Naman Jain | नमन जैन

@techscetica @TheKunwarKhan All the best for your website.

@ThisIsNJain @TheKunwarKhan read what I wrote

Gujaratis, Marwaris, Jains should not be allowed to impose their morality on other Hindu sects. Too much malarkey going on by these groups to ban pashu-bali which is our sacred rite as Shakti worshippers.

@samudragupt108 @TheKunwarKhan Did Jains interfere here? No. It was a Guj Hindu, a Vaishnav, who said this, not Guj Jain, Marwari Jain or any other Jain for that matter. Still Jains are being dragged here for no reason. Call out when we interfere. Otherwise no need to drag people from Jain Dharm unnecessarily.

@ThisIsNJain @TheKunwarKhan Agree and they should stay far away from our temples & traditions, no comments no ahimsa tamasha infront of any Hindu temple

@techscetica @TheKunwarKhan Half of the issue is people know Jain is a religion but they treat it as a caste.

I saw that — though the focus of the message was slightly different, the concern is valid and I hear it. The truth is, Jain philosophy and theology has never had a proper home on the internet — not in English, not presented visually, not with the intellectual depth it deserves. That changes soon. I'm building the first website that presents Jain philosophy, theology, and fundamentals visually — in plain English — alongside translated scriptures - YES - everything in English with the ability to translate in various languages. The kind of resource that clearly communicates how Jainism is, and always has been, an entirely independent philosophical civilization — never a branch of Vedic religion. We will finally be in a position to speak for ourselves, on our own terms. Stay tuned.

@techscetica @TheKunwarKhan It's the part where he said don't impose morality in other Hindu sects, that's where it felt like that. Even if it's not the case why people from Jain Dharma are getting dragged here. It was a Guj Hindu, a Vaishnav who said this, not a Guj Jain, Marwari Jain or any other Jain.

@ThisIsNJain @TheKunwarKhan he didn't imply its a sect. where did you guys get it from?? lmao

@VoiceOfSidd1 @TheKunwarKhan I am talking about this issue. Jains didn't say anything, it was a Gujarati Hindu, a Vaishnav not a Gujarati Jain, Marwari Jain or any other Jain who did. There was no need to drag Jains here, this time. You can complain about where they did, but not this instance.

@ThisIsNJain @TheKunwarKhan True. That's why they shouldn't interfere in hindu religion at any level.

@ShivamK96256649 @TheKunwarKhan Jains didn't interfere here. It's a Gujarati Hindu who said this, not Jains. Then why dragging Jains here unnecessarily.

@ThisIsNJain @TheKunwarKhan True then they should mind their own buisness.

@KShrikaanth Then the Hindu god can't be Vitrag. It goes against the definition of Vitrag. So it becomes self contradictory. Aadhi Bhagwan generally means First Lord with the Tirthankara being the "first teacher" or the one who first established the path to virtue, not the physical universe.

@ThisIsNJain You are going by second hand information I think. I understand Tamil. Interpretations do vary- but world originated form God is the straightforward meaning here God is omnipotent- nothing is impossible for god

The Bhagavad Gita has this very term, as do countless other texts of sanatana dharma, Hinduism. It isn’t specifically Jain at all. This is stretching unnecessarily and creating a rift where there is none. Bhagavad Gita duḥkheṣvanudvigna-manāḥ sukheṣu vigata-spṛhaḥ |
vīta-rāga-bhaya-krodhaḥ sthita-dhīr munir ucyate || Here is one from aShTAvakra gItA hātum-icchati saṁsāraṁ rāgī duḥkha-jihāsayā vītarāgo hi nirduḥkhas-tasminnapi na khidyati Mudduswami DIkShitar KRti (vātāpi gaṇapatiṁ ) in hamsadhwani vīta-rāgiṇaṁ vinuta-yoginaṁ

@KShrikaanth No it isn't. The first couplet doesn't say god created the world. And if Hindu Gods are also vitraag, then they also can't create the world.

@ThisIsNJain First kural- that is one interpretation. If as per Jain tradition, god did not create the world as vItarAga, then that kural does not lend itself to a Jain interpretation.

@KShrikaanth As for the first Kural couplet it literally mentions Adi bhagwan which is Adinath which is Rishabhdev our first Tirthankar. The first couplet – Just as 'A' is the first letter of all alphabets, the Arihant is the primary source or guide for the world towards liberation.

@KShrikaanth When did I say it is unique to Jains now. In Hinduism it is used in some places, I don't deny that. I still say it is largely used by Jains and Jains define their gods like this only.

@KShrikaanth There is a major agreement to it. And it is a Jain text. I don't know in which context it is used in Hindu text as Hindu gods are Raagi not Vitraagi. Tirthankars neither fullfill wishes nor take something from someone. Jains largely define their gods like it is mentioned here.

Let us leave Thirukkural out here. It is not definitely not a Jain text and there is no major agreement that it is. I am sure vItarAga is used in Jain texts. That is not a controversial statement. The vItarAga is as much Hindu as it is Jain. The uniqueness that was wrongly being put forward is what I am questioning

@KShrikaanth Actually they do. And the Vitraag part is largely and majorly used in Jain text. All our Tirthankars are referred to as Vitraagi. They don't have any Raag and Dwesh with anyone. Even if it is not uniquely associated with Jains. It is majorly associated with Jainism.

@ThisIsNJain Actually they don’t. The point is not so much about thirukkural here but about the vItarAga part which the author of the whites post claims to be uniquely Jain. That is incorrect

@ShaukeenBharat @naa_ganesan @sarpame Yes, agreed. The ground reality is comparatively diff from the one on X. There are some genuinely very good Shwet & Dig accounts on X from where you can learn a lot of stuff but some have now stopped posting, while some others now post very less.

@ThisIsNJain @naa_ganesan @sarpame I do appreciate your reply. Though other than these twitter accounts, I feel most people are genuinely good with both sects, even in terms of respect. I've both dig and Shvet frens n we visit each other's temples.

Don't know what's the motive of swetambers in changing iconography of ancient south digambara idols !

@ShaukeenBharat @naa_ganesan @sarpame I generally don't reply to this type of posts from both Shwetambars and Digambars, but I replied today as I thought you didn't know the context and all the drama which is going around here from the past few years between both of these sects.

@ShaukeenBharat @naa_ganesan @sarpame Yes, I totally agree. Both the community are responsible for the whole superiority & maligning the other nonsense. They will never learn. I was just explaining the current situation about why these posts about conversions were being uploaded suddenly. This was done as a response.

@ShaukeenBharat @naa_ganesan @sarpame Earlier I have tried to stop this fight but unnecessarily got dragged in it, so I have stopped interfering in these fights. This is a never ending issue at the moment.

@ShaukeenBharat @naa_ganesan @sarpame It will never end. And this acc is posting this type of post as a response to some Shwet handles who actually started it when Dig were busy defending Jains as a whole against Marathi Hindus who are angry with Jains because of Shwet monk's recent statement & Kabutar khaana issue.

@ShaukeenBharat @naa_ganesan @sarpame It's not a replaced pratima. This is the same pratima and was actually changed and enhanced using vajra lep.

@naa_ganesan @sarpame I agree. It's not just the case of polishing. There are key differences,like in width of snake hood, which does make it seem like replaced pratima.