[Buddha-l] Non attached & mindful culinary triumphalism?

[Artur Karp]

>> Social marginalization is definitely a byproduct of
>> deforestation and detribalization, the two processes
>> conditioning/accompanying the emergence of the new
>> political and economic order in Northern India.
>> [On that, sufficiently, Romila Thapar and, lately, Greg
>> Bailey&  Ian > Mabbett.]

>This is argued and may be so, but we don't really know
> anything very solid about these historical processes. There
> seem to me to be many possibilities.

Such as? Would you, please, care to share some of your opinions?

> This is out of context. In most cases this passage occurs precisely to
> distinguish the fate of caṇḍālas, etc. who live a good life from those
> who live a bad life.

Yes, in most cases, but not always. But, anyway, stress is on the
effects of one's karma, not on victimhood.

>> And – getting what was coming to them.
> No, this is incorrect, as I indicated above.

Yes, we have this to consider:

<<So kāyena sucaritaṃ carati, vācāya sucaritaṃ carati, manasā
sucaritaṃ carati. So kāyena sucaritaṃ caritvā vacāya sucaritaṃ caritvā
manasā sucaritaṃ caritvā kāyassa bhedā parammaraṇā sugatiṃ saggaṃ
lokaṃ upapajjati.>>

If one thinks, speaks, does things the proper way, after death one can
count on heaven. Do we have textual examples of people of the
candala-nesada-vena-rathakara-pukkusa class advancing in this life? Or
what we have here is only a nicely formulated eschatological promise?

I do suspect, that whatever their attitudes, however deeply and
sincerely they agreed with the principle of total śuśrūṣā, they would
still get what was coming to them.

In terms of pitiless exploitation and violence.


Regards,

Artur