Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 05:06, 22 March 2017

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Śramaṇa article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 3 months

Jainism B‑class Mid‑importance

This article is part of WikiProject Jainism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Jainism. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page for more details on the projects. Guidelines: Manual of Style – Naming conventionsJainismWikipedia:WikiProject JainismTemplate:WikiProject JainismJainism B This article has been rated as B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

First edit at this page

yes they should be merged, but both spellings should lead to the same article. the s - sh issue is due to varying standards of transcribing the term into western (latin) letters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.237.89.225 (talk • contribs) 10:52, 2 February 2006‎

Philosophy section

The philosophy section has little philosophy, too much polemics. The views and contrast with the orthodox Indic schools should be included, but this should be a summary of recent reliable sources on the views found in early Buddhist and Jaina texts, such as the Nikayas, and texts composed through the 1st millennium CE. A summary from the records of 1st millennium CE Chinese travellers to India, a better discussion of Sunyata/Atman/Soul, etc would improve this article. The section should also summarize the difference between early Jaina and early Buddhist, as well as competing Sramana philosophies.

Some text needs a rethink. Consider the Dharmakirti quote. It is sourced to Jaini's book, who sources it to Rahul Sankrityayan. The quote is actually not from Dharmakirti's Sanskrit text, which is lost. It is a quote from an unidentified Tibetan text, which Sankrityayan claimed to have re-translated back to Sanskrit, between 1930s through 1950s. Sankrityayana added it as his personal commentary, to Pramanavarttika, and to Darshana Digdarshana on page 806, and to Buddha Darshana to page 184, and to few other unrelated texts claiming it to be from the same unidentified Tibetan text. In one version, he wrote the last part of the verse differently.

Sankrityayana verse, added to this article, is:

vedapramanyam kasyacit kartrvadah/ snane dharmeccha jativadavalepah// santaparambhah papahanaya ceti/ dhvastaprajnanam pancalirigani jadye

Provided translation: The unquestioned authority of the vedas; the belief in a world-creator; the quest for purification through ritual bathings; the arrogant division into castes; the practice of mortification to atone for sin; - these five are the marks of the crass stupidity of witless men.

The translation is puzzling, as there is no Sanskrit word in there for "arrogant" or "unquestioned". I have seen three translations, all different from the above, one included in a paper by Ramakrishna Bhattacharya, of Charvaka literature fame. Here are two translations:

T1: Belief in the authority of the Vedas, and in a creator, desiring merit from bathing, pride in caste, and practicising self denial for the eradication of sins - these five are the marks of stupidity of one whose intelligence is damaged.

T2: Veda as epistemic authority, taking bath to gain merit, starting asceticism to destroy sin, know these as foolishness of five senses.

Jaini's book on page 48 is stating that the last part of the quote "viz. the path of asceticism, stands out as the chief characteristic of all the heterodox schools collectively called the sramanas", and that the orthodox and heterodox (sramana) traditions mutually influenced each other. The philosophy section does not mention this, it only mentions conflict.

Jaini's book on page 72 is also stating that Jaina denied the supremacy of Brahmins, not the social structure, and in practice even claimed to be the originators of the system of hereditary ranks, in the medieval times. Gotra and social structure existed among Jains, according to Jaini's book. Similarly, on pages 142-147, he mentions "rituals and magical practices" among Buddhists and Jains. A neutral and balanced summary would mention this, wherever polemics against the ancient and medieval orthodox school beliefs are included. Past the trees, from a forest level perspective, the section should be 80%+ philosophy of Sramanas, and each Sramana school - by this I mean, metaphysics, epistemology, ontology, axiology, etc.

@Joshua Jonathan:, @Abecedare: your thoughts? Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 16:34, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Very little thoughts on this. I tried to read the philosophy-section; it's quite muddled. The introductory-section consists of too many loose ends. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 18

41, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Influences

@Ms Sarah Welch: Patrick Olivelle also states "It is obvious that vedic society contained large numbers of people whose roots were non-Aryan and that their customs and beliefs must have influenced the dominant Aryan classes. It is quite a different matter, however, to attempt to isolate non-Aryan customs, beliefs, or traits at a period a millennium or more removed from the initial Aryan migration." p68

Regardless, Olivelles views are still revisionist history and one sided, where he believes non-Aryan influences are "Aryan" due millennium evolution unlike others historians and scholars. Sramana reflects cultural synthesis between Aryan and Non-Aryans that took place over a period of millennium, as many other historians pointe out, emerging in or around Indus or Ganges valley. Aryans did not migrate to empty land. It's not 'neutral' to have one sided quote/view that veils Non-Vedic influences as Aryan and Brahmanical. We need more sources, not one-sided historian view in quote. 117.221.26.125 (talk) 04:31, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

• B-Class Jainism articles
• Mid-importance Jainism articles