-----Original Message----- From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org] On Behalf Of Dwayne Monroe
> My focus was on the full flavor of the very old story
of Siddartha in the harem -- part of a larger tale --
you cited as evidence of Buddhist misogyny.
I suspect this will fail to move you, which is fine.
** On the contrary it moves me greatly. My apologies for setting the wrong tone to my reply which should have been in agreement more than once or twice. Most, if not all, the narratives about the life of Siddhartha are fabrications and creations from later authors, scribes, and scholars - and could be set in a wider cultural context. My immediate comparison would be the Gospels and Jesus. Did Jesus say anything that the Gospels record? Perhaps, but not in the narrative form they are presented nor in the context of the early Christian communities and their practices. In truth, there is only a 50/50 chance that "Jesus of Nazareth" is an historical person. I'll give 50 to the two very minor (and late) 'outside' sources that talk about some Christ crucified by the Romans... the other 50 goes to the village scribes of Galilee who were pissed off when they were cast aside by the building of Roman cities in the area, thus enacting a shift in their status from "scribe" to "functionary." That 50 sides with Jesus being a narrative character created to annoy the Romans and boost the morale of the locals. Maybe I'll move that to 70/30 in favour of the historical person. He probably did run amok in the Temple.
Indeed, you've already explained your dis-interest in interpretation, original sources and so on:
"I'm interested in the history of religion, not the philosophy of religion. And I *totally* excuse myself from discussing doctrine / belief / or authentic tenets."
Which means we are actually talking, as the old saying goes, at cross purposes.
** I'm not dis-interested in interpretation / historiography. I am disinterested in debating the metaphysical truths of one form of Buddhism or another. Experience is not epistemology... just because one is Buddhist (or Christian) doesn't give one any "knowledge" about that tradition... that's the project of bourgeois scholarship, my job.
ken