I just discovered that Snakes and ladders originated in india!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snakes_and_ladders" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Snakes and Ladders originated in India as a game based on morality called Vaikuntapaali or Paramapada Sopanam (the ladder to salvation).[3] This game made its way to England, and was eventually introduced in the United States of America by game pioneer Milton Bradley in 1943.[3]
Vaikuntapali
The game was played widely in ancient India by the name of Moksha Patamu, the earliest known Jain version Gyanbazi dating back to 16th century. The game was called "Leela" - and reflected the Hinduism consciousness around everyday life. Impressed by the ideals behind the game, a newer version was introduced in Victorian England in 1892, possibly by John Jacques of Jacques of London.
Moksha Patamu was perhaps invented by Hindu spiritual teachers to teach children about the effects of good deeds as opposed to bad deeds. The ladders represented virtues such as generosity, faith, humility, etc., and the snakes represented vices such as lust, anger, murder, theft, etc. The moral of the game was that a person can attain salvation (Moksha) through performing good deeds whereas by doing evil one takes rebirth in lower forms of life (Patamu). The number of ladders was less than the number of snakes as a reminder that treading the path of good is very difficult compared to committing sins. Presumably the number "100" represented Moksha (Salvation). In Andhra Pradesh, snakes and ladders is played in the name of Vaikuntapali
The squares of virtue on the original game are Faith (12), Reliability (51), Generosity (57), Knowledge (76), Asceticism (78); the squares of evil are Disobedience (41), Vanity (44), Vulgarity (49), Theft (52), Lying (58), Drunkenness (62), Debt (69), Rage (84), Greed (92), Pride (95), Murder (73) and Lust (99)[4].
Snakes & Ladders
- Cittasanto
- Posts: 6646
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
- Location: Ellan Vannin
- Contact:
Snakes & Ladders
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.
He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
Re: Snakes & Ladders
Cool... I wonder if the old version of the game can be found anywhere?
With metta,
zavk
zavk
- Cittasanto
- Posts: 6646
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
- Location: Ellan Vannin
- Contact:
Re: Snakes & Ladders
It was on games britania last night on TV in the UK, moments before I posted this!
I was looking for a Buddhist Version, but no luck! the only two versions I could see are a Hindu and Jain but didn't look for a set!
I was looking for a Buddhist Version, but no luck! the only two versions I could see are a Hindu and Jain but didn't look for a set!
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.
He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
-
- Posts: 1614
- Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:21 am
- Location: By the River Thames near London.
Re: Snakes & Ladders
For just a sec Manapa I read your last sentence, " but didnt look for a self ! "
The going for refuge is the door of entrance to the teachings of the Buddha.
Bhikku Bodhi.
Bhikku Bodhi.
- Cittasanto
- Posts: 6646
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
- Location: Ellan Vannin
- Contact:
Re: Snakes & Ladders
Sanghamitta wrote:For just a sec Manapa I read your last sentence, " but didnt look for a self ! "
I stopped looking for one of those, found it to be futile, besides I have enough clinging to the self I think I don't have.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.
He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
-
- Posts: 1614
- Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:21 am
- Location: By the River Thames near London.
Re: Snakes & Ladders
I'm afraid that I still cling to the thought that I cling to the self that thinks it thinks.
The going for refuge is the door of entrance to the teachings of the Buddha.
Bhikku Bodhi.
Bhikku Bodhi.
- Cittasanto
- Posts: 6646
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
- Location: Ellan Vannin
- Contact:
Re: Snakes & Ladders
Suppose the saying 'I think therefore I am' & The alternative 'I think, I think therefore I am' are both forms of I am!Sanghamitta wrote:I'm afraid that I still cling to the thought that I cling to the self that thinks it thinks.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.
He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
Re: Snakes & Ladders
I think what you think is, 'I think, therefore I think I am,' but maybe it is, 'I think I think, therefore I think I am.'Manapa wrote: Suppose the saying 'I think therefore I am' & The alternative 'I think, I think therefore I am' are both forms of I am!
There are, of course, other possibilities.
All such constructions are, of course, snakes.
Kim
Re: Snakes & Ladders
I think, therefore thought is.
- Cittasanto
- Posts: 6646
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
- Location: Ellan Vannin
- Contact:
Re: Snakes & Ladders
no, I did put what I thinkKim O'Hara wrote:I think what you think is, 'I think, therefore I think I am,' but maybe it is, 'I think I think, therefore I think I am.'Manapa wrote: Suppose the saying 'I think therefore I am' & The alternative 'I think, I think therefore I am' are both forms of I am!
There are, of course, other possibilities.
All such constructions are, of course, snakes.
Kim
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.
He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
-
- Posts: 980
- Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 5:27 am
- Contact:
Re: Snakes & Ladders
Well, well, well. That is interesting.Manapa wrote:I just discovered that Snakes and ladders originated in india!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snakes_and_ladders" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Snakes and Ladders originated in India as a game based on morality called Vaikuntapaali or Paramapada Sopanam (the ladder to salvation).[3] This game made its way to England, and was eventually introduced in the United States of America by game pioneer Milton Bradley in 1943.[3]
Vaikuntapali
The game was played widely in ancient India by the name of Moksha Patamu, the earliest known Jain version Gyanbazi dating back to 16th century. The game was called "Leela" - and reflected the Hinduism consciousness around everyday life. Impressed by the ideals behind the game, a newer version was introduced in Victorian England in 1892, possibly by John Jacques of Jacques of London.
Moksha Patamu was perhaps invented by Hindu spiritual teachers to teach children about the effects of good deeds as opposed to bad deeds. The ladders represented virtues such as generosity, faith, humility, etc., and the snakes represented vices such as lust, anger, murder, theft, etc. The moral of the game was that a person can attain salvation (Moksha) through performing good deeds whereas by doing evil one takes rebirth in lower forms of life (Patamu). The number of ladders was less than the number of snakes as a reminder that treading the path of good is very difficult compared to committing sins. Presumably the number "100" represented Moksha (Salvation). In Andhra Pradesh, snakes and ladders is played in the name of Vaikuntapali
The squares of virtue on the original game are Faith (12), Reliability (51), Generosity (57), Knowledge (76), Asceticism (78); the squares of evil are Disobedience (41), Vanity (44), Vulgarity (49), Theft (52), Lying (58), Drunkenness (62), Debt (69), Rage (84), Greed (92), Pride (95), Murder (73) and Lust (99)[4].
It is especially interesting in the light of a conversation I had a couple of months ago with a group of monks from China. We were talking about Sangha education, and the topic of young novice monks came up. A few of them mentioned what can only be described as a Chinese Buddhist version of snakes and ladders that was used to entertain (if that is the right word) the little novices in the monastery. A couple of the monks in our conversation had been young novices a few decades ago. It uses dice, but the squares that one lands on are all Buddhist concepts. eg. do some bad deed and slide down the snake, do some good deed and climb up the ladder. I can't recall if the end of the game was nirvana, or maybe rebirth in Amitabha's Pureland.
I wondered, but didn't have the time then to inquire, whereabouts this had entered China from. I assumed it was a modern thing, perhaps from the Western notion of Snakes and Ladders. But now I am wondering if it entered from India a long time ago, and has been lurking around the monks' quarters for a few centuries!
I shall make a few inquiries tomorrow...
Very interesting indeed.
My recently moved Blog, containing some of my writings on the Buddha Dhamma, as well as a number of translations from classical Buddhist texts and modern authors, liturgy, etc.: Huifeng's Prajnacara Blog.
Re: Snakes & Ladders
Paññāsikhara wrote:Well, well, well. That is interesting.Manapa wrote:I just discovered that Snakes and ladders originated in india!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snakes_and_ladders" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Snakes and Ladders originated in India as a game based on morality called Vaikuntapaali or Paramapada Sopanam (the ladder to salvation).[3] This game made its way to England, and was eventually introduced in the United States of America by game pioneer Milton Bradley in 1943.[3]
Vaikuntapali
The game was played widely in ancient India by the name of Moksha Patamu, the earliest known Jain version Gyanbazi dating back to 16th century. The game was called "Leela" - and reflected the Hinduism consciousness around everyday life. Impressed by the ideals behind the game, a newer version was introduced in Victorian England in 1892, possibly by John Jacques of Jacques of London.
Moksha Patamu was perhaps invented by Hindu spiritual teachers to teach children about the effects of good deeds as opposed to bad deeds. The ladders represented virtues such as generosity, faith, humility, etc., and the snakes represented vices such as lust, anger, murder, theft, etc. The moral of the game was that a person can attain salvation (Moksha) through performing good deeds whereas by doing evil one takes rebirth in lower forms of life (Patamu). The number of ladders was less than the number of snakes as a reminder that treading the path of good is very difficult compared to committing sins. Presumably the number "100" represented Moksha (Salvation). In Andhra Pradesh, snakes and ladders is played in the name of Vaikuntapali
The squares of virtue on the original game are Faith (12), Reliability (51), Generosity (57), Knowledge (76), Asceticism (78); the squares of evil are Disobedience (41), Vanity (44), Vulgarity (49), Theft (52), Lying (58), Drunkenness (62), Debt (69), Rage (84), Greed (92), Pride (95), Murder (73) and Lust (99)[4].
It is especially interesting in the light of a conversation I had a couple of months ago with a group of monks from China. We were talking about Sangha education, and the topic of young novice monks came up. A few of them mentioned what can only be described as a Chinese Buddhist version of snakes and ladders that was used to entertain (if that is the right word) the little novices in the monastery. A couple of the monks in our conversation had been young novices a few decades ago. It uses dice, but the squares that one lands on are all Buddhist concepts. eg. do some bad deed and slide down the snake, do some good deed and climb up the ladder. I can't recall if the end of the game was nirvana, or maybe rebirth in Amitabha's Pureland.
I wondered, but didn't have the time then to inquire, whereabouts this had entered China from. I assumed it was a modern thing, perhaps from the Western notion of Snakes and Ladders. But now I am wondering if it entered from India a long time ago, and has been lurking around the monks' quarters for a few centuries!
I shall make a few inquiries tomorrow...
Very interesting indeed.
That's really interesting! It's nice, too. I liked snakes and ladders when I was a child.