[Buddha-l] Return of blasphemy?

[Jo]

Joy
I've not looked at Jayarava's Raves for some time--thanks for posting this one--having never read that sutta in the MN,  it's useful to know what it said. As an anthropologist, I never fell for the longer story of the Buddha, especially the convenience of his mother dying right after he's born.  Now, it is interesting to see in this MN sutta that his mother is still alive and there's no wife or child. The motif of a future saint becoming enlightened early in life, while still a 'boy' so to speak, appears also in other hagiographies, e.g., that of Dhynaneshwara, a devotee of the Vishnu venerated in Pandharpur, India. 

However, the attribution of Brahmanisation as responsible for purity elements of the later story, might also seem to apply to the MN story, in that by the Buddha's going forth unmarried he has completely avoided the impurities of marriage and sexuality. There is a good deal in the Pali suttas or at least in the Vinaya about the impurity of sexual relations, right?  So I'd question whether 'Brahmanisation' is at work in these stories as Jayarava suggests. I agree with Jayarava's comment, how could anyone name their child 'Fetter' (Rahula); he makes a good point--that bit does seem to be a probably later dogmatic allusion to spiritual perils as applied in the later story of homefullness, of sexuality and having a family. 

Today in India, Rahul(a) is not an unusual name. Those bearing it are Hindus. I suspect naming a child this way is apotropaic, as Rahula (one of the two Moon's nodes) is considered to be a demon and dangerous.  In the distinction between these two traditions in the naming of a male child, one gets a good example of the complexity of myth and legend, where some motifs seem to reappear as the same, and others as entirely different in their functions.

Joanna
----------------------------

Dan,

Religions have been evolving constantly. What used to be acceptable in a certain context may not be acceptable at a later time. This tends to be more of a problem for revelations and religions of the Book and especially in case of a literal reading thereof. Self promotion at the cost of others is built in in any religion.

Defamation, like discrimination, racism is already punishable by law. I expect that official religious organizations can defend themselves in case of a legal offense. But as I wrote I expect there are other things at stake here and that the declaration may be a bit of a Trojan horse.

The one to attack for defamation for treating the Buddha as deadbeat dad would be Asvaghosa, although his version makes better movie material than the Ariyapariyesanā Sutta [MN 26] (See Jayarava's Raves http://jayarava.blogspot.com/2011/07/buddhas-biography.html).

Joy

_______________________________________________
buddha-l mailing list
buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l