Want do download Shashtras?

http://www.atmadharma.com/laghujainsiddhant/english/sidhnref.html

Online Vedas and Sutras

http://www.urday.com/

Contribution of Jainism to the Philosophical Foundations of Democracy

Contribution of Jainism to the Philosophical Foundations of

Democracy

--By B. K. Sawangikar



[The author is a former Post Graduate teacher of Philosophy and

Gandhian Thought at the Nagpur University, Nagpur, Bharat, this

article has been taken from the Hindu Vishwa, Sept/Oct 1987]



Vicharochchar dhee shraddha Pujadishu swatantrata,

Nyayah samajike Arthe Rajakiya Vidhau Tatha



    Freedom of thought (Vichaar Swatantrata) and freedom of

Expression (Uchchar Swatantrata) are the basic pillars of any

Democracy. In addition to that, freedom of holding and practicing

any faith or Religion, in a nutshell, secularism, also goes hand in

hand with the first two in a Democratic set-up. Justice in social,

Economic and Political matters is also guaranteed by the

Constitution of any Democratic country.



    The values outlined above are considered to be of recent

origin. They are referred to as a gift of the Industrial Revolution

and other Political struggles which humans in various parts of this

world successfully underwent in the no-so-far off past.  In fact

this is not so.



    Bharat is known, throughout the world, as a land of profound

knowledge and wisdom.  If we cugitate over the philosophical

thoughts expressed in the various systems of Bharatiya philosophy,

we are astounded to find that they express in a subtle manner

various up-to-date views which the modern man considers as the gift

of modern age and scientific thinking.



    In this essay an effort is made to explain how Philosophical

Thought of Jainism contains some basic pre-suppositions of

Democracy as a political system and as a Way of Life. In this

connection we are primarily concerned, only with the first two

essentials of Democracy viz, freedom of thought and freedom of

expression.



    Jainism is atheistic in both the senses of the term. Jain's do

not believe in the existence of God and hence they are atheist.

Similarly, they do not believe in the testimony of Vedas and

therefore, in this sense also, they are atheists.



    Jain Epistemology, i.e. theory of knowledge propagates Anekant

Vaad and it is in the exposition of this doctrine that we find the

basic presuppositions of Democracy referred to above.



    Anekant Vaad presupposes and rightly so, that Reality or

anything in reality has many or for that matter, innumerable faces

or facets. Whereas, the knower has his own limited powers of

knowing; because he is engulfed in a body - Sharir which limits his

powers of knowing. The sense-organs, the intellect with which the

knower tries to know the Reality have limited powers. Thus what is

to be known is unlimited, whereas the knower is limited. This being

so, no individual or born Jiva (limited self in this "world or

Sansar) can get a full view of anything. What the knower gets are

the glimpses of reality and not the full or complete view of

reality. Some knower knows one face of the reality depending upon

the circumstances in which he is placed. The other knower gets

entirely a different or contradictory view of the same reality

because of his own peculiar circumstances. Each one of them is

right in his own way. Every Jiva gets his own view and not the view

of the other. This being so, no knower should take an extreme view

and propagate that he alone knows the Truth. The Truth known by

different knowers is relative. Nobody knows the absolute or

complete Truth. In the domain of knowledge we are like those

proverbial seven blind persons feeling whatever part of the anatomy

of an elephant that comes their way and giving their incomplete and

erroneous judgement about the nature of the elephant body.



    Thus it logically follows that every individual knower knows

the partial Truth and as much each one of them has a right to

express his own understanding of the Reality, particularly because

each one of us is similarly situated in this regard. It would be

unjust on our part to disallow any person an opportunity to express

his view or understanding of the Reality. Nay, in so doing we shall

be denying to ourselves the knowledge of his views which we do not

possess and which is equally valuable in order to know the whole of

Reality.



    Jainism advocates NON-VIOLENCE or AHIMSA as an Ethical value.

Killing or doing injury to any Jiva in any manner is forbidden by

Jain Dharma. Now this prescription of Non-violence has to be

practiced in the domain of knowledge also. Not to allow a person to

express his own views of Reality, is tantamount to killing his

views and as such it is intellectual violence, which is forbidden

by Jainism. Anekant Vaad thus propagates practice of Non-violence

in the domain of knowledge also.



    Anekant Vaad assumes two forms in the process of its

development. They are Naya Vaad and Syad Vaad. Let us find out what

these two views stand for.



    NAYA means the view of the knower - Nayo Gyaturabhiprayah. In

order to understand Naya Vaad, we must get acquainted with two

concepts of philosophical thought; viz SUBSTANCE and MODE.



    Substance is known as Dravya. It is the substratum or support

of all qualities and states; e.g. water is a substance, firstly

because it is something to which the qualities liquidity,

tastelessness, purity etc. belong and secondly, because it has its

three state i.e. solid state (ice), liquid state (Drinking water)

and gaseous state (vapor). In all these varying states water

continues to be the same H20. It is expected of a substance

that it continues to remain the same in its varying states. The

states of a substance are known as modes or Paryaya. Dravya is

defined in Jainology as one that has its qualities and states --

Guna paryayavat dravyam. It should be remembered in this context

that a substance could be animate as well as inanimate; e.g. Jiva

- i-e. individual soul is also a substance, because it has

qualities, such as knowledge, ignorance, capacity to become free

etc.; similarly, it has its own states, such as, state of bondage

and state



    Keeping these concepts in view, let us try to understand what

Naya Vaad advocates. A particular knower may say after viewing a

thing that it is a table.  Another knower may say in regard to the

same thing, that it is wood. That the thing is a table and that it

is wood are two different Nayas about the same thing.  The first is

Paryaya Naya where as the second is  Dravya Naya. Both are correct

in their own right; because they represent two different points of

view. This being so it would be an exercise in futility, if the two

knowers fight among themselves to assert that their individual view

alone is the right view. In one sense or considered Srom one angle

the thing is wood. And the same thing is a table if it is viewed

from a different angle. Naya Vaad, therefore, advocates that nobody

should consider that his own Naya or view is correct and that of

others is totally incorrect. We must avoid wrangling out of

ignorance over such silly matters. Dravya Naya is however, always

superior as a piece of knowledge as compared to Paryaya Naya.

Instead of labelling Hindu's as Jain, Marwadis, Sikhs etc., it is

always better to consider all of them as essentially Hindus or

humans.



    The second form of Anekant Vaad is known as Syad Vaad.

According to Syad Vaad, all our judgements are relative to time and

circumstances. No judgement contains absolute Truth. All judgements

express Relative Truths, relative to the time and place. This

being, so every judgement should be qualified by the word or

preceded by the word Syat. Syat literally means, "in a sense," "in

a particular context," "may be" etc.



    Shakespeare says in his famous play "Hamlet" -- "Frailty thy

name is woman".  This judgement is true or may be true in the

circumstances that obtained in England in his own times. It may not

be true in a different context. If Shakespeare was born in Bharat

during the Moghal period and had he visited the lanes or by-lanes

of the city of Lucknow, he would have perhaps made a statement

contrary to his own statement. Thus "in a sense", what he says is

true, whereas in a different context what Shakespeare states is not

true. This being so this judgement should be expressed as "May be

such and such is the case" - Syat Asti. In a different context the

statement does not hold. Hence, in that context we shall have to

say " May be that is not the case or that is not so" -- Syat Naasti



    Thus every judgement is relatively true and no judgement is

absolutely true. This being so every judgement should be qualified

by the word SYAT and we must value or respect all judgements alike

because they contain the fragments of Truth.



    Syad Vaad refers to seven such forms of judgements known as

Saptabhaangi Naya.  However, we are deliberately not going into the

details for obvious reasons.



    Thus both the forms of Anekant Vaad advocate that every

individual has a right to hold his own view or opinion, Similarly

every individual must be allowed to express his own view. No one

knows the whole truth. Every one knows the glimpses or fragments of

truth. Thus to know the whole truth, freedom of thought and freedom

of expression is a must. We must develop tolerance for accepting a

contradictory or a different view about the same situation or

state. We must learn to respect the views of our opponents in every

walks of life. Tolerance for different or contradictory views

Bhinnamata Sahishnuta is the very basis of democratic way of life.



    Freedom of thought and freedom of expression as envisaged by

Democrats are in no way different from the teachings of Anekant

Vaad.



    Jainism thus provides for the philosophical foundation of

Democracy.





******************************

Posted by: Ajay Shah

for the Hindu Students Council

******************************

Team Blog

Dear All,

With regards to a nice suggestion from Mr. Hemal Modi, I would like to invite you all to join this blog so that you can post articles of your choice. Please email me at jjhaveri@gmail.com if you would like to join and I will extend you an invitation.

Jai Jinendra

Micchami Dukkadam

Hi All,

Micchami Dukkadam, to all of you. According to my knowledge, the meaning of micchami dukkadam is ""On this auspicious occasion, after the Paryushan and Samvatsari pratikaman,
I wish you all Micchami Dukkadam! I ask forgiveness for any harm I may
have caused you, by thoughts, words or actions, knowingly or unknowingly.". Would someone like to improve this translation? Does anyone know the exact translation (if its different from the one I described)?

Jainism Literature Center at Harvard

http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~pluralsm/affiliates/jainism/

How does Jainism fit in Hinduism?

A nice article I found on a usenet group:

Vedic, Bauddha and Jaina are branches of Sanatana Dharma. Jainism is

certainly as old as the Vedic dharma. Two of its 24 Tirthankaras, Rishaba and

Arishtanemi, are mentioned in the Rig Vedas. Rishaba, the first of the

Tirthankaras, is believed to be the founder of Jaina dharma while Mahavira is

the last.



Jainism, Buddhism and Carvaka systems are considered nastika

(heterodox) sampradaya of Sanatana Dharma while Nyaya, Vaiseshka, Sankhya,

Yoga, Purva Mimansa and Vedanta are the called astika or orthodox systems.

I give below a comparison between Jainism and Hinduism in general and

between Jainism and Sankhya darshan in particular:



Jainism and Hinduism

--------------------

1. Jainism rejects the rituals of Vedas i.e. the Karma Kanda of the

Vedas and also the caste system. Of course Vedic rituals (Karma Kanda) are

really for beginners. Jains, however, want to have nothing to do with them

from the very beginning. Also the caste system as propounded by Sri Krishna in

the Gita is a merit based system while caste system as seen in Hindu society is

a birth based system. That is Hindus do not follow Sri Krishna's advice.



2. It does not accept God as the creator of the world. According to

Jaina sampradaya the universe is beginning-less (anadi), endless (ananta) and

operates according to natural laws. The various Vedantic sampradayas have

different views on the subject. Advaita Vedanta holds that The Ultimate Reality

is impersonal and the world is a projection and is ultimately unreal. There is

a Personal God but such a God is ultimately unreal also. The other schools of

Vedanta like Vishistadvaita and dvaita hold the Ultimate Reality as Personal

and that the universe is real. There are other Vedantic schools which give

equal importance to impersonal and personal God (Bhedabhed, Sri Ramakrishna's

school).



3.Both Jainism and Hinduism believe in the immortality of the soul and

in the law of Karma. Both accept the doctrine of Ahimsa (non-violence). But

Jainism makes Ahimsa its central doctrine and it is the first of the five vows,

(ahimsa (non-violence), satya (truthfulness), asteya (non-stealing),

brahmacharya (chastity) and aparigraha (non-attachment)) taught by the last

Tirthankar.



4. The goal of life according to Jainism is to attain Kevala. You may

wonder that since there is no Personal God what does attaining Kevala mean?

It is necessary to discuss the concept of Jiva in Jainism to understand this.

There are two independent and distinct categories of Reality, Jiva (soul) and

Ajiva [matter(pudgala), space(akash), time (kala), dharma, and adharma]. A

liberated Jiva has perfect knowledge, purity, peace etc. A bound Jiva has a

body and is associated with karmic forces. Jainism considers karmic forces to

be matter like which actually cover the glory of soul. The analogy given is

like a lamp covered by soot. To attain Kevala means to restore the glory of the

soul by removing the covering of Karma. The Jain teaching is not that different

from Advaita Vedanta. Both Kevala and Mokhsha allow jivas to transcend the

world of names and forms. It is necessary to take the five vows (mentioned in

point (2) and to follow the three jewels (right faith, right knowledge, and

right conduct) to attain Kevala. Kevala can be reached by one's own effort.

There is no savior. The person wanting Kevala must do selfless work without

desire for rewards. Jainism emphasizes ascetism.





So Jainism is infact quite similar to Advaita Vedanta specially to the

path of Karma Yoga and Jnana Yoga. There is some similarity with Sankhya

as both reject the idea of a creator God. The differences between them are in

defining certain concepts like jiva. In jainism, jiva is characterized by

consciousness, life, immateriality, and extension in space. The size of the

individual soul is the same as the size of the body it occupies; expanding and

contracting. In Sankhya, purusha is an eternal,immutable, conscious entity

which is nonactive and has neither birth or death. So there is no question of

contraction or expansion of the jiva. It is the phenomenal self, a blend of

purusha and mind, which is subject to change. There are also other differences.





Jainism and Sankhya

-------------------



All Indian philosophical systems are concerned with four basic issues:

Jiva (individual soul), Jagat (world), Brahman/Ishwar (Absolute/Personal God)

and Mokhsa (liberation). We have to compare the position of Jaina dharma and

Sankhya darshana on these four issues to be able to see the similarities and

differences.



1. Brahman/Ishvara



Both Jaina dharma and Sankhya darshana deny the existence of a creator

God.



2. Jagat



If you deny the existence of a creator then you have to face the

problem of explaining the existence of the world. As we will see these two

systems solve the problem in two different ways.



Jaina dharma denies there is any creation. To understand the Jaina

position we have to know that there are two major categories in Jaina dharma,

Jiva (individual soul) and Ajiva (non-soul). Jiva and Ajiva comprise the whole

of universe and both are eternal. To those who think that there needs to be a

creator to create the universe, the jainas ask: who will create the creator?

In Jaina view it is dangerous to assume the existence of a creator as it will

create the need for more creators. It is best to terminate the series at the

level of jiva and ajiva, both of which are eternal. The world is real in Jaina

view unlike Advaita Vedanta for example.



Sankhya darshana also denies that there is any creation but in a

different manner. Sankhya darshana also has two categories, Purusha and

Prakriti. Purusha is pure Consciousness while Prakriti contains within itself

the materials for the universe which evolves into mind and matter. There are

many Purushas but only one Prakriti. The entire universe has come out of

prakriti by the proximity of Purusha and into it it will return. There has

been no creation and so there will be no destruction. So Prakriti may be

thought of as the uncaused cause of the universe. Sankhya darshana postulates

evolution of a real universe from a primordial prakriti (satkarya vada).



3. Jiva



According to Jaina dharma, Jiva (individual soul) is characterized

by consciousness, life, immateriality and is madhyama-parimana (middling size)

. The individual occupies the whole of the body in which he dwells, changing

with the body as it changes. This idea of a changing soul is strikingly

different from the idea of the eternal, immutable, conscious Purusha of

Sankhya.



4. Mokhsa



All major sampradayas of Sanatan Dharma agree that Mokhsa is

liberation from the bonds of Karma and rebirth. Jaina Dharma is unique in that

it postulates that Karma is something material albeit very fine as not to be

perceived by the senses. As the soul comes into contact with the material

world it experiences desire for enjoyment, for example, which causes the karma

molecules to flow into the soul and change its size. This flowing in of Karma

particles into the soul is called asrava and is unique to Jaina metaphysics.

Then the molecules become settled and build up a body on the soul called

karmana sarir. Even when the physical body dies the soul together with the

karmana sarira live on until the final liberation. Moksha essentially means

freeing the soul from the weight of the karma particles accumulated over many

births.



In Sankhya darshana a jiva is bound when he identifies through

ignorance with his mind, intellect and body. Liberation is achieved when the

jiva realizes that he is pure consciousness or Purusha. The jiva has apart from

the gross body also a subtle body which consists of the intellect, mind and

the senses. When the gross body dies the subtle body which contains the

impressions due to Karma exists. These impressions on the subtle body

determines the next birth. Thus in Sankhya the soul is kept constant while

Karma which is non-material affects the subtle body of the Jiva.







Regards

Was originallly written by Pradip Gangopadhyay
Original Link

Some more Links

This site contains tons of links on Jainism. Some of this links might have been duplicated on our blog.
http://www.nepaljain.com/jainweblinks.htm

Jainism Database

http://www.ibiblio.org/jainism/

Outline of Jainism History

http://www.cs.colostate.edu/~malaiya/jainhout1.html

Jain Terms

Great collection of the meaning of some of the Jain terms we use in our day to day routine
http://www.jcgb.org/jain_terms.asp

Meaning of word Jai Jinendra

Jai Jinendra !



I was very happy to know that you wanted to know the meaning of "Jai

Jinendra".  The word Jain came from "Jin".  We are the followers of

"Jin" so we are called Jain.  "Jin" means one who have achieved Jeet

(Victory) over internal and eternal enemies including Karmas.  They are

the Enlightened Souls who have achieved Omniscience (Pure and complete

knowledge - all knowing, all seeing, can observe past present and future

of the entire universe).



They have showed us the true path to achieve salvation.  By saying Jai we

are praising the glory of those great Souls (Tirthankaras) and by doing

this indirectly we are trying to internalise and imbibe their greatness in

ourselves.  By Jinendra we are saluting and appreciating the virtues of

tose Jins who also have achieved full control over their Indriyas

(Senses).  Every Jain or on fact everyone should always start the

communication (both written and oral) with "Jai Jinendra".  By admiring

the greatness of these Emancipated Souls we get benefitted and feel more

purified at the same time achieving further victories over our Karmas.

Thats all for now,  I hope this helps.



Narendra R. Shah (Visaria)

      M.B.A. (U.S.A.)  

Why are you, or any other Jains, trying to use words with ordinarily

> Why are you, or any other Jains, trying to use words with ordinarily

> means a deeply intimate encounter with the Supreme Lord, and

> twist it to mean something else?



I, for one, as a Jain, tend to agree with the question you raise even

though your emotions are foreign to me.  The "ordinary" meaning of the

word prayer cannot be dissassociated, at least in the minds of most

theists or animists etc. who postulate either a Supreme Lord or spirits or

super-natural entities, from some deeply associated notion of communion.

In particular when one talks to a Hindu or a Christian or a Muslim, prayer

has and can have one and only one meaning -- in the case of the former,

the deity at whom the prayer is aimed and in the latter, the Supreme Lord.

If you believe in Vedanta, then too, it is my understanding that prayer is

aimed at the Supreme or Universal Consciousness.



That is why I think that the Jain practice of what is (wrongly IMHO)

called prayer is so radical that in modern times, it ought not to be

called prayer at all -- if only for the simple reason that according to

Jains, there is nothing or no one to pray to.  Jains pray in the same

outward form that Hindus pray, the words sound similar (e.g. Bhaktamar

stotra which to my mind is dripping with Hindu imagery) and many of the

puja rituals were self-consciously copied from Hindus.  Yet, if you ask

most educated Jains (I mean people who have their Jain philosophy straight

-- not many around sadly) they will tell you that no "true" Jain would

pray to the Lord Arihant for anything -- it would be a sign that one has

not even begun to understand what Jainism is about.



In my family for example nobody ever uses the vernacular form "prarthana."

One uses "darshan" (glimpse) or if one is making ritual offerings one

calls it puja (worship).  Some Jains worship idols (not all do) some the

books (not all do) and some nothing at all -- they make NO ritual

offerings (my family does but I think the other groups who don't may have

the better end of the argument here).  But when they worship, it is a sign

of reverence and respect, much as a student making a grave and respectful

obeisance before a Nobel Prize winner before sitting down to take lessons.

It is not a sense of bowing before a superior or divine power that is

qualitatively different from oneself -- no Christian or Muslim would dare

do this -- it would be considered a vile sacrilege to make such a daring

comparison.  By contrast, Jain sadhus are expressly forbidden to pray in

this sense or to do puja.



As an alternative consider the idea that when a "true" Jain "prays"

(s)he is not praying a la any theistic interpretation of prayer.  Jain

prayer is an euphimism for meditation and invocation and as I have

said before, psychological reinforcement.  As a Jain, I choose to

abide by some values.  These values must, consistently, guide my all

actions big or samll.  This is hard to do because we are human and

thus fallible.  Here fallible means inconstant, unable to hold one

idea fixed in the mind for long, incapable of purging ourselves of

akrasia or weakness of the will, like the classical monkey dark and

intoxicated with rage who is unable to sit still for one moment.  For

such fallible human beings, it is but human nature that we shall fail

to consistently implement our code of conduct.



Consider then the possibility that Jain philosophical ideas indicate that

*it is our failure to see that at all times it is our failure to follow

the code itself that is the cause of all grief* -- i.e. the Jain

philosophers realize(d) that in some measure self-reflexivity is the way

to cut the Gordian knot of misery and samsara.  Why it should logically

follow that such enlightened self-recognition leading to the control of

one's actions leads to liberation of the soul or indeed whether there

exists a soul at all?  What if there is no soul and no moksha?



We do not know these answers -- the all seeing perfect ones have told

us it is thus and thus we believe it to be.  Hence Jainism like any

other belief system requires faith -- faith that there is a soul and

that right conduct is the way to liberation and that one is

responsible for one's own liberation.  And it basically requires faith

that the great teachers, the arihantas were not wrong.  That is all

though -- it requires no assumption of divinity, no assumption of

magic, supernatural or miracles -- it is relatively baggage free

(though once you postulate soul karma action and samsara, you have a

pretty large bag already) of stuff that one might call extra-human or

super-natural.  Thus it does not need a God -- the soul and the

principle of Karma replace the notion of God in a sense.



From these basic principles, the Jains derive codes of conduct and

urge you to walk the path -- as with any journey, what the traveller

can narrate of their journey in a retelling of it is but an

infinitesimal fraction of the true experience (a map cannot describe

reality without becoming reality itself etc.)  -- it is the

psychological transformation within that is the reward for the

journey.  As with physical travel, one who has travelled realizes that

it is hopeless to try and explain what one has learnt to one who has

not travelled at all.  It is a bit like trying to talk about jets and

germs to someone who has had at most a bad high-school geometry curse

(revealing slip wasn't that?) and no algebra at all.



In this schema, it is ourself that we are trying to improve and only

we can do that -- no external power can change our minds so praying to

someone else for material benefits is sort of missing the joke.

Consequently, Jain "prayer" is an affirmation of adherence to a code

established by the tirthankars, followed by the siddhas, preserved by

achrayyas, taught by the upadhyayas and preserved by the sa(d)hus.

Hence the panch parameshthi or the five supreme entities saluted in

the naokar mantra are venerated for having discovered, preserved and

taught as well as exemplified the right path -- it is their conduct

that one vows to emulate (however imperfectly) and to improve one's

own conduct by dwelling on how one has been imperfect, how one might

have responded differently, whether a different response would have

been bette and how one might resolve to deal with it next time.  It is

this sort of mundane "reflection" that is the closest I can describe

to what "prayer" means to me.



Consequently, I do agree that there is no sense of communion with a

Supreme Lord in my mind when I "pray" since I deny the neccessity of a

Supreme Lord and if there need not be one then in my system of belief

anyway it is baroque and an offense againt logic to postulate one.  I

will go further and say that if the Supreme entity is not required,

for one to exist would be superfluous and thus would negate the

essentiality that must axiomatically characterize a supreme being.  At

least so I understand the traditional Jain argumnt(s) against the

notion of a Creator entity or a personal God.



Now of course this soul and moksha business that I and many other

Jains I know believe in is all perhaps still only one, perhaps highly

defective, and probably fairly simple-minded way to evade a deeper

more troubling question: - why do we need this elaborate edifice of

beleifs?  What happens if we jettison all these things -- soul, kriya

and karma? It would be hard to govern our passions.  And frightening

beyond belief.  Thus all these assumptions and elaborations seem to me

at times to be little more than very baroque mechanisms to help us

bear the terrifying realization that after our death there may be

nothing -- the pure materialisis may be the one who turn out to have

the last laugh.  None the less presently I call myself Jain because I

cannot face the fact that after my death it is just "game over"

flashing on some little video screen in the great network in the sky,

or that it is simply the ceasing to be of a random collection of

chemcials.  So perhaps it is a bit more comforting to say that is a

soul that survives.  But beyond that, why there should be a God is a

question I find quite meaningless.  Thus the notion of praying or of

communion with some universal principle seems redundant to me.



I want to make it clear that personally, I now believe that the entire

notion of swarga and narak (heaven and hell respectively) the notion

of gods and goddesses etc. that Jains believe in were the result of a)

old aministic traditons that are intertwined with the roots of

pre-Mahavir Jainism (about which little can be deciphered directly)

and b) partly consciously adopted to ease the assimilation of

heretical (to Hindus) Jains in the midst of a mainstream community of

Hindu theists.  Thus in modern times, when surrounding society does

not exert norm of conformance with respecct to religion as strongly as

in the past, I feel free to jettison the fantastic elements of Jain

mythology as pablum for the masses of that time and to concentrate on

the underlying psychical foundations and motivations that Jain

practice seeks to grapple with.



However, I still do find it disturbing to think that after we are gone

there may be nothing at all -- and that I find it disturbing that I

find it disturbing is even more disturbing etc.., so I seem to be a

Jain out of psychological weakness -- not a shining example of faith

either!!



This started out as a discussion of prayer, so let me end by saying

that the thought process that writing this has generated to me is the

same as "prayer" -- when I think of its effect on my psyche, I think

serious philosophical discussion is the closest thing to prayer that I

can think of as a Jain.  It is the dialogue that enables me to see

more clearly what I understand and what I do not and what thus I need

to think about, read about and learn about more.  It is part of the

journey.  Prayer too is simply a part of the journey, though I agree

that we should call it something else -- Maybe Jain prayer instead of

prayer would be a more accurate term to always use but common usage

and human nature is against this.  I do agree with you that Jains do

not pray in your sense -- the notion of prayer in your sense is

meaningless to me as a Jain and I think to some (many?) other Jains as

well.



One final thought: I think that the whole stuff about colors and healing

power of prayer etc. needs to behandled with extreme care and with hugely

more precision than it is being handled at present in this discussion.

Does prayer improve one's psychological state?  Maybe.  Can this have a

healing effect -- certainly can make things more bearable as in the effect

of an opiate but can it cure cancer?  No way.  Can one see a golden glow

when one recites naokars?  maybe.  Can this elevate one's sprit?

Possibly.  Can this golden glow cure a fever?  Pretty doubtful.  One

*must* distinguish between pshychological state alteration and physical

miracles.  Prayer (meditation) has psychological effects and these may be

*very* useful to a physican as part of a tool kit of phramacological

concoctions, surgical and non-invasive procedures and psychological tools,

but to claim that prayer can cure cancer is a meat product of a kind I

will not name. 



I personally prefer to disassociate this sort of what I call psychic

charlatanry from serious meditation and philosophical discussion -- the

former i best left IMHO to weak-minded and credulous people. My impression

is that above all Jainism is empirical-logical at heart, it is most

emphatically not a religion based on blind faith in any super-powered

entity.  Anything that mitigates this basic thrust is anathema.



Back to lurking for a while.



rajib

Online Bhaktamara and Navkara

http://www.jain.8k.com/jainsong.html