critiques of sacrifice

[Finnian Moore Gerety]

My warmest thanks to all have contributed their thoughts and recommendations
so far. I'm looking forward to following these leads.

Yours,
Finnian

On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Vincent Eltschinger <veltsch at oeaw.ac.at>wrote:

> Dear Benjamin,
> Of course, the question of the ethical, social and political consequences,
> for a king, of being a Buddhist, is a very interesting one (and it is more
> than certain that many among the monastic intellectual elite had very
> definite views on the topic). But in my opinion, one is a king before
> being a Buddhist. I mean: there are normative, almost sacred, even
> formulaic prerogatives and duties for a king in the ancient Indian
> context. Look, for instance, at those kings who, in the very same
> inscription, present themselves as paramasaugata, i.e., as supreme
> (devout) Buddhists, AND praise themselves for preserving the
> var.naa'sramadharma. Here too, the contradiction between core Buddhist
> values (or: what we take them to be) and the king's self-assertion seems
> to be total. What we also ought to consider is: has there been anything
> like a Buddhist society, or a properly Buddhist kingdom, in ancient India?
> Look, for instance, at Naalandaa and its surrounding: Naalandaa was the
> flagship of Indian Buddhism, a place where people converged from all parts
> of Asia and which was richly endowed by successive generations of kings of
> different dynasties (local Guptas, Vardhana, Paala). Now, the seals that
> have been excavated in Naalandaa seem to demonstrate that the whole
> administrative, political, juridical and social environment of the
> monastic complex wasn't Buddhist at all.
> Well, instead of writing too much on this complex and fascinating issue, I
> would recommend you to read at least the beginning and the end of Alexis
> Sanderson's recently published "The 'Saiva Age" (pp. 41-349 [sic] in
> Shingo Einoo, ed.: Genesis and Development of Tantrism, Tokyo, University
> of Tokyo, Institute of Oriental Culture, 2009). Here you will find some
> answers and at least many insights.
> Best,
> Vincent Eltschinger
>
> Institute for the Cultural and Intellectual History of Asia
> Austrian Academy of Sciences
> Prinz-Eugen-Strasse 8-10
> A-1040 Vienna
>
> >
> > Dear List,
> >
> > It is possible to contrast the various textual examples cited in this
> > thread by pointing to other examples from inscriptional sources? I am
> > familiar with inscriptions wherein Buddhist kings are known to have
> > promoted rather than rejected certain types of Brahmanical sacrifice.
> This
> > is seen, for example, in Pāla and Candra inscriptions of Bengal where
> > rituals from the Atharvaveda Pariśiṣṭas, at least in name (such as
> > the koṭihoma and the adbhutaśānti of the homacatuṣṭaya), are
> > invoked for the purposes of returning favor for gifts of land. Further,
> as
> > I recall, even at stūpa sites such as at Nāgārjunakoṇḍa there are
> > inscriptions promoting the aśvamedha sacrifice.
> >
> > To my mind such inscriptional evidence raises the question of how we
> > receive the Buddhist critiques of sacrifice. Are the textual sources, for
> > example, derived only from a canonical framework?  Is the critique
> offered
> > in ritual sources such as Tantras? I am curious as, looking to the
> > inscriptional evidence, I wonder if the Buddhist critique of sacrifice is
> > only rendered by Buddhist monks who are themselves in competition with
> > Brahminical ritualists and thus, wishing to discredit their ritual rivals
> > in the hopes of gaining royal favor?
> >
> > It would be helpful to understand what is behind the question about
> > Buddhist or Jain rejection of sacrifice. Admittedly, my knowledge of
> > Buddhist canonical literature is not, what it should be! I would
> > appreciate any comments with respect to clarification or otherwise. This
> > is certainly an interesting topic! I am in fact working on two related
> > projects and am happy to receive further references on this general
> topic.
> >
> > Best Wishes,
> >
> > Benjamin
> > --
> >
> > Benjamin Fleming Visiting Scholar,
> > Dept. of Religious Studies,
> > University of Pennsylvania 249 S. 36th Street,
> > Claudia Cohen Hall, #234
> > Philadelphia, PA 19104 U.S.A.
> > Telephone - 215-746-7792
> > http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~bfleming<http://www.sas.upenn.edu/%7Ebfleming>
> >
> >
> >
> >> Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 09:41:56 +0900
> >> From: yanom at CC.KYOTO-SU.AC.JP
> >> Subject: Re: critiques of sacrifice
> >> To: INDOLOGY at liverpool.ac.uk
> >>
> >> One of the interesting sources is the Buddhist
> >> text ZaarduulakarNaavadaana (ed. by
> >> Mukhopadhyaya, Santiniketan 1954, page 19),
> >> where Brahmanical sacrifice is critisized as
> >> being performed by those who want to eat the
> >> meat of sacrificail animals.
> >>
> >> lines 15-18:
> >> na prokSaNair na mantraiz ca svargaM gacchanty ajaiDakaaH/
> >> na hy eSa maargaH svargaaya mithyaaprokSaNam ucyate//
> >> braahmaNai raudracittais tu paryaayo hy eSa cintitaH/
> >> maaMsaM khaaditukaamais tu prokSaNaM kalpitaM pazoH//
> >>
> >> Michio Yano
> >> Kyoto Sangyo University
> >>
> >> >Dear List--
> >> >Can anyone recommend primary or secondary literature on critiques of
> >> Vedic
> >> >sacrifice and orthopraxy? I am interested in Buddhist & Jain critiques
> >> as
> >> >well as those from within the Brahmanic fold.
> >> >
> >> >Thanks
> >> >
> >> >Finnian Moore Gerety
> >> >
> >> >doctoral student, Dept. of Sanskrit & Indian Studies, Harvard
> >> University
> >
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your
> > inbox.
> >
> http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_1
>
>