[Buddha-l] Hardships & Downfall of B. in I.

[Jo]

The only way that the Buddhist communities might be considered antinomian is in terms of their rejection of Brahmanical ritual(s)....the ritual "laws" of the highest varna, including laws on purity and pollution. The Buddhists supposedly rejected all that ceremonialism, presumably Buddhist traders did also. 
However, they had their own 'laws" (Greek, nomos, law) available in terms of the five precepts of laypeople, obligatory if one wanted to take refuge. (I agree that siddhas were a different case.) I don't see any evidence that Indian Buddhists held that moksha or nirvana--aka salvation -- could be achieved by faith (belief) alone. Thus, they could not be antinomian in the usual Protestant sense of the term. 
(Hey--this proves there is no such thing as Protestant (Indian) Buddhism.)

Joanna


On Behalf Of Sherab
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2012 1:01 PM

Hi Folks,

	Always happy to learn a new word - Antinomian. I was wondering how Buddhists of India could be considered to be antinomian. Isn't it a Christian quirk? I thought that Indian Buddhist were the best of the best at living according to a societal moral code. Now it does occur to me that perhaps the Pureland Schools that developed later in Japan might have a possibility of antinomian thinking and perhaps did in fact, sort of a salvation through faith alone that could lead to antinomianism. There are also examples from the Mahasiddha tradition, you know that crazy wisdom thing. Virupa is said to mean "I am wicked" a name adopted by a famous siddha after leaving the monastic tradition and frequenting bars and if memory serves - courtesans. This however would seem to be based on dwelling in a state of unshakeable Mahamudra, where his seemingly anti-societal or bawdy moral behaviour was unable to shake the foundation of his realisation.

	Is there some misunderstanding on my part of the word antinomian?

	Thoughts?

Sherab

-----Original Message-----
snip>>

> http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/320817943

 From that short review...

"The broad dichotomy he proposes (here crudely put) pits the “antinomian” trading Buddhist community against the hierarchical agrarian Brahmanical community."

What about the Jains? - That religion survived in India, supported by the same trading community, while Buddhism virtually vanished.
Perhaps Jain traders were less “antinomian” than Buddhist traders?
:-)
_______________________________________________
buddha-l mailing list
buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l

-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2793 / Virus Database: 2634/5946 - Release Date: 12/08/12

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