Such episodes make it clear that Māra does not always function as the personification of inner defilements in the sense of acting out internal struggles.
From what we know, it would seem that Māra is used both to convery mental obstacles and also an actual impermanent god named Māra.
Buddhist cosmology Māra is categorized as
devas delighting in Creation; devas wielding power over others’ Creations. The former can create any shape they like, the latter delight in things created by others, to get them in their power. These two are the highest in the World of Sense Desires.
Brahmins were the formulating higher class of Indians who would devote themselves to spiritual learning and development. Brahmā, was a god (also impermanent) regarded as real but one who also reflected the qualities of loving kindness, compassion, joy, and equanimity - thus the brahmavihāras, the practices leading to the brahmā realm. Māra would then be the opposite manifestation of unwholesome qualities.
Evil qualities and conditions are also a part of the process. Perhaps not so outlandish that a deity would come to represent those unwholesome aspects of dhamma. In the same way that some humans grow to be the epitome of evil in this world. I would also be inclined to agree, however Māra, while convenient, doesn’t seem to be a later developement. At least I have seen no one take this stance thus far.
Exactly. Whether Māra reveals itself in physical form or just as a mental defilement, we should deal with it all the same. Mindful and clearly comprehending.
Have you read Mara Samutta SN4.1 to SN4.25?
Very interesting read or listen.
In Sutta Central voice type SN4.1-25 to listen to all of them.
In this sutta do you see Mara as a person or a mental state?
This article by Choong Mun-keat may be useful:
“A comparison of the Pali and Chinese versions of the Mara Samyutta, a collection of early Buddhist discourses on Mara, the Evil One”, The Indian International Journal of Buddhist Studies, Vol.10, 2009, pp. 35-53.
According to the article by Choong Mun-keat, “A comparison of the Pali and Chinese versions of the Mara Samyutta, a collection of early Buddhist discourses on Mara, the Evil One”, The Indian International Journal of Buddhist Studies, Vol.10, 2009, pp. 40-41:
“… Before discussing disagreements on some teachings presented in the three versions of the Māra Saṃyukta/Saṃyutta, some shared images of Māra in the literature will be discussed here.
(1) The term Māra-pāpimant/Māro Pāpimā, ‘Māra the Evil One’, in the Pāli Māra Saṃyutta corresponds to Mo/Mowang (魔/魔王) Boxun (波旬) (Skt. Māra-pāpman) in the SA and ASA versions. Māra-pāpimant or Māra (as an individual name) is derived from the term Pāpmā Mṛtyu, ‘Death who is Evil’, of the Brāhmaṇas. Māra is also regarded as a deity in the early Indian cosmological or mythical tradition (O’Flaherty, 1988:213). Thus, Māra is already regarded as both the idea of evil (pāpmā) death (mṛtyu) and a mythical deity in Brahmanism at the time of the Buddha.
(2) Māra in this early Buddhist literature, the three versions of the Māra Saṃyukta, is evidently presented as threefold: (a) he is a real being, an evil deity of temptation (the tempter and lord of sensuality); (b) he can be defeated only in a psychological sense, not by physical force; and (c ) he appears in the texts more as an actual deity than as a result (personification) of psychological projection. Two examples from the texts will now be mentioned and discussed. …
Consequently, for a proper understanding of Māra in the three versions of Māra Saṃyukta, the personal and mythical aspect of Māra should not be entirely ignored, and the impersonal and symbolic aspect of Māra should not be over-emphasized.”
SN 5. Bhikkhuni Samyutta is more about the notion of Mara rather than Bhikkhuni. It is the early Buddhist adaptation of general Indian religious beliefs about divine beings (devas), and one of them is Mara. The adaptation style is presented in verse in the early Buddhist texts.
Fascinating!
Any idea if these stories are from the EBTs or the commentaries?
Many attained Thai masters suggest that Mara is both external and a personification of inner psychological states. And we need to be vigilant of both. This seemingly is also borne out in the texts.
Interesting that Mara is a resident of one of the highest deva realms…makes one wonder how it was possible for someone to be born in that high realm and still have so much delusion? It would suggest that the “Mara-to-be” would have attained a high jhana but not have much wisdom.
Great question Vic. I’ll try to ask Ajahn Punnadhammo about this after one of his online dhamma talks. I’m wondering what he will say and if he do, I’ll post his reply here.
His answer to your question, in short, is that the Pali canon has both poetry and prose in different places, and the fact that Mara usually appears in poetry means that he is simply a poetic device.
Hmm, I wonder about that…Mara does appear in some major Suttas within the EBT. I can imagine that his backstory may have been embellished later in poetry but it appears that Mara as an “entity” is likely from the earliest strata of EBT.
Thanks, @Invo. That was very interesting. I understand what he said about the attainment of Mara that although requiring spiritual development could still be amenable to corruption. It’s basically the lack of right view. One can “progress” quite far spiritually and still lack right view–the practice of high states of samadhi attained by the Buddha’s teachers may be an appropriate example.
I remember the mara entering the belly of his disciple. It seems then that it might have been used for beings that enter humans. Those can bring influence to a ordinary person. We see that Sangha also believed Mara can travel until other realms. Similar to Bible. Where the devil talks to “God” on how to treat Job. I have read that in India they used stories alot to teach, so maybe using a name that all knew, was similar to everyone knowing characters in Netflix series.
The section on Mara is great.
I’m wondering what he will say and if he do, I’ll post his reply here.
