Why Did Brahm? Ask the Buddha to Teach?

2009 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dhivan Thomas Jones

The episode of Brahm?’s request to the Buddha to teach has been regarded as problematic from early times, since it suggests that the Buddha was initially lacking in compassion. Comparison of versions of the story shows it to be possibly pre-A?okan in origin. A close reading of themes in the episode in relation to other incidents in the Buddha’s life described in the Pali canon show that it need not be taken as portraying an actual experience of the Buddha. The original purpose of the episode was not to describe the Buddha’s inner conflict but to show that Brahm?, representative of Brahmanical religion, was a follower of the Buddha. The episode was originally religious propaganda.

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 1010-1027
Author(s):  
I. V. Grunin

The article represents a kind of “postscriptum” to the author’s hypothesis about fundamental sources found in Pali canon and early post-canonic literature that gave birth to formation of the crowned Buddha image. This hypothesis underlies this study of early Buddhist iconography, in particular with respect to images belonging to the Amaravati school, which illustrate the relationship between the Buddha and Cakkavatti. The author substantiates the conclusion that the image of the crowned Buddha had emerged almost simultaneously with the anthropomorphic image of the Enlightened One.


Author(s):  
Felipe Nogueira de Carvalho

O objetivo deste artigo é sugerir que os ensinamentos Buddhistas sobreanattā(não-eu) não devem ser entendidos como uma negação categórica do eu, mas fazem parte de uma estratégia soteriológica comumente empregada pelo Buddha, de utilizar algo como ferramenta para o seu próprio fim. Tomando o kamma(ação) como o elemento central que estrutura todos os ensinamentos, podemos pensar na identificação do eu como um tipo de ação. Algumas instâncias desta ação serão hábeis e condutoras à libertação, e outras inábeis e condutoras ao sofrimento. Com isso em mente, este artigo irá analisar algumas ações inábeis do eu e do não-eu em suttasselecionados do Cânone Pali, mostrando como se encaixam na estratégia do Buddha de se utilizar de elementos como ferramentas para o abandono desses próprios elementos. Nessa perspectiva, o eu não é negado em absoluto desde o início do caminho, mas aprende-se a usa-lo de forma hábil como um meio de abandoná-lo.THE RAFT OF THE SELF: SOTERIOLOGICAL USES OF SELF AND NOT-SELF IN ANCIENT BUDDHISM ABSTRACTThe purpose of this article is to suggest that the Buddhist teachings on anattā (not-self) should not be understood as a categorical denial of the self, but constitute a soteriological strategy commonly employed by the Buddha, of using something as tool for its own demise.Taking kamma (action) as the main framework that structure all the other teachings, we can think of self-identification as a kind of action. Some instances of this action will be skillful and will lead to liberation, while others will be unskillful and will lead to suffering.With this in mind, the present article will analyze some skillful actions of self and not-self in selected suttas of the Pali canon, showing how they fit into the Buddha’s overall strategy of using elements as tools for their own demise. In this perspective, the self is not denied from the beginning of the path, but one learns how to use it skillfully in order to let go of it.


2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 394-401 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yevgeniy G. Vyrschikov

This article concerns the origin of the early Buddhist term tathagata (on Pali and Sanskrit material). This way, if you judge according to the Pali Canon, is of ancient pre-Buddhist origin. The “Digha-Nikaya” Sutras provides us with a number of nontrivial contexts of the use of this word, allowing us to accurately establish its etymology and literal meaning. In addition, these contexts suggest a special connection of Tathagata (as an image of the Buddha) with “truth telling”.


1957 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 533-535
Author(s):  
W. Stede

Angulimāla (Finger-garland, nickname from the chain of fingers which he wore), the fierce bandit, occurs at many places in the Pali Canon. One of the best-known episodes in which he figures and which has caused a good deal of comment is that of his conversion, told in the Angulimāla-sutta of the Majjhima Nikāya (no. 86; PTS, II, 97 sq.). For his legendary biography see Malalasekera's Dictionary of Pāli proper names, s.v.Here we see him following the Buddha in murderous intention trying to catch up to him as he walks on in his usual, natural step (Pakatiyā). But he soon realizes that his is unable to do so: the nearer he gets the more distant the Buddha is. He wonders: Although he is of great strength and can race elephants, horses, and deer: here must be a superman who can move at will.


1970 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 179-183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ernst Waldschmidt
Keyword(s):  
The Sun ◽  
The Moon ◽  

The Candimā-sutta or ‘discourse on the moon’ in the Samyuttanikāya of the Pali canon based on the Indian myth according to which eclipses of the moon as well as of the sun are caused by a demon named Rāhu ‘the Seizer’, who is supposed to try to lay hold of one or the other of the two planets at certain times. The Sutta reports that on such an occasion the god dwelling in the moon takes his refuge in the Buddha who successfully shows his power and pity by directing Rāhu emphatically to set the moon at once at liberty.


2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-69
Author(s):  
Przemysław Szczurek

Krishna’s skirmishes with the Buddha. Remarks on the polemical meaning of the Bhagavadgītā towards early Buddhism: The paper discusses the issue of the confrontation of the Bhagavadgītā with some aspects of the early Buddhist doctrine as presented in the Pāli canon. The confrontation points to the Bhagavadgītā as being a poem of the (broadly understood) orthodox current of Indian religious thought, which also contains some polemical elements, these mostly addressed to the most powerful heterodox religious current in the first centuries B.C. (which is most probable the date of the Bhagavadgītā’s composition). Several parts of the famous Sanskrit poem are compared and confronted with the respective parts of the Pāli canon in order to demonstrate, firstly, the different approaches of both currents, mostly in ethics and metaphysics, and secondly, the Bhagavadgītā’s reaction to particular elements of early Buddhism. The first six chapters of the Sanskrit poem have been subjected to analysis in this respect.


2002 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Viktoria Lyssenko

The author compares Aristotle with the Buddha who, though incompatible with one another in their mode of thought (Aristotle was a theoretical thinker, inquiring into those very matters which the Buddha, as a practical religious thinker, considered to be completely futile), agreed at least about one point: they clearly realised the extreme difficulty of attaining the mean (or the middle), both understood it as something more complex than an equal distance from opposite ends, or an arithmetical mean, or a mechanical equilibrium (equipoise). They presented the mean regarding human beings as a state which is never given a priori, established spontaneously, or found by pure chance, but, on the contrary, is the subject of a constantly renewable creative search. The comparison is based on the analysis of Aristotle’s texts (Eud. Eth., Nic. Eth., etc.) and the Buddhist texts from the Pali Canon (Vinaya pitaka and Sutta pitaka).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document