Best and brief conclusion on Buddhism and Jainism
Answers
Answered by
3
Jainism and Buddhism, though at first glance may appear to share a great deal in common, are not very much alike. Ethically, Buddhism and Jainism share a great deal, but that is where most of the similarities end.
Jain practitioners believe in souls, Buddhist do not. Although Buddhist believe that a person is reborn, this rebirth is not a transmigration of a soul. That which makes me, 'me', is the ego and the ego is a biological construct, NOT part of a soul. (If you want more information concerning this, you may post a question back asking about Buddhism and the soul, or lack there of.)
Jain practitioners advocate a great deal of fasting and even asceticism, or the abstaining of earthly pleasures. Buddhism teaches that the middle road, or the life of neither feast nor famine, is best. Meaning, that a person should not live life in luxury since nothing is permanent, but they should not live in pain or discomfort due to neglect or malnutrition either.
Jain practitioners believe that enlightenment and the realize from the cycle of life (moksha), death and rebirth, comes from withdrawal from the world. Karma is the cause-and-effect mechanism by virtue of which all actions have inescapable consequences. Karma operates to keep the jiva (immortal essence of a living being or a soul) chained in an unending series of lifetimes in which the jiva suffers to a greater or lesser extent. Thus the way of escape must involve an escape from karma. Buddhism teaches that although Karma is important and can cause good and bad consequences, enlightenment is NOT dependent on karma and a person with bad karma from their past is not excluded from the possibility of enlightenment.
However, despite these and other differences, the two faiths are both based on the idea of companion towards all living beings. It may be that although the paths are different, they both lead to the same destination.
Jain practitioners believe in souls, Buddhist do not. Although Buddhist believe that a person is reborn, this rebirth is not a transmigration of a soul. That which makes me, 'me', is the ego and the ego is a biological construct, NOT part of a soul. (If you want more information concerning this, you may post a question back asking about Buddhism and the soul, or lack there of.)
Jain practitioners advocate a great deal of fasting and even asceticism, or the abstaining of earthly pleasures. Buddhism teaches that the middle road, or the life of neither feast nor famine, is best. Meaning, that a person should not live life in luxury since nothing is permanent, but they should not live in pain or discomfort due to neglect or malnutrition either.
Jain practitioners believe that enlightenment and the realize from the cycle of life (moksha), death and rebirth, comes from withdrawal from the world. Karma is the cause-and-effect mechanism by virtue of which all actions have inescapable consequences. Karma operates to keep the jiva (immortal essence of a living being or a soul) chained in an unending series of lifetimes in which the jiva suffers to a greater or lesser extent. Thus the way of escape must involve an escape from karma. Buddhism teaches that although Karma is important and can cause good and bad consequences, enlightenment is NOT dependent on karma and a person with bad karma from their past is not excluded from the possibility of enlightenment.
However, despite these and other differences, the two faiths are both based on the idea of companion towards all living beings. It may be that although the paths are different, they both lead to the same destination.
Similar questions