Complicated and brutal ways of divinity in the past/myth 
I’m sticking with simple yet profound Dhamma.
:anjal:
Dear Bhante,
Scary picture indeed! 
with respect and gratitude,
russ
:anjal:
I was reading a book on the theology of the Idabi Islam and came across a couple of pointseminded me of that post of yours. In the ʾAshʿarīyya theological school of Islam God is considered to be always just not because he is subject to the moral laws but because he created this very law, and is, therefore, above any moral or ethical considerations and his every action is per definitionem just. So, the substitute sacrifice is not the story of ‘taming God’ or subjugating his actions to the ethics, but rather a story of a divine whim. He could have just as well not ordered the substitute sacrifice and it still would have been a perfectly just moral action. As some of the ʾAshʿarīyya theologians wrote, even if God would declare anything that is now evil to be good and anything that is good to be evil, there would be nothing to stop Him. The ʾAshʿarīyya school is widely spread in the regions of the Shāfiʿī and Mālikī madhhabs, i.e. is influential for at least 250 million people (possibly more), so as you see the idea of God as the Absolute Ruler is still very much alive.
1 Like
Taking this theme to a tangent, albeit I feel an important one, is the idea that monastics should not be so tied to repulsiveness of the body, or not-self, or self sacrifice, that they neglect their health and fitness. I know of some stories of monks allowing themselves to be fed on by mosquitoes, or bitten by snakes, or medically ill and refusing modern medical treatment. Less harmfully, some monastics feel that their diets are unimportant, or that fitness is not a proper monastic consideration; we then have diabetic and ill monks with preventable diseases.
I’d like to see more of a sense of the Buddha’s magnificent pragmatism, and his sense of acting skillfully, and not foolishly…sometimes letting dengue ridden bugs inject you seems to me silly, when a more skillful approach to mosquitoes might be needed. I’d like to see monks and nuns encouraged to exercise in their kutis, to walk more, and to be allowed ( as one Thai monk did in secret) lift weights to maintain fitness. I’ve heard that Ajahn Passano allows monks to do yoga in their kutis, which I feel is a great idea.
So, to our treasured teacher monks and nuns, our Metta for you overflows, we need and respect you and want you to live long healthy lives. And while none of you may consider self-immolation or finger severing, I for one would like to see self care and fitness emphasized in the Sangha. The lay sangha might be educated a bit as to healthier dana; fewer cakes and sweets, and more protein and veggies. The Buddha lived a mostly fit life to be 80, and we have seen some of our modern great Ajahns live shorter, sicker lives, cut short by lack of self care or a sense that active self care is adhammic. I think of Nanavira Thera as perhaps one tragic example of this.
My two baht for today.
5 Likes
it’s interesting that in the Sabbasava sutta (MN 2) avoidance is prescribed against wild animals, but not insects, who on the other hand are to be met with forbearance
Taints to be Abandoned by Enduring
“What taints, bhikkhus, should be abandoned by enduring? Here a bhikkhu, reflecting wisely, bears cold and heat, hunger and thirst, and contact with gadflies, mosquitoes, wind, the sun, and creeping things; he endures ill-spoken, unwelcome words and arisen bodily feelings that are painful, racking, sharp, piercing, disagreeable, distressing, and menacing to life. While taints, vexation, and fever might arise in one who does not endure such things, there are no taints, vexation, or fever in one who endures them. These are called the taints that should be abandoned by enduring.
Taints to be Abandoned by Avoiding
“What taints, bhikkhus, should be abandoned by avoiding? Here a bhikkhu, reflecting wisely, avoids a wild elephant, a wild horse, a wild bull, a wild dog, a snake, a stump, a bramble patch, a chasm, a cliff, a cesspit, a sewer. Reflecting wisely, he avoids sitting on unsuitable seats, wandering to unsuitable resorts, and associating with bad friends, since if he were to do so wise companions in the holy life might suspect him of evil conduct. While taints, vexation, and fever might arise in one who does not avoid these things, there are no taints, vexation, and fever in one who avoids them. These are called the taints that should be abandoned by avoiding.
that would be good, especially for unhealthy monastics having to be selective in food, but i don’t think monastics are in a position to be picky, as the apposite saying goes ‘beggars can’t be choosers’, so it’s a toll of the homeless life which must be accepted
besides, attitude of contentment in particular with any kind of almsfood as one of the 4 requisites is often praised in the suttas
Therefore, bhikkhus, you should train yourselves thus: ‘We will be content with any kind of robe, almsfood, lodging, medical requisites and we will speak in praise of contentment with any kind of robe, almsfood, lodging, medical requisites, and we will not engage in a wrong search, in what is improper, for the sake of a robe, almsfood, lodging, medical requisites . If we do not get a robe, almsfood, lodging, medical requisites we will not be agitated, and if we get one we will use it without being tied to it, uninfatuated with it, not blindly absorbed in it, seeing the danger in it, understanding the escape.
SN 16.1
i think renunciation means forsaking care about all worldly matters and affairs including diet
when applied to the body the term seems kind of alien and opposite to what the Dhamma stands for, body care would perhaps be more in line with it
Thanks for the reply, LXNDR, my friend. I may have to respectfully agree to disagree with you on this one. While MN2 provides appropriate guidance this text predates knowledge of insects as carriers of deadly disease, so I’d argue we need not take this text as literally as it appears. I still urinate in water every day, though the Vinaya proscribes this, but with modern sanitation, the practice of urinating in water is seen as healthy, not unhealthy, by way of example.
as the apposite saying goes ‘beggars can’t be choosers’, so it’s a toll of the homeless life which must be accepted
I don’t view monastics as beggars, but almsgoers, part of a healthy symbiotic relationship. Just as the lay people depend on the Dhamma being taught as sound, wise, and beneficial, so might as well the dana given in return be the same. I don’t want my Dhamma to be sweetened or without nutritional value. I want it to fuel my life in a beneficial and wise way…so the same for food, in my view.
So, I see the renunciant life as a wise life. We don’t renounce our wisdom, common sense, or our health, but only the aspects of mundane life that draw us away from liberation. I’d like to see our monastics live as long and as healthily as did the Buddha at least, only to pass once their bodies are, naturally, held together like an old cart held together by straps. 
i just quoted it as a curiosity, i don’t think self exposure to bites of insects is prudent when means of protection are handy, probably mosquito nets were unknown to the Buddha’s contemporaries
i just found this particular saying quite apt in relation to bhikkhus, Pali for beggars
there’s another one however ‘don’t look a gift horse in the mouth’
we know that early Sangha monastics couldn’t expect to be offered fresh food, let alone a healthy one
And when he enters a house, some give and some do not. And when they give, some give yesterday’s cooked rice and stale cakes and rancid jelly, sauce and so on. Some, not giving, say, “Please pass on, venerable sir,” others keep silent as if they did not see him. Some avert their faces. Others treat him with harsh words such as: “Go away, you bald-head.”
Visuddhimagga transl. by Ven Nanamoli, pp. 340-341
Today I am fortunate, persevering,
Happy with the scraps in my alms-bowl;
Bhaddiya, son of Godhā,
Practices jhāna without grasping
and so forth
Thag 16.7
1 Like
On this topic of neglect with one owns body.
I think it is worth highlighting that the Vinaya depicts the Buddha constantly getting consulted with Jivaka the doctor and making use of treatments, etc.
Note however that this is what you should expect of a Samma Sambuddha: to extend out of compassion the life of his body so the Dhamma is further spread.
1 Like
and of course we cannot suspect Buddha of self-identification with the body or any of the 5 khandhas for that matter and clinging to them, his status is beyond lay or renunciant
1 Like
Another interesting statement about a ‘narcissistic God’ coming from an Islamic preacher. This time, it is a more Salafi / Hanbali oriented scholar. ‘Arrogance is a quality that is not suitable for us, earthly creatures. However, God the Allmighty is beyond reproach and no-one can rival him in anything, so it is suitable for His exalted Person to be arrogant’
Once I asked a certain person what they would feel after death if this particular version of Islam proved to be true. The answer was ‘disappointment’.
1 Like
A recent study confirms the long-held view that human sacrifice, in part, enabled the development of stratified societies.
And I couldn’t resist this:
7 Likes
Here is the U.S., we don’t actually sacrifice our poor and vulnerable in order to maintain the ever-increasingly wide gap between rich and poor, but we do let them starve due to poverty (in the world’s richest country), we let sick people die who cannot gain access to health care, and we have a death penalty that seems not to affect too many from the highest strata of society.
It could have other motivations, including to punish taboo violations, demoralize underclasses, mark class boundaries and instil fear of social elites, all of which aim at building and maintaining social control. For this reason, says Michael Winkelman, an anthropologist now retired from Arizona State University in Tempe, “I suspect that Watts et al. are assessing some general notion of social legitimated killing.”
In modern times, we need not crush people with rocks, but it does seem that the so-called 1 % must get some sense of control or status over seeing people die due to neglect in the US (knowing with the stroke of a pen they could mitigate it), and knowing that these vulnerabilities keep the impoverished in fear and in further poverty, and those close t o the poverty line meek and subservient. So, we don’t exactly crush marginalized people with large rocks anymore, or pull the hearts out of their chests, but the psychology of fear and control and the demoralization of lower classes today seems eerily similar to that of, say, ancient Aztec times.
3 Likes
When looking at MN 28 I also thought this passage may have contributed to this sort of ideas:
MN28:9.5-8: But the Buddha has said in the Simile of the Saw:
“Even if low-down bandits were to sever you limb from limb, anyone who had a malevolent thought on that account would not be following my instructions.”
My energy shall be roused up and unflagging, my mindfulness established and lucid, my body tranquil and undisturbed, and my mind immersed in samādhi. Gladly now, let fists, stones, sticks, and swords strike this body! For this is how the instructions of the Buddhas are followed.
There aren’t many passages in the Suttas that may be taken as an endorsement of self-sacrifice, but this is one.
1 Like
With deep respect, but does it?
It seems the context is one in which there was no choice and the subject is already being sawed from limb to limb – the main point being to remain without polluting the mind with hostility and rather reinforcing it with goodwill and samadhi.
This is interpretive but, again, this can be seen not as a call to self-sacrifice in terms of self-immolation or suicide, but in terms of progressing on the Path via goodwill, renunciation, and non-identification with the body or the khandhas, no matter what the circumstances may be.
Is this what you meant by “self-sacrifice”?
I may have mistaken the point of your post. If so, sorry!
1 Like
Exactly, and I don’t think it was meant as such. My point was rather that such a passage can have been taken in order to endorse ideas of self-sacrifice. Not that it was ever meant as such.
Sorry if I wasn’t clear enough.
3 Likes
Yes. Many thanks 
2 Likes
Does it have to do with the concepts of Nagas in Theravada Buddhism?
Reptilian Beings Emerged During Government-Funded Psychedelic Studies
Reptilian Beings Emerged During CIA’s Interdimensional Experiments
The Pāli SN 29.1 and SN 30.1-2 mention the four types (aṇḍajā, jalābujā, saṃsedajā, opapātikā), from inferior to superior classes, of nāgas and garuḍas (called supaṇṇas in the Pāli).
The four types are egg-born, womb-born, moisture-born, and transformation-born nāgas and garuḍas.
The garuḍas are only able to carry off (haranti) nāgas that are of equal or inferior types, but not their superiors.
The reason why the four legendary types of nāgas and garuḍas are included in the Pāli collections (SN 29 and SN 30) within the Buddhist framework is not clearly revealed.
However, the Chinese version (EA 27.8) of the Pāli SN 29.1 and SN 30.1-2 seems to provide a motivation for the inclusion of these two mythical animals in the Buddhist context, by showing the importance of practicing the “four kinds of mind” (i.e. loving-kindness, compassion, empathic joy, and equanimity):
“If the nāga king were to serve the Buddha, then at that time garuḍas would be unable to eat [nāgas]. Why is that? Because the Tathāgata constantly practiss four kinds of mind, the garuḍas are unable to eat. What are the four kinds? The Tathāgata constantly practiss loving-kindness, compassion, empathic joy, and equanimity.” (pp. 46-7):
Pages 44-47 from Mythical Naga JOCBS_vol18_Choong Mun-keat May 2020.pdf (409.6 KB)
( “A comparison of the Pāli and Chinese versions of Nāga Saṃyutta , Supaṇṇa Saṃyutta , and Valāhaka Saṃyutta , early Buddhist discourse collections on mythical dragons, birds, and cloud devas”, Journal of the Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies , 2020 (18), pp. 42-65.)
The Pāli and Chinese versions adapt Indic mythology about the two animal classes: serpent-like beings and birds (nāgas and garuḍas/supaṇṇas).
1 Like
I think a mother or father would sometimes sacrifice their own lifes for saving that of their children, spontaneously. It is not that they think ‘i sacrifise myself’. This way i also understand that the Buddha might have sacrifised his life. I believe this is very different from doing such deeds from political or religious motives.