Talk:Jainism - Definition and Overview

The article, by the aid of wiki's diligent contributors, is making significant progress. Considering the length, perhaps the time has arrived for us arrange the content into sections using sub-headers. Early History, Jain Society, Mahavira, etc. It may provide as encouragement and direct us to what needs to be further written about.
Suprisingly, much is written online about the founder and last Jaina, Mahavira. Usedbook 21:42 3 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Added links to Religions_of_the_world, Culture_of_India and India's_independence_movement. Removed link for ascetic as it appeared twice in 2 paragraphs. Removed a duplicate line regarding women attaining moksha.
Jay 10:54, Aug 15, 2003 (UTC)

Which is proper: "Jain teachings" or "Jainist teachings" ? LirQ

Jainas depicted as sinister overlords

In India, Jains—much like Jews in the United States—are over proportionately represented in positions of economic and political power. I've removed the phrase "much like Jews in the United States". Even if the statement about Jews in the US is true, it has no place in an article about Jainism.

the global diamond market is dominated by Jain-owned corporations. This claim, and the claim that Jainas are overrepresented in positions of power, are each potentially racist. They therefore require serious and substantial reference before being reinstated. Given the fact of De Beers, I am sceptical that such empirical evidence can be found for the diamond claim. I have therefore removed it. Adhib 15:52, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Root vegetables

As part of its stance on non-violence, Jainism goes beyond vegetarianism in that the Jain diet also excludes most root vegetables and certain other foods believed to be unnecessarily injurious.

Could someone explain this? Why is avoiding root vegetables in particular part of a non-violent stance? Josh Cherry 02:06, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Because in eating the root you kill the plant. Jains eat only trimmings and fruits, etc.. which allows the plant to continue living. Sam [Spade (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Sam_Spade&section=new)] 04:27, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Jains believe in non-violence,and there are living things in grains, vegetables, fruits and water also, however to survive one has feed himself. Therefore a Jain has to try kill minimum living things for his food. As rooted vegatbles do not receive direct sunlight and therefore, have much more living things in them than the vegetables which grow on the surface. Many persons who follow stricter practice do not consume vegetables and fruits on certain days of a month. (sig added by Sam [Spade (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Sam_Spade&section=new)] 17:59, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC))

The article, Vegetable Rights could use some cleanup and also benefit from your knowledge on this subject. Please take a look at it when you have time. --Viriditas 23:03, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Jain cosmology

The mythological description of the four yugas and the twenty-four Tirthankaras is none other than a metaphor for the Precession of the equinoxes. This is an interesting topic for Archaeoastronomy. See Santillana and von Dechend's, Hamlet's Mill for further ref. I suppose I should collect some good sources before editing this section. Unfortunately, you will not find credible sources on Google. --Viriditas 04:24, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

There are six AARA or YUGAS, not four as you mentioned. However, I will try to understand about "Precession of the equinoxes". Can I help you any way? Jayeshbheda

I do not state there are four yugas. This article states it as such: of these upward or downward swings is divided into four world ages (yugas). See Yuga. The way I understand it, the aara, or cosmic rotation, is merely a subdivision of the yuga. Here's a question for you: How long (in years) is each aara? You will find a relationship between these numbers and the Precession of the equinoxes. --Viriditas 22:45, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Wikisource:Religious texts

Any chance we can get someone to add the Jaina Sutras to Wikisource: Religious texts (http://wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Religious_texts)? --Viriditas 04:19, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Still biased

Unfortunately, this article is rather biased. Many religions like to imagine that they are as eternal as their gods, as well as self-evident, with no debt to any other religion. It is not, however, the place of Wikipedia to reproduce ahistorical religious propaganda from the point of view of its adherents. Could we please stop reverting to the propaganda, and finally delouse this entry of its bias?

Bias against Buddhism

The article asserts that Jainism is a seemingly eternal, endless truth (which its worshippers may believe, but others will not) and dismisses Buddhism, which non-believers would consider to be contemporary of Jainism, is simply an offshoot of it. No academic sources for either of these assertions are given. This religious grandstanding is not in keeping with Wikipedia's desire for neutrality.

Penile force

So, can someone tell me how "Jains have been a important and penile force in Indian culture..."? I went ahead and took it out since it didn't really make any sense to me unless Jains are the source of penises in India. - Mr d logan

Charge of Bias

The charge is that a religious zealot is editing the article and adding parochial content. Au contraire, mon ami. Recently added material contains verified and accepted facts with regard to the origins of Jainism and its influence on Buddhism. References have been included. The article clearly states that the idea that Jainism is "eternal" is itself a religious belief. The stated notion that it is a belief is a fact, and apart from this belief, verifiable historical dates are included. What is the problem with that? Similarly, if an article on Christianity states that Christians believe that the God of the Old Testament created the earth, is that a case of "religious grandstanding" or simply a description of the religion? Moreover, Mahavira is regarded in neither academic nor religious circles as the "founder" of Jainism (i.e., the one to whom the Jain religion/tradition/philosophy owes its origins). This being the case, the above claim that "non-believers" would consider Jainism as having been co-founded with Buddhism appears to be the personal bias of whoever is stating so. All evidence from both non-Jain and Jain primary sources points to pre-Mahaviran origins, and almost all if not all scholars accept the existence of at least Mahavira's predecessor Parshva (877-777 BC).

Please explain in what way Buddhism is being "belittled" and the article displays "religious grandstanding". If you have actual counterevidence to any information in the article, you are free to include it. If not, then the label placed at the beginning of the article -- calling it disputed -- seems unwarranted and an injection of bias. Wouldn't you agree?