Mara the devil is nonself

In mathematics, the transitive property of equality states that if a = b and b = c, then a = c.  This, I must say, yields some pretty interesting results in Buddhism if we use Buddhist terms instead of bare symbols like a and b, etc.

Take for example Mara, the devil of Buddhism.  He is equal or exchangeable with the Five Aggregates of form, feeling, perception, volitional formation, and consciousness.  

“When there is form, Radha, there might be Mara, or the killer, or the one who is killed.  Therefore, Radha, see form as Mara, see it as the killer, see it as the one who is killed.  See it as a disease, as a tumor, as a dart, as misery, as really misery.  Those who see it thus see rightly.  When there if feeling ... When there is perception ... When there are volitional formations ... When there is consciousness, Radha, there might be Mara, or the killer, or the one who is killed” (S. iii. 189). (trans. Bhikkhu Bodhi)

Following this line of reasoning, the Five Aggregates are also equal with anattâ (anatma), often translated as no-self or nonself, which is taught in Buddhism without exception, for example, "Bhikkhus, form is nonself" (S. iii. 22–23).  We can conclude from this that Mara, our Buddhist devil, equals no-self.  Put schematically, Mara = the Five Aggregates and the Five Aggregates = nonself ergo, Mara = nonself, or the same, the nonself is Mara!  

I can imagine many Buddhists saying to themselves, "That can’t be right—you’re crazy. Mara can’t be the nonself!"  Well, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but yes he can.  At least the logic is inescapable.  But it may not be sufficient to shatter the crazy belief of some Buddhist sects that strongly believe the Buddha walked around ancient India teaching everyone that there is no fundamental self when in fact he only taught that the Five Mara Aggregates are not the self (anattâ).  In other words, our real self is not connected in anyway with the Five Mara Aggregates which constitute the psychophysical body. 

I must say, ancient India was not without its own of share boneheads even among Buddhist monks; nor are we moderns in short supply of wrong ideas about what the Buddha actually taught.  Given that modernity is at bottom, ‘lite nihilism’, I don't find it surprising that modern Buddhists believe that the teaching of nonself is authentic Buddhism when it makes no logical sense that the Buddha taught this. 

Comments

[Wonderwheel]

"Now, now girls. Cease that name calling and hair pulling." said by the Queen of name calling and hair pulling!
LOL!

[minx]

Now, now girls. Cease that name calling and hair pulling.

[Lama Guru Shining Path Holy Light]

You forgot to mention that Gotama the persona (khandhic namorupic eso kaya...) is = Mara.

As such, all brass statues, paintings, drawings etc. "of the buddha" are in fact persona non grata representations of Mara, of Gotama, of the khandhic logos which is "not the Buddha who is akimkanna (a NON-PERSON[A]).

That all current “statues of the Buddha” are in fact gold-covered or brass homage’s to Mara, or Gotama, cannot be denied and is most certainly fitting for an perversely upside-down corrupt materialistic pseudo-religion far diverged from its original, which praises Mara-Gotama over that of the Buddha who is spirit and his wisdom-attainment which culminated in the subjugation of the spirit over that of persona (= anatta, Mara, Gotama), or, as depicted in earliest iconography, the Buddha is undepictable, just as in sutta he is deemed a “non-person”; [SN 1.132]

But im sure you (didnt) already make that logical conclusion from doctrine.

[ryoken]

yes mara has no self, is not a self either.

[Lama Guru Shining Path Holy Light]

Hmmmmmmm, this sounds like a copy of my earlier article

http://aryan-buddhism.blogspot.com/2009/09/gotama-is-mara-is-evil-in-sutra.html

coincidence Im sure

The Zennist: Not a coincidence. The Zennist published this blog in 2007. http://zennist.typepad.com/zenfiles/2007/11/this-entails-th.html