Query to anyone who knows the suttas well: The Sigalovada says the highest duty of layman is to support "ascetics and brahmins." Anomalous?
Conversation
Replying to
Isn't it odd for a Buddhist text to recommend supporting brahmins, rather than monks? Or is "ascetics" actually "bhikkhus"?
2
Replying to
It's interesting that many of the summaries I read on the web do replace "ascetics and brahmins" with "monks" (inaccurately, I take it?).
1
Replying to
Based on this and other inconsistencies, I suspect the Sigalovada is a brahmanical text, lightly edited, and slipped into the suttapitaka.
1
Replying to
But I don't read Pali and I don't know the suttas at all well, so maybe this suspicion is obviously wrong?
1
Replying to
The Sigalovada Sutta is a key text for "Buddhist ethics," so if it's actually brahmanical, some rethinking might be called for.
2
Replying to
brahmins basically pwned the sangha in the first 100 years after B's death. Basic Indian history fact on 8th grade tests
2
2
Replying to
Reason Buddhism died in India is mainly (R^2=0.6) that people couldn't tell it apart from brahmin priesthood
1
1
Replying to
Then American history is wrong. I've actually been to Bodhgaya temple. Has been run by hindu brahmin priests for 2000+ years
Replying to
Yes, that much I know… Although I would have guessed a few centuries less.
1
Replying to
Modulo a few destructions I suppose, by Islamic invaders etc. Haven't looked in detail.
1
Show replies

