[Buddha-l] Dharmapala

[sjziobro at cs.com]

Hi Joanna,

 


 Sorry for the lack of clarity.  The "this" refers to Artur's post.  I understand that I wasn't commenting on your remarks relative to the unbridled use of power to which they are inclined.  But Artur's post did seem a sort of response to Richard's remarks concerning his sense of the Judeo-Christian scriptures as replete with violence and an apparent lack of violence in Buddhist scriptures and other writings.  This surmise on my part was only that, a surmise as to what was Artur's point for his posting.

My question is one familiar to those familiar with exegetical trends from the time of Plato into the fifth century AD.  What does one do with a text deemed to be scriptural in a weak or a strong sense where fantastic events are related?  Are these events relevant to the readers life and, if so, how?  Conceiving an extra-literal sense to what is written allows for conceiving corollaries between outer events and inner emotions, states of mind, etc., which in turn permits one to appropriate the scripture in a personal way that transcends any re-enacting of some event related therein.

Stan

 

-----Original Message-----
From: JKirkpatrick <jkirk at spro.net>
To: 'Buddhist discussion forum' <buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com>
Sent: Sun, Jul 18, 2010 12:58 pm
Subject: Re: [Buddha-l] Dharmapala
Hi Stan


I'm unclear on what you mean by "this not [being] a response" to something 
Richard said. 

What do you mean by "this"?  Your point here doesn't seem to refer to what I 
posted about kings. Anyway, I'm not a Bible scholar, nor have I read Origen. 
Why not post your comment to the list. It seems to be replete with Bible 
scholars. 
_________________________________

Joanna,

 Might this not be a response to Richard's assertion that he didn't find in 
Buddhist texts the sorts of violence depicted in the Bible?  As a tangential 
question, do you think Origen's introduction of an explicit spiritual sense to 
scriptural exegesis places the blblical scenes of battle, betrayal, mercy, etc. 
in a more acceptable light to those who find their literal sense at least 
puzzling?



Stan