In his influential Tibetan Renaissance (publ. 2005), Ronald Davidson categorizes the two eminent masters of the late 12th and early 13th centuries, Sa-skya Pandita Kun-dga'-rgyal-mtshan and 'Bri-gung 'Jig-rten-mgon-po, as "neoconservatives," portraying them as having an un-Buddhist and inauthentic fixation on India, and as working to suppress any deviation from their norms. This paper critically investigates Davidson's general and specific interpretations of his categorization and raises the question of methodology.
A careful reading of the Buddhist epic Saundarananda shows that the poet Aśvaghosa strategically repeated and manipulated key words, phrases, and images from the love scene in sarga IV in the scene of Sundarī's despair in sarga VI. The earlier images of love and pleasure are transformed into symbols of despair and misery, illustrating the fundamental Buddhist principles of suffering and impermanence.
In this paper after a short discussion of the Rigvedic dialogue hymns and their general interpretations focusing on the ākhyāna theory and "Legendenzauber" one special hymn (10, 10) dealing with the famous dialogue between the twins Yama and Yamī has been translated with an elaborate commentary. Here especially its treatment in a recent book of Susanne Knaus on the Rigvedic dialogue hymns forms the starting-point. One of the problems of this hymn is the interpretation of the erotic aspects of this dialogue and the situation of the beginning of the human race, which mostly is associated with unavoidable incest.
This article discusses the procreation of gods and sages in ancient India, which is contrasted to the ordinary way of procreation among human beings. It is sporadically mentioned in the classical Sanskrit literature, but more systematically in the commentary literature. The divine beings could dispense with sexual contact for bringing about their offspring and produce offspring by such acts as touching (śparsa), thinking (samkalpa), addressing (ullapana), smiling (upahasana), etc., some of which are also found in a list of the so-called dohadas of plants and trees for bringing about flowers (puspa).
The fragment of the recitative for a sacrifice to the waters which was inserted in the Avestan Yasna under the title āb zōhr, if correctly understood, teaches that the offerings must be brought to stagnant waters.
The introduction to the oldest Vinaya subcommentary of the Theravādins, Vajirabuddhi's undated Vajirabuddhitīkā (after the 7th, before the 12th centuries) has a parallel in Upasena's Saddhammapajjotikā, a commentary on the Niddesa (877 AD). A detailed comparison of this otherwise not transmitted passage that describes and defines a perfect speaker (vatta) makes it plain that the text of the Saddhammapajjotikā as it has come down to us is heavily corrupted. It, furthermore, made probable that the Vajirabuddhitīkā borrowed this passage from the Saddhammapajjotikā before the corruption of the latter. Thus we have the 9th century AD as a terminus post quem for the origin of the Vajirabuddhitīkā.