Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Times of India reports that the number of adherents of the Jain religion has fallen to 4.5 million, and with a declining birth rate may well disappear from the world in a generation or two.
For those who are not completely familiar with Jainism, it is one of the three heterodox Sramanas religions of Jainism, Buddhism, and Ajivaka(or Ajivika). The Ajivika religion disappeared after about a thousand year run. Jainism and Buddhism share many common beliefs such as nontheism, the Five Precepts, and many more. Jainism only differs from Buddhism in its promulgation of a more extreme asceticism and minor differences about the nature of the self or atta. Mahavira, the twenty-fourth Tirthankara of the Jain religion was a contemporary of Siddartha Gautama. It is unclear if they had ever met.
From the viewpoint of a Greek philosopher such as Heraclitus or the Buddha, all things are subject to flux and change, even religions. Jainism had an influence far beyond their numbers, and, while the religion did not have the good fortune of being adopted by Emperor Ashoka and the Mauryan Empire, has had a powerful influence in Indian culture and civilization over the centuries.
Of course, the question is whether agnostics/atheists should even care about the passing of an ancient religion. To that I have no answer.
I feel mild regret over the demise of the Jain religion. I speak from the perspective of a student of Indian Civilization. I have visited the Tirthankars Temple in Varanasi and was deeply moved. The teachings may be absurd, but the culture has grandeur and power.
"Quaint custoom; don't think I could ever get used to it"
In fact, while I may have a few regrets about the vanishing of a really rather admirable religious ideal , my principal feeling of one of relief. Because it seemed one of those Ideals which, if it was fine in principle, it was unworkable, because of the way it is. You cannot live in this world without something dying so you can live.
While I will avoid treading on animals and even plants, if this or that bug finds that the evolved instinct for self -perservation doesn't enable it to scuttle out of my way, that's tough. There are thousands of people dying of disease and natural accidents, while some duvet -clad fool is sweeping the pavement for fear of inadvertently stepping on some bug without the sense to keep it's ass out of my coffee.
So, despite its' extreme niceness in the religious league table, and the impressive antiquity, it is really a bit of a nut -cult and I no more mouirn its' passing than I do the Zoroastrians, flat earthists or Samaritans.
And there's the good news, folks. Zoroastrians and Samaritans and flat -earthists still exist today. They won't entirely die out, so will still be there like the preserved Kakapo or European Bisoin, a rare living treasure to be nurtured and preserved out of interest, but which really ought to have vanished long ago.
TRANSPONDER, I thoroughly enjoy your earthy but common sense approach to matters. When I was a Buddhist, I had a real problem with the veneration of insects, et al. I understand it is about motivation, but, sorry it is just stupid.
Do Buddhists/Jains get warm and fuzzy about the malaria mosquito, and leaches? Bhikkhu Bodhi says all sentient beings wish to be happy...I don't think so. How about the ticks that transmit Lymes disease and viral encephalitis.
Also, how about bacteria? Where do you draw the line in the idiocy?
TRANSPONDER, I thoroughly enjoy your earthy but common sense approach to matters. When I was a Buddhist, I had a real problem with the veneration of insects, et al. I understand it is about motivation, but, sorry it is just stupid.
Do Buddhists/Jains get warm and fuzzy about the malaria mosquito, and leaches? Bhikkhu Bodhi says all sentient beings wish to be happy...I don't think so. How about the ticks that transmit Lymes disease and viral encephalitis.
Also, how about bacteria? Where do you draw the line in the idiocy?
Thank you, Earthy and common sense is not what I do, but I'm happy that it comes across like that. I try to be entertaining and even amusing, in the hope that people will wade through my stuff in the hope of coming across a quip or joke. And I like to put in analogies and explanations put in 'earthy' terms or exchanges. But I sometimes spend a lot of time picking an analogy or scenario that will stand up to scrutiny, nevertheless.
However I won't get onto an apologetic for me.
I'm not saying that going to the logical extreme is stupid or wrong or even illogical. I sympathize with a lot of ideals, including the ideals of communism. It might work and it might work without strongmen becoming dictators, but not in our time. That remark of Me Bohdi's makes sense, in an evolutionary way. We all evolved to survive and avoid being eaten. Thus all things strive to survive ans avoid dying. Through a mental chain you can you yourselves what aids survival is what is good and makes us happy.
It seems absurd that this biological urge should have driven Mahler to write ten and a bit huge symphonies about it (watched a docu. on him last night (1) and all because we refuse to believe that we are animals but we fret about the powerful instincts, and drives that we do not understand and will not think evolution but try to make it work as a coherent spiritual or cosmically ordered system. It isn't; it is evolutionary nature working with what it has. And that is what we have to do too, not try to access some spiritual perfection we can imagine and aspire to, but isn't there to be accessed through some Faith based gimmick or shibboleth.
The problem with what happens with these ideals is that they do not work in an ideal world. We have to compromise with the world the way is and the way we are. We have to understand ourselves, biologically as a product of evolution. We evolved to be omnivorous, tribal and intensely curious. We were not made angels, and while the aspiration to become angels is ok, in hopes to improve some of the bad hand evolution has dealt us, the stupidities, impracticalities, and above all gueswork treated as reliable facts should be avoided.
(1) I must recount an anecdote they gave that I hadn't heard. Of course his intro and adagietto from the 5th became celebrated for being used in 'Death in Venice'. The producer watched the film and asked "Who wrote the music?"
"Gustav Mahler".
"Can we sign him?"
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 08-10-2017 at 07:13 AM..
In fact, while I may have a few regrets about the vanishing of a really rather admirable religious ideal , my principal feeling of one of relief. Because it seemed one of those Ideals which, if it was fine in principle, it was unworkable, because of the way it is. You cannot live in this world without something dying so you can live.
.
Yeah, whatever your philosophy or religion, life still demands extinguishing other life to be sustained. Hell, each breath you take slaughters a million microorganisms. Jainism doesn't work for the same reason that communism didn't work, it is predicated upon a reality which does not exist.
The Times of India reports that the number of adherents of the Jain religion has fallen to 4.5 million, and with a declining birth rate may well disappear from the world in a generation or two.
For those who are not completely familiar with Jainism, it is one of the three heterodox Sramanas religions of Jainism, Buddhism, and Ajivaka(or Ajivika). The Ajivika religion disappeared after about a thousand year run. Jainism and Buddhism share many common beliefs such as nontheism, the Five Precepts, and many more. Jainism only differs from Buddhism in its promulgation of a more extreme asceticism and minor differences about the nature of the self or atta. Mahavira, the twenty-fourth Tirthankara of the Jain religion was a contemporary of Siddartha Gautama. It is unclear if they had ever met.
From the viewpoint of a Greek philosopher such as Heraclitus or the Buddha, all things are subject to flux and change, even religions. Jainism had an influence far beyond their numbers, and, while the religion did not have the good fortune of being adopted by Emperor Ashoka and the Mauryan Empire, has had a powerful influence in Indian culture and civilization over the centuries.
Of course, the question is whether agnostics/atheists should even care about the passing of an ancient religion. To that I have no answer.
I feel mild regret over the demise of the Jain religion. I speak from the perspective of a student of Indian Civilization. I have visited the Tirthankars Temple in Varanasi and was deeply moved. The teachings may be absurd, but the culture has grandeur and power.
Comments
Jainism is a fairly gentle and benign religion. So should we feel regret at its eventual passing? No, not at all. Nonsense is nonsense, and the sooner we put all nonsense behind us the better. And the easier it is to challenge the major religious nonsense of the world.
Funny how the religions saying not to kill anyone or anything get swept aside so easily as the world is infested by the violent ones.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"Quaint custoom; don't think I could ever get used to it"
