[Buddha-l] Buddhism and forced conversion

[Piya Tan]

Dear Lance,

Thanks for the sobering words.

The "head-splitting" reference is actually  found in about a dozen sutta
references, and a few more in the Jatakas and Miln. However, none of them
were ever effected, unlike in the BrhadAranyaka Upanisad (BU 3.9.26) see
Brian Black ("Ambattha & Svetaketu," 2007:23).

I think the head-splitting remark is (was) merely a figure, like in East
Asia, someone might say "You will lose your face," or something to that
effect.

I have included a short study on this figure in my annotated translation of
the Ambattha Sutta.

With metta & mudita,

Piya Tan


On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 5:34 PM, L.S. Cousins <selwyn at ntlworld.com> wrote:

>
>
> As regards forced conversion, there is a major difference between
> Buddhism on the one hand and the Christian or Islamic religions on the
> other. Similarly between Buddhism and such religions as Marxism. For
> Christianity and Islam forced conversion has played a very major role in
> their history, although other means of conversion have also played their
> part. For Buddhism it has played only a minor role. It is essentially
> sporadic and atypical. There certainly are examples. Indeed it would be
> surprising if there were not, given the vast history of Buddhism and the
> great variety of ideas and practices subsumed under that heading.
>
> Inevitably those who would like to tar all 'religions' with the same
> brush want now to argue that somehow forced conversion is a part of
> Buddhism from the start. One technique for doing so is to extend the
> meaning of the term 'forced conversion'.
>
> They have a problem with the earlier Buddhist literature because despite
> the large size of the literature and its very varied content there is
> very little to support such an idea. So we see the story of the yakkha
> with the vajira weapon cited as some kind of example of forced
> conversion. This is really quite peculiar. Even if it were, we should
> note that this occurs in one passage (pericope) found only in two suttas
> in Pali and in parallel versions in other languages. In other words, it
> is something very rare and quite possibly a rather late addition.
>
> How this passage (or others) are (mis)interpreted in later times is of
> course quite irrelevant to the question as to whether there is any kind
> of forced conversion in /early/ Buddhism.
>
> But in any case can we view the episode of the yakkha with the vajira in
> his hand as any kind of forced conversion. ? This has to be interpreted
> in the same way as the appearance of devas to make some reinforcing
> point that is found commonly in the suttas. So too in later Buddhist
> works where sometimes Buddhas or bodhisattvas play a similar role. It
> seems rather naive to take this kind of thing literally.
>
> The idea that someone who behaves badly to or in debate with a spiritual
> teacher might find his head split into a number of pieces is part of
> pan-Indian ideas concerning religious truth and religious debate. It
> needs to be analysed in such a context. In essence, it seems a way of
> saying that setting oneself in conflict with dharma is self-divisive and
> self-destructive.
>
> To forcibly convert these episodes into some kind of forced conversion
> seems to me to be way over the top.
>
> Lance Cousins
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> buddha-l mailing list
> buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
> http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l
>



-- 
The Minding Centre
Blk 644 Bukit Batok Central #01-68 (2nd flr)
Singapore 650644
hpl: 8211 0879
Meditation courses & therapy: http://themindingcentre.org
Sutta translation: https://dharmafarer.org