[Buddha-l] Batchelor

[Joy Vriens]

>> Richard wrote an article in defense of Stephen's book.

I printed it out together with the reviews by Bhikkhu Punnadhammo,
Bhikkhu Bodhi and Urgyen Sangharaskita. Those were the days where one
still printed out the stuff one read. The latter reviewed the book as
being too slim a volume.

> Your memory is better than mine, so I'll take your word for it. I see Stephen as a man whose position is something like this: "If you liked David Hume, you'll love the Buddha."

If you need a copy of your review for the Richard P. Hayes Archives, I
am happy to scan it and send it to you.

> David Hume wrote "There arise, indeed, in some minds, some unaccountable terrors with regard to futurity: But these would quickly vanish, were they not artificially fostered by precept and education. And those, who foster them: what is their motive? Only to gain a livelihood, and to acquire power and riches in this world. Their very zeal and industry, therefore, are an argument against them."

I wondered about that the other day. Is dana the same after a teaching
about loving kindness and compassion as after one about
karma-and-reincarnation? Michel Strickmann (Mantras et mandarins) had
written about the function of texts predicting apocalyptic times where
Maras would rule and about instructions that save (powerful dharanis,
pure land etc.). Create a need, create a market and sell your product.
Like our times where terror rules and security is a bestseller.

Joy