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.