Jainism and Other Indian Religions

By Mr. P. L. Jain 

Jainism has all the characteristic features of the Indian religions in the historical as well as morphological context. Like Hinduism and Buddhism, the focus of its metaphysics is the doctrine of Karma, re-birth and salvation, the periodic course of world history and the regular appearance of harbingers of salvation agree in their basic features with those of the other two religions. This is also natural because all three religions have grown from the same root, have blossomed next to one another for centuries and have influenced one another most intensely.

1. Jainism and Hinduism : The points of agreement between Jainism and Hinduism are extraordinarily extensive. In social and cultural life, there is very little difference between a Jaina and a Hindu. The social and ritual practices of a Jaina are mainly like those of Hindus who do not eat meat and drink alcohol; they are different in as much as Jainas emphasize more strongly on the principles of Ahimsa, and that is why they generally do not eat or drink anything after sunset. Some of the differences with respect to rituals is that Jainas do not give any significance to bathing in the holy rivers, in not offering sacrifices to the dead and believing in the theory of a supreme authority controlling the whole universe as also multiplicity of various Gods, Goddesses and deities affecting the fortunes of human beings. From social angle, these and other differences are negligible and Jainas in a larger sense accept themselves as belonging to Hindu culture. Jainas often visit Hindu temples of Rama, Krishna and Shiva and celebrate Hindu festivals and Hindus as well visit Jaina temples, though might not perform worshipping rituals, like how Jainas do.

Inspite of all the similarities, from religious and philosophical angle, the differences between the teachings of Jainas and Hindus are very significant. Jainas do not pay much cognizance to Vedas, the sacred boos of Hindus. They have a different tradition and have their own scriptures. They have a well-defined dogmatic system, which is accepted as true by all who belong to Jaina community. Jainism has learnt and borrowed a great deal in the course of time from the philosophy of Brahamanas, e.g. yoga and tantrism, inspite of its independence and differences. The Hindu legends have exerted significant influence on the Jaina hagiography. Jainas have borrowed stories of Ramayana, Mahabharata and others and reworked them in accordance with their taste. They of course do not concede this and explain that they bequeath the stories is alone genuine and authentic and the Brahamanic form of old legends is a later falsification. According to Jaina philosophers, Hinduism in its very inception was an offshoot of Jainism, the former being the oldest religion on the earth. 

Jainism has also influenced the Saivite-systems. G. U. Pope in his book, The Tiruvacagam, (Oxford-1900), thinks that the doctrine of Saiva-Siddhanta of the three fetters (Pasa) or impurities (Mala) which estrange soul from its true nature is reminiscent of Jaina-ideas. Thus, one can not deny the influence of Karma theory of the Jainas upon the doctrine of Anava, Karma and Maya-mala. Even in recent periods, Jainas do have significance for the spiritual life of Hindus. Dayanand Sarswati (1824-1883), the founder of Arya Samaja, was influenced, as J. N. Farquhar in his book, "Modern religious movements in India" (Newyork-1915), has shown, probably by the example of Sthanakwasis, who had assumed a prominent position in his native place Tankara (in Kathiavad), to condemn iconolatry, and the Jaina ideas must have certainly influenced Mahatma Gandhi, the leader of the Indian nationalists, when he proclaimed "non-violent civil disobedience". Although Gandhi was a Vaishnava, he was under a strong influence of Jainism, when his mother made him take a vow before a Jaina Sadhu that he will abstain in the occident from meat, alcohol and women, before he went on his journey to England for his studues.

2. Jainism and Buddhism : The question whether between Jainism and Buddhism, there is a historical connection, has occupied the mind of scholars who are studying Jainism since it became known in Europe. Jainas themselves believe that Buddhism is a heterodoxy which was propagated by a defected Jaina monk. According to one version, the ascetic Buddhakirti from Parshwa's school saw, when he had devoted himself to penance on the bank of river Sarayu, how a dead fish was washed away by flowing water at the place where he was sitting. He then thought that it could not be a sin to eat fish since it was without a soul, and he ate it. This act of his is said to have been the cause of schism from which Buddhismemerged. According to another report, another pupil of Parshwa, Maudgalyayana is said to have founded Buddhism as an expression of hatred against Mahavira. The view that Buddhism has emerged from Jainism was held also individually by European scholars, like Colebrooke, Prinsep, Stevenson and Editor Thomas. They base their theory upon the fact the name of one of  the pupils of Mahavira was Gautama, and then they identified him wrongly with Gautama Buddha.

Buddhists on the other hand consider that Jaina are heretics and charge that they had stolen the basic tenets of the doctrine from Buddha's books. H. Jacobi has conclusively established the invalidity of all the hypotheses which seek to let one religion derive from the other and has convincingly demonstrated that the agreements existing in two forms of faith, do not bring even a trace of evidence to say that both have only one origin. Still, it is a fact that Buddhism and Jainism are similar to one another in many respects. The fact emerges most clearly that Brahmanic writers often mix them with one another. There is a perfect agreement between the two in many points. Both deny the authority the Vedas and fight against the Brahmanic rule of the priests and the Brahmanic sacrificial practices. Both deny the existence of supreme personal God, but worship a number of saviours appearing at certain period of time. Their external forms are similar to those of the Hindus in many things. Both give their prophets the same honorific name (Arhat, Jina, Buddha), ascribe to them the same characteristics of beauty and provide them the same signs and symbols, a fact which aroused Hiuen tsiang’s interest. Both recognise a number of chakravartis (world rulers) and ascribe to them the same attributes. Both the doctrines advocate the principle of Ahimsa and proclaim in part the same ethical commandments. Among both, the order of monks and nuns are the back bone of community. The idea of similarity is strengthened by the fact that their prophets, buddha and Mahavira, were contemporaries and worked in the same region of Bihar and that in the life time of these two men, the same places and persons are mentioned. And few people who were close to these founders of religions,  had accidentally the same names because these names were a fashion at that time among the kshatriyas of Magadha. (The name of Mahavira's father was Siddharth, and this was also Buddha’s name as a prince;the name of Mahavira's wife was yasoda and Buddha's wife was Yashodara.)

Inspite of these similarities, the differences are also glaring. They have different scriptures and different history and tradition. At their root, they have altogether different philosophical views. Jainism teaches the existence of eternal, immaterial souls which, as long as they are bound to matter, wander about in Samsara. The principle of Buddhism however is that there is no ego and no soul. What one calls self, I or soul is, according to it, not of a constant dimension but a Santana of momentary "Dharmas", a chain of very different elements of existence which all exist only for a moment and when they have disappeared in the next, are replaced by the facsimiles of their self. This concept of non-existence of ego, which was for Buddha the most essential characteristic of their religion, is in sharp contrast to the doctrine of monads of soul which is held by Jainas. One also comes across further great differences in the fundamental concepts of the systems, in epistemology, in ethics, in the doctrine of Karma, and above all in the doctrine of Salvation. For a Jaina, Nirvana is reached when the soul has removed all the material particles polluting it with the help of spiritual discipline. The soul then remains there for ever in eternal bliss. Buddhism considers that salvation is only possible, once the painful, ephemeral immaterial character of the ago has been recognised, when the five groups of psychophysical existence (Skandha), do not enter into a new connection and Dharmas attain a state of quietude. Otherwise they come together to form a new individual after the death of a being on account of the power of Karma.

In the social organisation, among the Buddhists, the Sangha community comprised of only two classes, monk and nun. The laymen were outside it. They had no influence on its management. Jainas, on the other hand, consider that Sangha is four-fold because laymen and laywomen were also included in it besides monks and nuns. The laymen here, have an important position in the Sangha (called chaturvidha sangha) as its integrated part and have extensive rights, and thus control over the conduct of ascetics. For this loose connection between monks and laymen in case of Buddhists, the religion suffered a great set back when it was attacked by Brahmans and latter muslims. As a result, the Buddhism disappeared from the Indian sub-continent and the laymen became Hindus. Jainism owes its existence in India even today to its organisation. Though it also suffered with the changing times but still, its monk-hood has not been so much degenerated as the one of Buddhists and its faith has asserted itself in its home till the present day, and its doctrine is gaining popularity in other countries.

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

Mail to : Ahimsa Foundation
www.jainsamaj.org
R12111