There Jain Digambara religion in Indian subcontinent has ‘Naked Priest’ tradition in CK3. Namely: ‘Priests and zealous characters do not wear clothes’. It follows the real-life practices of Digambara (‘sky-clad’) ascetics who are – indeed – naked.
However, in CK3 terms, the ‘Naked Priests’ tenet extends that to the female zealous characters. Well, what is wrong with females specifically? Well, I would like to quote Paul Dundas, ‘The Jains’. Dundas writes on one of the difference between the Śvetāmbara and Digāmbara strains of Jainism, namely: the point of female delieverance and wider enlightenment:
I think that fragment speaks for itself: while Śvetambaras and Digambaras differed wildly, they both considered female public nudity something that was totally unthinkable. I do not think that going around their theology suits ‘Zealous’ Digambara characters any more than e.g. Christian female Zealous ruler would feel compelled to imitate clergy by officiating all the Holy Sacraments.
Well, so… While I also don’t think the Naked Priests should effect rulers at all, I would prefer if it – in the case of Jains – were limited to male characters. It may not be the biggest issue around (... or even a big issue), but this is my female bugbear, and I imagine it is quite easy to change.
However, in CK3 terms, the ‘Naked Priests’ tenet extends that to the female zealous characters. Well, what is wrong with females specifically? Well, I would like to quote Paul Dundas, ‘The Jains’. Dundas writes on one of the difference between the Śvetāmbara and Digāmbara strains of Jainism, namely: the point of female delieverance and wider enlightenment:
The early Śvetāmbara literature shows no sign that the possibility of female liberation was in any way controversial and the question must have arisen as a consequence of the Digāmbara insistence, confirmed from about the fifth century CE or so as a result of the final hardening of sectarian boundaries, that ascetic nudity was an essential component of the path to liberation. There can be some confidence about this, since important early Digāmbara texts, which can be located in about the third or fourth centuries CE, state that both monks and nuns can achieve deliverance.
The appearance of a fully worked out defence of this position in the eighth century suggests that female religiosity had been a topic of debate for some time previously. The basic premise for Digāmbaras and Śvetāmbaras alike is that female nudity is impossible for social reasons and, if one Śvetāmbara writer does refer to the existence of naked female ascetics (yoginī) amongst Hindus to suggest that this is not necessarily a cultural universal, all the sectarian polemicists accept that clothes are essential to enable women to function in any type of life, ascetic or otherwise.
Prabhācandra (eleventh century), who gives the fullest Digāmbara discussion available (NKC pp. 865–70), clearly regards this as the cornerstone of the rejection of female enlightenment. If, he says, it is a fact that a woman wandering around naked would inevitably be raped, then that must surely prove the point about the unsuitability of women for the ascetic life, while conversely, and somewhat disingenuously, he argues that naked Digambara monks are never the object of lascivious propositions by women. There cannot possibly be two different ascetic paths, nakedness and the wearing of clothes, which would bring about one result, enlightenment. Women, in other words, cannot be Jains in the same way as men.
The appearance of a fully worked out defence of this position in the eighth century suggests that female religiosity had been a topic of debate for some time previously. The basic premise for Digāmbaras and Śvetāmbaras alike is that female nudity is impossible for social reasons and, if one Śvetāmbara writer does refer to the existence of naked female ascetics (yoginī) amongst Hindus to suggest that this is not necessarily a cultural universal, all the sectarian polemicists accept that clothes are essential to enable women to function in any type of life, ascetic or otherwise.
Prabhācandra (eleventh century), who gives the fullest Digāmbara discussion available (NKC pp. 865–70), clearly regards this as the cornerstone of the rejection of female enlightenment. If, he says, it is a fact that a woman wandering around naked would inevitably be raped, then that must surely prove the point about the unsuitability of women for the ascetic life, while conversely, and somewhat disingenuously, he argues that naked Digambara monks are never the object of lascivious propositions by women. There cannot possibly be two different ascetic paths, nakedness and the wearing of clothes, which would bring about one result, enlightenment. Women, in other words, cannot be Jains in the same way as men.
I think that fragment speaks for itself: while Śvetambaras and Digambaras differed wildly, they both considered female public nudity something that was totally unthinkable. I do not think that going around their theology suits ‘Zealous’ Digambara characters any more than e.g. Christian female Zealous ruler would feel compelled to imitate clergy by officiating all the Holy Sacraments.
Well, so… While I also don’t think the Naked Priests should effect rulers at all, I would prefer if it – in the case of Jains – were limited to male characters. It may not be the biggest issue around (... or even a big issue), but this is my female bugbear, and I imagine it is quite easy to change.
- 3
- 1
- 1