DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**cypedembeda** · 07-02-2011, 09:21 AM

Stuka, thanks for labelling Element as "superstitious" and as "folks to steer clear of"

LOL you think this "Mara" is a real creature? I have yet to see you argue vehemently for such a notion....UrgyenTaschi, yes. Dorge Shedrub? Yes....you...? hmmmm....

But Batchelor asserts the Buddha did not quench all defilement I am not sure I have seen him declare this. can you point me to a cite?

....because Batchelor asserts Mara is exclusively "inner" rather than also "outer" temptation. I have not seen this either. Are you specifically referring in the above sentence to a Living Devil Thang, or to temptations from outside of ones own mind (Oh, come on, have a toke off this crack pipe, it'll be fun..")...?

Batchelor denies Buddha attained Nibbana as it is defined in the suttas. Not sure I have seen him declare this, either. Cites?

If we accept the supernormal powers reported in the suttas, then Mara was simply an adversary of the arahants; a deity with supernormal powers who opposed the Buddha-Dhamma, particulary the doctrine of anatta. Fortunately, we don't have to.

In traditional Buddhism four senses of the word "mara" are given.....

4. Devaputra-mara, or Mara the son of a deva (god), that is, Mara as an objectively existent being rather than as a metaphor.

Wikipedia
WIKI and "Traditional Buddhism" say all sorts of things we know to be mistaken, misapprehended, or blatantly false. You know this.

07-02-2011, 09:21 AM	#25
cypedembeda Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 408 Senior Member	Stuka, thanks for labelling Element as "superstitious" and as "folks to steer clear of" LOL you think this "Mara" is a real creature? I have yet to see you argue vehemently for such a notion....UrgyenTaschi, yes. Dorge Shedrub? Yes....you...? hmmmm.... But Batchelor asserts the Buddha did not quench all defilement I am not sure I have seen him declare this. can you point me to a cite? ....because Batchelor asserts Mara is exclusively "inner" rather than also "outer" temptation. I have not seen this either. Are you specifically referring in the above sentence to a Living Devil Thang, or to temptations from outside of ones own mind (Oh, come on, have a toke off this crack pipe, it'll be fun..")...? Batchelor denies Buddha attained Nibbana as it is defined in the suttas. Not sure I have seen him declare this, either. Cites? If we accept the supernormal powers reported in the suttas, then Mara was simply an adversary of the arahants; a deity with supernormal powers who opposed the Buddha-Dhamma, particulary the doctrine of anatta. Fortunately, we don't have to. In traditional Buddhism four senses of the word "mara" are given..... 4. Devaputra-mara, or Mara the son of a deva (god), that is, Mara as an objectively existent being rather than as a metaphor. Wikipedia WIKI and "Traditional Buddhism" say all sorts of things we know to be mistaken, misapprehended, or blatantly false. You know this.
	Quote