Some Strange Notitions In Jaina Cosmlogy

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided text, "Some Strange Notions in Jaina Cosmology" by Dr. Sajjan Singh Lishk, focusing on the key concepts discussed:

The article "Some Strange Notions in Jaina Cosmology" by Dr. Sajjan Singh Lishk examines peculiar and historically significant cosmological beliefs within Jainism, contrasting them with other ancient cultures and modern scientific understanding.

1. Notion about the Shape of the Earth:

• Ancient Cosmological Diversity: The author begins by highlighting that many ancient civilizations developed unique cosmological views as they attempted to describe the world mathematically. Examples include the Greek notions of a cake-shaped earth (Anaximander), concentric crystal spheres (Pythagoreans), and the Earth as a cylinder. Japanese and Chinese views featured square earths and round heavens. Vedic beliefs described the earth as circular like a wheel or bowl-shaped.
• Jaina Conception of the Earth: Jainas, according to Lishk, believed the Earth was composed of a series of flat, concentric ocean rings. The central island was called Jambūdvipa, with Mount Meru at its center. This flat earth concept is attributed to the Jaina perception of the Sun's diurnal circles (mandalas) being concentric around Mount Meru. The increasing diameters of these mandalas over the earth's surface led to the visualization of circular land masses separated by ocean rings, implying a flat Earth.
• Contrast with Spherical Earth: The article notes that while Aristotle questioned the flat earth concept and Philolaus of Tarentum is credited with first suggesting a spherical Earth around 450 BC, Jaina canonical literature, in its current form attributed to the Council of Valabhi (circa 519-549 AD), does not contain the notion of a spherical Earth.
• Jaina Arguments Against a Spherical Earth: Lishk mentions that Jaina monk Abhay Sagar has logically argued against a spherical Earth, basing his inferences on archaeological and geographical evidence, such as the varying distance for one latitudinal degree, which he claims contradicts a spherical model.
• Modern Observations: The author also brings in modern space observations, suggesting that even today, the Earth is not perfectly spherical but oval-shaped.
• Sthāpānga Sūtra: The text references the Sthāpānga Sūtra, which describes the Earth's shape as being like a Jhallari (an earthern pot for cooking pulse), implying a form close to oval.

2. Theory of Two Suns and Two Moons:

• Counter-Body Concepts: The notion of "counter bodies" existed in other civilizations, such as the Chinese "Counter-Jupiter" and the Pythagorean "counter-earth," which were developed to explain celestial phenomena or achieve numerical completeness.
• Jaina Dualism: Jainas, similarly, had a theory of two Suns, two Moons, and two sets of Nakṣatras (asterisms), believed to move in circles parallel to the Earth's surface around Mount Meru.
• Addressing the Day-Night Cycle: The article explains that this theory was likely devised to address the problem of the Sun's apparent movement and the need to explain how different regions experience day and night. On a flat Earth, the Sun, after illuminating one region, would need to travel a significant distance to reach another. To circumvent this, the theory proposed two Suns (Bhārata and Airāvata), separated by half the orbit, to account for the entire diurnal cycle.
• Mathematical Utility vs. Literal Belief: L.C. Jain is cited suggesting that the concept of real and counter bodies might have been more for mathematical calculations rather than a literal belief in the existence of two Suns. The author speculates that the names "Bhārata" and "Airāvata" might have been used to represent the same Sun in different contexts, particularly to account for the phase difference between the Sun's southern and northern journeys due to the solar year not aligning perfectly with integral solar mandalas. This theory served as a functional astronomical model for centuries to address practical cosmological problems.

3. The Theory that the Moon is 80 Yojanas Higher than the Sun:

• Specific Jaina Texts: The article cites Sūrya Prajñapti (S.P. 18) and other Jaina texts like Jivabhigama Sūtra and Jambudvipa Prajnapti, which state that the Sun moves at a height of 800 Yojanas above a plane portion of the Earth, while the Moon moves at 880 Yojanas. This means the Moon is considered 80 Yojanas higher than the Sun.
• Traditional Explanation: One proposed explanation is that since stars are visible at night when the Moon moves among them, and the Moon is observed in the same celestial sphere as the stars, it was natural to believe the Moon was higher than the Sun.
• Technical Interpretation of "Height": Lishk delves deeper, suggesting that "height" in this context refers to distances measured from a "plane portion of the earth" (Samatala Bhumi), a technical term in Jaina astronomy. This plane is defined as being at a distance of 800 Yojanas from the Sun's apparent path (the ecliptic). The center of this plane is projected from the pole of the ecliptic onto the Earth's surface.
• Lunar Orbit and Celestial Latitude: The article explains that the Moon's orbit is inclined to the ecliptic. When the Moon is at its ascending or descending node, its height above Samatala Bhumi is the same as the Sun's. However, when the Moon moves between these nodes, it can be higher than the Sun relative to Samatala Bhumi. Therefore, the concept of the Moon being "higher" than the Sun likely refers to the maximum celestial latitude of the Moon. This interpretation aligns with similar ideas found in commentaries on the Surya Siddhanta and the text Goladipika.

In conclusion, Dr. Sajjan Singh Lishk's article sheds light on some of the unique and complex cosmological ideas found in Jainism. These notions, particularly concerning the Earth's shape and the dual celestial bodies, reveal a sophisticated, albeit different, approach to understanding the universe compared to other ancient traditions and modern science. The paper emphasizes the need to interpret these concepts within their specific historical and textual contexts, highlighting the mathematical and practical considerations that likely influenced their development.