Talk:Buddhism and Jainism

1
59.95.164.38 09:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC) I have added a description about the non-extreme way of life under the Jain tradition. The previous author perhaps might not be aware of these nuances. However, Jainism does prescribe a moderate and non-extreme way of Dharma, which I have described.

-rishabh-

First comment on Wikipedia for me, but some of the definitions are wrong, re: common terms. Samyak sam buddha refers to the 'historical' buddha, and pratyekabuddha literally means self enlightened one. My Sanskrit is shaky, but this needs to be fixed. See Ray's book, Buddhist Saints in India or Kloppenborg's "The Paccekabuddha" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.69.223.58 (talk) 22:54, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

In my observation "Samyak" in sanskrit means " to have saiyam/right vision " in life. It also means "to remain unaffected" in all situations in life like grief,happiness,sorrow etc. The word "sam" means "complete". "Buddha" means "bodhi", It is the situation of the disappearance of ignorance due to the functioning of awakened wisdom. Hence "Samyak sam buddha" in Jainology means to have right vision in life with complete disappearance of ignorance due to the functioning of awakened wisdom. The word "Buddha" often means the historical Buddha named Buddha Shakyamuni (Siddhartha Gautama), but "Buddha" does not mean just one man who lived at a certain time. There have been many Buddhas and there will be in the future. "Buddha" does not necessarily means 'Siddharth Gautam/shakya muni buddha'. Siddharth Gautam after getting enlightment called himself 'Buddha'. There is no evidence to suggest that  "Samyak sam buddha" refers to the 'historical' buddha, and "pratyekabuddha". This is a misnomer. The word buddha is taken from pali/sanskrit language. This word "Buddha" Existed even before Siddharth Gautam was born. Siddharth Gautam simply took this word from Popular language to define himself and his religion to say "Enlightened one".Dr Prashanna Jain Gotani (talk) 03:14, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

"Shakya Muni Buddha" is not a name. Siddharth Gautam was born in Shakya Dynasty.'Shakya' is name of ruling dynasty of "Lumbini". "Muni" means "saint". Hence, Shakya Muni Buddha means " The man of Shakya Dynasty who was a Saint and attained Enlightment. Dr Prashanna Jain Gotani (talk) 03:23, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Jainism emphasises that ratnatraya (triple gems of Jainism) — the right vision or view (Samyak Darshana), right knowledge (Samyak Gyana) and right conduct (Samyak Charitra) — constitutes the path to liberation. These are known as the triple gems (or jewels) of Jainism and hence also known as Ratnatraya.

Second Edit

"Early Buddhists posited the existence of 24 previous Buddhas (Buddhas who walked the earth prior to Siddhartha Gautama, as established in the Buddhist text Mahavanso 1:100:1 among others"

Think for the sake of clarity, it is best we stay inside the Buddhist Pali Canon for doctrinal comparisons between it and Jainism. As historical commentaries written a thousand years after the time of Buddha may include ideas not generally accepted by all Buddhists, whereas the Pali Canon tends to be embraced by Buddhists of almost all traditions as basically historically accurate as to what Buddha said and didn't say.

In the Pali Canon, I don't think Buddha makes mention of more then six prior Buddhas to of been on Earth and only predicted the next immediate one that would be coming. Those six, being Vipassi, Sikhi, Vessabhu, Kakusandha, Konagamana, Kassapa and the coming one Metteyya. He also talks of large numbers of paccekabuddhas. The 24 previous Buddhas comparison between Janism and Buddhism is interesting, but may be just a confusion or adoption that made its way into the Mahavanso. It is not a generally accepted Buddhist cosmological idea.

Hope nobody is bothered, but I'm going to alter this section, as I feel it would be misleading to people.

- Iamlog

It would have been better if the statement was included. Although the Mahavamsa is not considered a canonical religious text, it is an important text in Theravada Buddhism and gives a historical description of Buddhism in Sri Lanka and briefly recounts the history of Buddhism in India, from the date of the Buddha's death to the various Buddhist councils where the Dharma was reviewed.

-Sam-  Samitshah1 (talk) 05:16, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

--

Reason for edit.

"The Buddhist formulation of the "Middle Way" may have been a post-Buddha response by the Buddhist monastic community to criticism by the Jains"

Think maybe the whole associated paragraph to the above should be removed, or seriously reworded. As the idea of the "Middle Way" being a post-Buddha monastic creation seems unfounded, at least when considered within context to basic Buddhist philosophy. Conventional wisdom may make such an idea seem plausible, but this doesn't take into account how central to Buddhism the idea of the "Middle Way" is. Although, on the surface it can seem to just be a backing off some of the more stringent ascetic practices, this really isn't the point of it. The "Middle Way" is maybe better thought of as specifically being the Arya(Noble) Eightfold Path, rather then some compromise between indulgence and self-mortification or a later defense against any Jain criticism. Especially given that the Eightfold Path really has little to do with denying either ascetic or hedonistic practices.

I'm also considering removing the, "In short, a large body of evidence suggests vividly that, in large measure, Buddhism is an offshoot of Jainism.", as from what was presented in the article the case doesn't seem to be made. If there is a large body of evidence to make this case, then it would be a great if it was posted. As it is though, it seems to only be conjecture from a Jain perspective. However, Buddhism is no doubt heavily influenced by Jainism, and much of the early Buddhist canon freely admits this. Although at times, some of Buddhist behavior in the Pali Canon as it related to Jainism, seems to be more in a sense of appeasing the Jain sesnobilities, because in their eyes some things Buddhist were doing appeared to be needlessly destructive (like Buddhist traveling during the rains) or not very wholesome. If it wasn't a big issue either way for the Buddhist, they'd acquiesce for the sake of harmony (related to the whole Middle Way thing). Like if you're grandma tells you to take off your hat, in her house. There really is no reason to take it off, but there is no reason to leave it on and upset her.

For now, I'm going to delete the paragraph and make some other small edits. If anybody object, feel free to return it to its original format and we can discuss the matter.

-Iamlog

--70.55.12.61 21:22, 30 October 2006 (UTC)In Jainsim.... it is wrong to say that Siddartha Gautama was contemporary of Mahavira. In fact, Mahivira hada disciple named Gautama and hence the confusion. Nirgrantha nathaputta was contemporary of Buddha. Nirgrantha nathaputta and Mahavira are different people

Mahvira's site of moksha attainment is in Bihar (Pava Puri).

Still a further research to be undertaken, may be the jain perspective needs to be publsihed that will clarify the above.

B Mehta ——––

Some Explanation

Dear B Mehta: Mahavira had a disciple named "Gandhar Gautam/Gautamswami" also called as " Indrabhuti Gautam ". Gautam Swami was the chief disciple of Lord Mahavira, the 24th Jain Tirthankara. He was a Ganadhara. His real name was Indrabhuti Gautam, but he is after referred to as Gautama because that was his gotra. He was born in the Gochchar village in the Magadh kingdom to a Brahmin couple Vasubhuti and Prithvi. Nirgrantha nathaputta and Mahavira are same people according to jain and buddhist texts.Just for the kind information there were no other person by this name except lord Mahavira/Lord Vardhaman. Link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahavira Dr Prashanna Jain Gotani (talk) 13:28, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Buddhist scriptures attest that some of the first Buddhists were in fact Jains (Nirgranthas as they were then called, meaning "the unbonded ones") .Dr Prashanna Jain Gotani (talk) 05:46, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

According to Jainism there are 24 known tirthankaras who discovered the truth. Similarly, according to Buddhism (Buddhavamsa) there were 24 previous Buddhas who discovered the truth (plus 3 in prehistoric times and Gotama-Buddha for a total of 28.

The Buddhavamsa (-vaṃsa; abbrev. Bv) is a Buddhist scripture, part of the Pali Canon of Theravada Buddhism. It is included there in the Sutta Pitaka's Khuddaka Nikaya. It is a fairly short work in verse, in 28 chapters, detailing aspects of the life of Buddha and the twenty-four preceding Buddhas. This canonical text, along with the Apadana and Cariyapitaka, has been described as "hagiographical" as well as a "latecomer" to the Canon.

In the second chapter he tells how in a distant past life as Sumedha he took a vow to become a Buddha, received a prediction from the then Buddha Dipankara that he would indeed do so and thought out the 10 perfections he would need to practise. The next 23 chapters tell of the intervening 23 Buddhas and the acts of merit that the Buddha performed towards them in his previous lives. Chapter 26 tells of his own life. Chapter 27 summarizes all twenty-five of these Buddhas; it also mentions three Buddhas that preceded Dipankara as well as the future Buddha, Metteyya. Chapter 28 tells of the distribution of the Buddha's relics after his death.Link:

http://www.dhammawiki.com/index.php?title=Buddhavamsa

Name of various Pakka/Previous Buddha may be different in Tibetan/chinese/Indo-Aryan language but they have some relation with Jainism. Pāli is a literary language of the Prakrit language family; it is not now (and never was) an informal, spoken language, in the sense of a mother tongue. Despite excellent scholarship on this problem, there is persistent confusion as to the inter-relation of to the vernacular spoken in the ancient kingdom of Magadha (now modern-day Bihār). below is a link to understand that language:

http://pali.askdefine.com/

In the Pali Canon, Buddha makes mention of more then six prior Buddhas to of been on Earth and predicted the next immediate one that would be coming. Those six, being Vipassi, Sikhi, Vessabhu, Kakusandha, Konagamana, Kassapa and the coming one Metteyya. He also talks of large numbers of paccekabuddhas. The 24 previous Buddhas comparison between Janism and Buddhism is interesting,

Warm RegardsDr Prashanna Jain Gotani (talk) 13:19, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

mutual rise from / reaction to hinduism?
lonely planet India says both of these religions arise from Hinduism but react against the caste system. it says Jainism is frank about this but Buddhism is not. It's not much of an authority, but if this is true it would make an interesting addition here.--202.53.85.74 11:31, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

59.94.113.39 14:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)Digvijay Echology in Buddhism and Jainism There may be, unknown to me, already some discussion on this topic. But exact reference may be posted by persons who know. Or serious discussion with correct references may be started right now. Digvijay

Mutual Influence not Derivation.

There is some confusion in the article in relation to Mahavira and Gautama Buddha. They were contemporaries, and it is certain that later there was a great deal of friendly debate and intercourse between their two traditions. However it is incorrect to postulate that one is a derivative of the other, nor is it correct to postulate that either are derived from 'Hinduism'. This is the collective label that was once applied to 'Indian Religious Traditions' that in recent times has changed to mean only 'Vedic Religion'. During the lifetimes of Mahavira and Gautama there was no overall sense of collective identity in Indian religions, only an array of competing philosophical schools, which had many doctrines in common. There was also only a very limited form of the caste system in existance at that time and it was confined to certain regions. The idea of a rigid and monolithic Indian religion stretching back to antiquity out of which Buddhism and Jainism later developed is a fiction. The religious institutions of 'Hinduism', 'Buddhism' and 'Jainism' developed much later, hence the mention of Jainism as a pre-existant religion in Buddhist texts; these were written centuries after the lifetimes of both Gautama Buddha and Mahavira. Lastly, although I love the information contained in the related article 'Shramana', it is an eccentric and old fashioned form of collective reference akin to 'Tantrism' or 'Padmaism'. These terms have different meanings in their respective traditions and therefore it is incorrect to group them together in this way. Any personal interpretation or theory, such as the existance of an autonomous 'Shramana tradition', should also be clearly indicated to be separate from historical fact.

POV Tag
I'm doing POV tag cleanup. Whenever an POV tag is placed, it is necessary to also post a message in the discussion section stating clearly why it is thought the article does not comply with POV guidelines, and suggestions for how to improve it. This permits discussion and consensus among editors. This is a drive-by tag, which is discouraged in WP, and it shall be removed. Future tags should have discussion posted as to why the tag was placed, and how the topic might be improved. Better yet, edit the topic yourself with the improvements.Jjdon (talk) 16:18, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Intro?
The introduction to this article is definitely too large. I'm not very good at restructuring articles, but if anybody's up to the task, perhaps they could move most of the details into other sections. -- Qmwne 235  21:41, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Influence
This article should mention possible influence. From what I have heard, it is reciprocal.--94.116.138.62 (talk) 18:19, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Good sources
I have found two good source that can be used for this article:
 * Jainism in Buddhist Literature by Hiralal Jain.
 * Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, Part 14 By James Hastings.

WHAT TOTAL LIES IS THIS?
Sadhus are NOT jains!!!

The Jain community is composed of four sections: "sadhus, sadhvis"? why lie with such false claims?

Sadhus are hindus, not jains so please do not write such lies! shameful!!82.38.160.13 (talk) 22:16, 6 February 2014 (UTC)Veda


 * Calm down! Calling info which may be incorrect "lies" won't further any discussion, will it? A simple Google search gives c.22.000 hits, showing that the word sadhu is also being used within Jainism.  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   05:04, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Correlate Jainism & Buddhism
In my opinion due to extreme similarity between jainism and Buddhism one must also read life of "pecca/previous buddhas" and "23 previous tirthankaras of jains". Buddha was initially follower of "223rd tirthankar Parasnath" tradition. Udaka Ramaputta was a Jain hermit saint, yogi, and a teacher of Gautama buddha. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Udaka_Ramaputta

Gautama felt unsatisfied by the practise, and moved on. Buddhism is no doubt heavily influenced by Jainism, and much of the early Buddhist canon freely admits this. According to Pali cannon and Jain texts there are similarities in life of previous buddha and tirthankara.

Name of various Pakka/Previous Buddha may be different in Tibetan/chinese/Indo-Aryan language but they have some relation with Jainism. Pāli is a literary language of the Prakrit language family; it is not now (and never was) an informal, spoken language, in the sense of a mother tongue. Despite excellent scholarship on this problem, there is persistent confusion as to the inter-relation of to the vernacular spoken in the ancient kingdom of Magadha (now modern-day Bihār). below is a link to understand that language:

http://pali.askdefine.com/

Hence I think one must not be surprised if someone finds that previous/pecca Buddha and Jain Tirthankars were same people.I do agree that Buddhas don't just belong to Buddhism, just like electricity does not belong to the white men. Kindly be neutral and allow similarity and comparison between jainism and buddhism freely and allow similarities to manifest itself. Both religions flourished in india and both have Aryan predecessors. So similarity is inevitable. Enjoy similarities just as we enjoy differences. Buddhas and Tirthankaras don't just belong to Buddhism/Jainism.

Warm regardsDr Prashanna Jain Gotani (talk) 14:06, 16 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Please provide reliable sources. --Rahul (talk) 06:08, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Buddhism and Jainism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150409132647/http://www.palitext.com/JPTS_scans/JPTS_2000_XXVI.pdf to http://www.palitext.com/JPTS_scans/JPTS_2000_XXVI.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:06, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Honors World Religions
— Assignment last updated by Jad Mada (talk) 05:20, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

History
जैन बुद्धिझम 2405:201:1000:9CCC:5C7D:1330:343F:7779 (talk) 14:54, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

History
Describing Buddhism and Jainism to indianart and literature 202.168.84.160 (talk) 14:30, 12 January 2023 (UTC)