainism includes women in their fourfold sangha, the religious order of Jain laymen, laywomen, monks and nuns. [25] The early Śvetāmbara scriptures imposed restrictions on pregnant women, young women or those who have a small child, to enter the ranks of nuns. [26] Regardless, the number of nuns given in those texts were always double the number of monks. Parshvanatha and Mahavira, two historical Tirthankars of Jainism, had huge numbers of female devotees and ascetics. [26] Moreover, the restrictions on certain women to enter ranks of nuns were not attributable to Jainism alone, but the erstwhile patriarchal Indian society as a whole.
According to the Svetambara's scriptures such as Chhedasutra, women were given lesser authority than their male counterparts. [26] Commentaries state that this is because things which could endanger the vow of chastity should be avoided. Nalini Balbir writes that the belief that women are more fragile than men were all-pervading in these texts. [27]
The Digambar sect of Jainism believes that women must be reborn as men in order to achieve liberation. [28] Digambars maintain that women cannot take higher vows of ascetic renunciation. [29]
The Swetambar sect, however, disagrees with this position, holding that one of the Tirthankars, Mallinath, was a woman [28] and even today the majority of Swetambar monastics are female. [30]
Jainism, also known as Jain Dharma, is an Indian religion. Jainism traces its spiritual ideas and history through the succession of twenty-four tirthankaras, with the first in the current time cycle being Rishabhadeva, whom the tradition holds to have lived millions of years ago, the twenty-third tirthankara Parshvanatha, whom historians date to the 9th century BCE, and the twenty-fourth tirthankara Mahavira, around 600 BCE. Jainism is considered an eternal dharma with the tirthankaras guiding every time cycle of the cosmology. Central to understanding Jain philosophy is the concept of bhedvigyān, or the clear distinction in the nature of the soul and non-soul entities. This principle underscores the innate purity and potential for liberation within every soul, distinct from the physical and mental elements that bind it to the cycle of birth and rebirth. Recognizing and internalizing this separation is essential for spiritual progress and the attainment of samyak darshan or self realization, which marks the beginning of the aspirant's journey towards liberation. The three main pillars of Jainism are ahiṃsā (non-violence), anekāntavāda (non-absolutism), and aparigraha (asceticism).
Mahavira, also known as Vardhamana, was the 24th Tirthankara of Jainism. He was the spiritual successor of the 23rd Tirthankara Parshvanatha. Mahavira was born in the early 6th century BCE to a royal Kshatriya Jain family of ancient India. His mother's name was Trishala and his father's name was Siddhartha. According to the second chapter of the Śvētāmbara Ācārāṅga Sūtra, Siddhartha and his family were devotees of Parshvanatha. Mahavira abandoned all worldly possessions at the age of about 30 and left home in pursuit of spiritual awakening, becoming an ascetic. Mahavira practiced intense meditation and severe austerities for twelve and a half years, after which he attained Kevala Jnana (omniscience). He preached for 30 years and attained moksha (liberation) in the 6th century BCE, although the year varies by sect.
Buddhism and Jainism are two Indian religions that developed in Magadha (Bihar) and continue to thrive in the modern age. Gautam Buddha and Mahavira are generally accepted as contemporaries. Jainism and Buddhism share many features, terminology and ethical principles, but emphasize them differently. Both are śramaṇa ascetic traditions that believe it is possible to attain liberation from the cycle of rebirths and deaths (samsara) through spiritual and ethical disciplines. They differ in some core doctrines such as those on asceticism, Middle Way versus Anekantavada, and self versus non-self.
Kundakunda was a Digambara Jain monk and philosopher, who likely lived in the second century CE or later.
Anekāntavāda is the Jain doctrine about metaphysical truths that emerged in ancient India. It states that the ultimate truth and reality is complex and has multiple aspects and viewpoints.
Jain monasticism refers to the order of monks and nuns in the Jain community and can be divided into two major denominations: the Digambara and the Śvētāmbara. The monastic practices of the two major sects vary greatly, but the major principles of both are identical. Five mahāvratas, from Mahavira's teachings, are followed by all Jain ascetics of both the sects. Historians believe that a united Jain sangha (community) existed before 367 BCE, about 160 years after the moksha (liberation) of Mahavira. The community then gradually divided into the major denominations. However, no evidences indicate when the schism between the Digambaras and the Śvetāmbaras happened.
The Ācārāṅga Sūtra is the first of the twelve Angas, part of the agamas which were compiled based on the teachings of 24th Tirthankara Mahavira.
Jainism is a religion founded in ancient India. Jains trace their history through twenty-four tirthankara and revere Rishabhanatha as the first tirthankara. The last two tirthankara, the 23rd tirthankara Parshvanatha and the 24th tirthankara Mahavira are considered historical figures. According to Jain texts, the 22nd tirthankara Neminatha lived about 84,000 years ago and was the cousin of Krishna.
Jain philosophy or Jaina philosophy refers to the ancient Indian philosophical system of the Jain religion. It comprises all the philosophical investigations and systems of inquiry that developed among the early branches of Jainism in ancient India following the parinirvāṇa of Mahāvīra. One of the main features of Jain philosophy is its dualistic metaphysics, which holds that there are two distinct categories of existence: the living, conscious, or sentient beings (jīva) and the non-living or material entities (ajīva).
Kevala jnana or Kevala gyana, also known as Kaivalya, means omniscience in Jainism and is roughly translated as complete understanding or supreme wisdom.
Mulachara is a Jain text composed by Acharya Vattakera of the Digambara tradition, around 150 CE. Mulachara discusses anagara-dharma – the conduct of a Digambara monk. It consists twelve chapters and 1,243 verses on. It is also called Digambara Acharanga. It is said to be derived from the original Ācārāṅga Sūtra and discusses the conduct of a Digambara monk.
Jain literature refers to the literature of the Jain religion. It is a vast and ancient literary tradition, which was initially transmitted orally. The oldest surviving material is contained in the canonical Jain Agamas, which are written in Ardhamagadhi, a Prakrit language. Various commentaries were written on these canonical texts by later Jain monks. Later works were also written in other languages, like Sanskrit and Maharashtri Prakrit.
Jīva or Ātman is a philosophical term used within Jainism to identify the soul. As per Jain cosmology, jīva or soul is the principle of sentience and is one of the tattvas or one of the fundamental substances forming part of the universe. The Jain metaphysics, states Jagmanderlal Jaini, divides the universe into two independent, everlasting, co-existing and uncreated categories called the jiva (soul) and the ajiva. This basic premise of Jainism makes it a dualistic philosophy. The jiva, according to Jainism, is an essential part of how the process of karma, rebirth and the process of liberation from rebirth works.
Padmanabh Shrivarma Jaini was an Indian born scholar of Jainism and Buddhism, living in Berkeley, California, United States. He was from a Digambar Jain family; however he was equally familiar with both the Digambara and Śvetāmbara forms of Jainism. He has taught at the Banaras Hindu University, the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor and at the University of California at Berkeley, from which he retired in 1994. Jaini was the author of several books and papers. His best known work is The Jaina Path of Purification (1979). Some of his major articles have been published under these titles: The Collected Papers on Jaina Studies (2000) and Collected Papers on Buddhist Studies (2001). He died on 25 May 2021 at Berkeley at age 97.
Umaswati, also spelled as Umasvati and known as Umaswami, was an Indian scholar, possibly between 2nd-century and 5th-century CE, known for his foundational writings on Jainism. He authored the Jain text Tattvartha Sutra. According to historian Moriz Winternitz, Umaswati may have been a Śvetāmbara ascetic as his views correspond more with the Śvetāmbara sect than with the Digambara sect, and that the latter is 'hardly entitled to claim him.' Umaswati's work was the first Sanskrit language text on Jain philosophy, and is the earliest extant comprehensive Jain philosophy text accepted as authoritative by all four Jain traditions. His text has the same importance in Jainism as Vedanta Sutras and Yogasutras have in Hinduism.
Digambara is one of the two major schools of Jainism, the other being Śvetāmbara (white-clad). The Sanskrit word Digambara means "sky-clad", referring to their traditional monastic practice of neither possessing nor wearing any clothes.
Jainism is an Indian religion which is traditionally believed to be propagated by twenty-four spiritual teachers known as tirthankara. Broadly, Jainism is divided into two major schools of thought, Digambara and Śvetāmbara. These are further divided into different sub-sects and traditions. While there are differences in practices, the core philosophy and main principles of each sect is the same.
Jainism and Hinduism are two ancient Indian religions. There are some similarities and differences between the two religions. Temples, gods, rituals, fasts and other religious components of Jainism are different from those of Hinduism.
Aryika, also known as Sadhvi, is a female mendicant (nun) in Jainism.
The global Jain community are broadly divided into 2 major lineages/sects whose differences trace back to the practices of ascetics. These include the Digambara, meaning "sky-clad", sect based on the nudity of male monks, and the Śvetāmbara, or "white-clad," sect referring to a simple white fabric worn by both male and female ascetics. Both of the groups share largely the same cosmology, belief structure, and ethical outlook, but differ in in some aspects of practice.
| Gods | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Philosophy | |||||
| Branches |
| ||||
| Practices | |||||
| Literature | |||||
| Symbols | |||||
| Ascetics | |||||
| Scholars | |||||
| Community | |||||
| Jainism in |
| ||||
| Jainism and | |||||
| Dynasties and empires | |||||
| Related | |||||
| Lists | |||||
| Navboxes | |||||
