Gamera

How do you know that?

Gamera

I'm not an authority on Hinduism, but I have in the past because of my interest in paleography looked up the ms history of Hindu religious texts. This isn't rocket science. They are all very late. Since the gap between the speculated origin of Hinduism is very early and the mss are very late, our certainty about the contents of early Hindu teaching is highly uncertain. This rebuts the claim that there are pre-Christian articulations of the teaching that we should love our enemies, or at least it throws it in doubt.

Again, Ethn, this isn't rocket science; it's just basic paleography. It is highly unconvincing to site a 12th century mss to claim an idea predated an idea expressed in a 3rd century mss. It's faulty reasoning.

Gamera

Now that that's settled, does the oldest mss contain the verse in question, which claimed to be an expression of the teaching that we should love our enemies.

I'd note the following from your link:

"Robert Henricks now presents the first English translation of the "bamboo slip Laozi." Differing substantially from other versions we have of the text, the Guodian Laozi provides us with clues on how and when the text came into being. As Henricks's translation shows, many chapters are missing in this form of the text, and some chapters remain incomplete. All of this seems to suggest that the Tao Te Ching was not yet "complete" when these slips were copied."

Identifying the passage should be simple for the proponent to provide, if it's there.

It's like pulling teeth.

EthnAlln

So all you've looked up is the dates of the Hindu manuscripts? If that was all you did with the Christian documents, you'd have to reject them as well, using the same canon. But, as you know, there are commentaries and references to these documents that fit together to form an interlocking system that does allow legitimate inferences as to the original text. You know that in regard to Christianity. Why don't you investigate it in regard to the Hindu documents as well? I'm rather sure you'll find a consistent picture that validates what the experts have said. As for me, I find no need to do so and don't have the time. I'm not putting myself in the position of overturning what the scholars say.

I'm really mystified as to why you are struggling so hard and introducing ad hoc hypotheses in the effort to prove that only Christianity ever discovered "love thy neighbor." As I said, it's like using your right hand to scratch your left ear. In a public debate, it's very inadvisable to base an argument on the assumption that all the experts in an area are wrong, and you, who know very little about it, are right.

Gamera

I've looked up the dates of the NT mss and the Hindu mss and the Buddhist mss. It's not hard. The NT mss are very early mss, earlier than the latter (except some Bhuddist fragments).

Everyone agrees the gap between Jesus life and the mss is relatively small. 100-150 years tops. Others place the gap much smaller.

The opposite is true about the the other traditions. Why does this upset you so?

EthnAlln

What mss are you talking about? The earliest Gospels I know of date to the ninth century. I suspect the ones you are thinking of are either very fragmentary or even purely inferential, based on commentaries whose manuscripts are also medieval. So what? I'm not challenging them. I agree that we can make many good inferences about what the early Gospels said.

What makes you think I'm upset? I assure you, I'm not. But I am struggling to discover why it's so important that Christian morality not have been prefigured or anticipated. You present a very crude requirement of essentially contemporary eyewitness testimony of non-Christian documents (something not available for the vast majority of human history) and demand to be shown that every detail is there before you will admit that the documents probably said what they did say. Yet you accept the Gospels, which certainly went through many editions before arriving at their present form. I don't see why the double standard?

Toto

I agree with you that the Hindu mss are late, and could show Christian influence, either from Nestorian missionaries or indirectly from Muslin sources. This is why Jesus is part of the pantheon in some eastern sects. (This just means that we cannot prove that the Hindu sources were not influenced by Christianity, not that any particular point of convergence must have been due to Christian influence.)

But the Chinese sources are ancient - the later one mentioned is still BCE. Since you are making a claim at variance with all the sources, perhaps you should put some effort into proving your position.

EthnAlln

OK, I"ll have a look at Jainism and see what I can turn up. This is a factual question we are discussing here.

But I still feel the need to point out Gamera's double standard. He is willing to believe that Christian doctrines got into Hindu works and doesn't require any paper trail to prove that. But to prove that the documents were of pure Hindu origin requires a paper trail. Not a very good canon for argument, I would say.

Diogenes the Cynic

The Vedas are extremely old, though. The Rig Veda, in particular may be as much as 10,000 years old.

There's no question that the major Buddhist and Hindu traditions as well as the Tao Te Ching greatly preceded Christianity. Absolutely no credible historian would tell you otherwise. I didn't even know that Christian apologists were egotistical enough to try to lay claim to them.

EthnAlln

I got this from a computer scientist's website at Colorado State. It isn't a work of scholarship, of course, but it looks reasonable to me. It gives a very clear picture of what Jainism is about and its history. If you e-mail the author, you might even get exact references. It is quite clear that most of the doctrines of Jainism are firmly in the Hindu tradition, and that they converge with Buddhist and traditional Hindu doctrines. The dating of Mahavira is also not something I've ever heard any doubt about (and I have read a few Jaina sources on my own in connection with Hindu mathematics). It is simply grotesque to claim that the resemblances to Christian doctrine embedded in the fundamental principles of Jainism are the result of Christian influence. Can anyone imagine Mahavira laying down four basic principles for his followers, which were followed as the absolute truth for many centuries, and then suddenly those same followers inserting a fifth great pillar of the faith? I don't see it.

Here's what I copied:

"In many cases, the historians do not accept a tradition until supporting evidence becomes available. For example, the Kalpa-Sutra gives a list of ancient orders (Ganas etc.) Many historians were not convinced of the historicity of this information until the excavations at Mathura un-earthed many inscriptions mentioning the very same orders. Several archaeological discoveries and studies of the Buddhist and Vedic/Puranic literature has confirmed the antiquity of the jain tradition. I will gradually add additional items and links to detailed information. The outline below will serve as an index.

Lord Mahavir was the twenty-fourth and the last Tirthankara of the Jain religion. According to Jain philosophy, all Tirthankaras were born as human beings but they have attained a state of perfection or enlightenment through meditation and self realization. They are the Gods of Jains. Tirthankaras are also known as Arihants or Jinas.

Tirthankara - One who establishes the four fold order (Monk, Nun, Layman, and Laywoman) of religion.

Arihant - One who destroys his inner enemies like anger, greed, passion, ego, etc.

Jina - One who conquers his inner enemies like anger, greed, passion, ego, etc. The followers of Jina are known as Jains.

Mahavir was born in 599 B.C. as a prince in Bihar, India. At the age of 30, he left his family and royal household, gave up his worldly possessions, including clothing and become a monk.

He spent the next twelve years in deep silence and meditation to conquer his desires and feelings. He went without food for long periods. He carefully
avoided harming or annoying other living beings including animals, birds, and plants.

His ways of meditation, days of austerities, and mode of behavior furnish a beautiful example for monks and nuns in religious life. His spiritual pursuit lasted for twelve years. At the end he realized perfect perception, knowledge, power, and bliss. This realization is known as keval-jnana.

He spent the next thirty years travelling on bare feet around India preaching to the people the eternal truth he realized. He attracted people from all walks of life, rich and poor, kings and commoners, men and women, princes and priests, touchables and untouchables.

He organized his followers, into a four fold order, namely monk (Sadhu), nun (Sadhvi), layman (Shravak), and laywoman (Shravika). Later on they are known as Jains.

The ultimate objective of his teaching is how one can attain the total freedom from the cycle of birth, life, pain, misery, and death, and achieve the permanent blissful state of one's self. This is also known as liberation, Nirvana, absolute freedom, or Moksha.

He explained that from eternity, every living being (soul) is in bondage of karmic atoms, that are accumulated by its own good or bad deeds. Under the influence of karma, the soul is habituated to seek pleasures in materialistic belongings and possessions. Which are the deep rooted causes of self-centered violent thoughts, deeds, anger, hatred, greed, and such other vices. These result in accumulating more karma.

He preached that right faith (samyak-darshana), right knowledge (samyak-jnana), and right conduct (samyak-charitra) together will help attain the liberation of one's self.

At the heart of right conduct for Jains lie the five great vows:

Nonviolence (Ahimsa) - not to cause harm to any living beings

Truthfulness (Satya) - to speak the harmless truth only

Non-stealing (Asteya) - not to take anything not properly given

Chastity (Brahmacharya) - not to indulge in sensual pleasure

Non-possession/Non-attachment (Aparigraha) - complete detachment from people, places, and material things.

Jains hold these vows at the center of their lives. The monks and nuns follow these vows strictly and totally, while the common people try to follow the vows as far as their life styles will permit.

At the age of 72 (527 B.C.), Lord Mahavir died and his purified soul left the
body and achieved complete liberation. He became a Siddha, a pure consciousness, a liberated soul, living for ever in a state of complete bliss. On the night of his salvation, people celebrated the Festival of Lights (Dipavali) in his honor. "


But if anybody is not convinced, I'll dig deeper.