Difference between revisions of "Jainism"
m (Reverted edits by Theologian (talk) to last revision by Karajou) |
Theologian (Talk | contribs) (what I have written is the correct description of jainism. I have added the actual scripture as the reference.) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | '''Jainism''' | + | '''Jainism''' means liberation path shown by Jina. In Jina's path, different types of descriptions are found from different angles |
| + | of different standpoints in different contexts. At some places, description is found with the prominence of real standpoint; the | ||
| + | same should be known "to be exactly true". And at other places description is found with the prominence of | ||
| + | conventional standpoint; the same should be known that" it is not so, it is described to be so conventionally from | ||
| + | the instrumental cause, etc. point of view." Knowing in this way only constitutes the acceptance of both the | ||
| + | standpoints. But knowing the description of both the standpoints as equally true i.e., "this is also true and that is also | ||
| + | true" - in this way knowing and accepting both standpoints fallaciously, is not advocated. | ||
| − | + | From real point of view, the [[soul]] substance is a self-evident entity separate from other substances and inseparable from its own qualities; those who are not able to identify it, if discoursed repeatedly in this way, then they would not be able to understand. Therefore, to make them understand | |
| + | is explained by means of conventional standpoint through its embodied forms of human-hellish-earthen beings in association with other substances like | ||
| + | body, etc.; then "the human being is [[soul]], the hellish being is [[soul]]" - they are able to identify the [[soul]] along with its embodied forms. | ||
| + | Or (for the sake of explanation) by creating divisions in the indivisible substance, the details of soul are stated through knowledge, perception, etc. attributes and modifications. Then the knower is the [[soul]], the seer is the [[soul]] - with these different traits, they are able to identify the [[soul]]. | ||
| + | Further, from real point of view, passionlessness is the path of liberation. Those who do not understand this, if discoursed repeatedly in this way, then they would not be able to understand. Therefore, by means of conventional standpoint, the details of passionlessness are explained to them in the form of observance of vows, chastity, continence, etc. in relation to dissociation of the instrumentality of other substances; then they are able to identify passionlessness. | ||
| − | + | Further, from the viewpoint of getting rid of the instrumental cause of other substances, the observance of vows, chastity, continence, etc. is stated to be the liberation path; so one should not believe their observance only to be the liberation path; for, if adopting and forsaking of other substances be possible for the [[soul]] then the [[soul]] would become the doer and the destroyer of other substances. But no substance is dependent on other substance. Therefore, the soul becomes passionless by renouncing the feelings of attachment, etc. So, in reality, passionlessness only is the liberation path. In some way, there is cause and effect relationship between passionlessness and observance of vows, etc., therefore, observance of vows, etc. is stated to be the liberation path; this statement is for the sake of statement only. In reality, the external conduct is not the liberation path.<ref>http://jainworld.com/pdf/Moksha%20Marg%20Prakashak.pdf</ref> | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | < | + | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | </ | + | |
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
| Line 22: | Line 20: | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
[[Category:Jainism]] | [[Category:Jainism]] | ||
[[Category:Dharmic Religions]] | [[Category:Dharmic Religions]] | ||
Revision as of 21:22, June 18, 2019
Jainism means liberation path shown by Jina. In Jina's path, different types of descriptions are found from different angles of different standpoints in different contexts. At some places, description is found with the prominence of real standpoint; the same should be known "to be exactly true". And at other places description is found with the prominence of conventional standpoint; the same should be known that" it is not so, it is described to be so conventionally from the instrumental cause, etc. point of view." Knowing in this way only constitutes the acceptance of both the standpoints. But knowing the description of both the standpoints as equally true i.e., "this is also true and that is also true" - in this way knowing and accepting both standpoints fallaciously, is not advocated.
From real point of view, the soul substance is a self-evident entity separate from other substances and inseparable from its own qualities; those who are not able to identify it, if discoursed repeatedly in this way, then they would not be able to understand. Therefore, to make them understand is explained by means of conventional standpoint through its embodied forms of human-hellish-earthen beings in association with other substances like body, etc.; then "the human being is soul, the hellish being is soul" - they are able to identify the soul along with its embodied forms. Or (for the sake of explanation) by creating divisions in the indivisible substance, the details of soul are stated through knowledge, perception, etc. attributes and modifications. Then the knower is the soul, the seer is the soul - with these different traits, they are able to identify the soul. Further, from real point of view, passionlessness is the path of liberation. Those who do not understand this, if discoursed repeatedly in this way, then they would not be able to understand. Therefore, by means of conventional standpoint, the details of passionlessness are explained to them in the form of observance of vows, chastity, continence, etc. in relation to dissociation of the instrumentality of other substances; then they are able to identify passionlessness.
Further, from the viewpoint of getting rid of the instrumental cause of other substances, the observance of vows, chastity, continence, etc. is stated to be the liberation path; so one should not believe their observance only to be the liberation path; for, if adopting and forsaking of other substances be possible for the soul then the soul would become the doer and the destroyer of other substances. But no substance is dependent on other substance. Therefore, the soul becomes passionless by renouncing the feelings of attachment, etc. So, in reality, passionlessness only is the liberation path. In some way, there is cause and effect relationship between passionlessness and observance of vows, etc., therefore, observance of vows, etc. is stated to be the liberation path; this statement is for the sake of statement only. In reality, the external conduct is not the liberation path.[1]
See also
| ||||||||
