Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
The Dharma Ending Age.
http://buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=8,3198,0,0,1,0
Protecting the Dharma or destroying the Dharma?
Protecting the Dharma or destroying the Dharma?
0
Comments
?
SN 16.13 Saddhammapatiruupaka Sutta:
"But there is no disappearance of the true Dhamma, Kassapa, till a counterfeit Dhamma arises in the world."
But I think right now the dhamma is still available, so those who wanted to practice it still can.
According to recent scholarship, the Mahayana suttras developed simultaneously with the others. There is some scholarship that says that the Pali developed from one batch of the Buddha's teachings, ignoring other teachings. And Mahayana developed from the teachings that those compiling the Pali ignored. This is fascinating.
The truth is simple: the future is unknown.
The second is to a booklet that critiques Theravada. The relevant part to evolution of sutras is on pg. 4, under "What is Theravada?"
http://www.buddhistische-gesellschaft-berlin.de/downloads/brokenbuddhanew.pdf
"The Pali Tripitika contains a truly amazing variety of material, from ethics to epistemology to practical wisdom. It would be very difficult to encompass all this material into a single schoofdl or system and indeed, Theravadins have not done this. Rather, they have emphasized some of the Buddha's doctrines and ideas and de-emphasized or even ignored others. For example, the Four Expressions of Sympathy (sangha vatthuni) are frequently mentioned by the Buddha and could have important implications for a deeper understanding of love and compassion, particularly their social application. Mahayana used them to develop a whole philosophy of practical altruism, but they are given almost no attention in Theravada.
To give another example. One of the central concepts of the Buddha's teachings is dependent origination. There are two versions of this doctrine; one showing the arising of suffering, and the other showing the arising of liberation and freedom. The first of these is arguably the most well known, although not necessarily well understood, of all Buddhist doctrines. ... The second, and one would think the more important of the two, is virtually unknown, even by quite learned Theravadins. Carolyn Rhys Davids called this positive version of dependent origination an 'oasis', and asked, 'How might it have altered the whole face of Buddhism in the West if that sequence had been made the illustration of causal law!' Indeed, how might it have altered the whole face of Theravada in Asia?"
By S. Dhammika. for info on the author, see: www.buddhanet.net/dhammika.htm
I think the above sheds light on a hitherto unacknowledged process of selectivity from the Buddha's teachings, by both Northern and Southern schools, that helps us understand how those schools evolved, and that they both evolved from the foundational teachings of the Buddha.
"If even Buddhists do not stand up to uphold the integrity of the Dharma, this is truly the Dharma ending-age, because if Buddhists do not stand up for Buddhism, who will? And if we consider ourselves as Buddhists, while neither proactively standing up for it, nor supporting others who do, we need to reassess our identity as Buddhists..."
"As good Buddhists, we need to bear personal responsibility for the state of the Dharma." This is a powerful article. (italics mine)
While I agree with zenff, that to a large extent, "end times" can be dogmatic projections, in the eye of the beholder, so to speak, this article nonetheless raises an important issue about how-and whether-to address corruption of various sorts in the Dharma, not to mention outright violence. And what do we do if we find ourselves swimming against the tide in our efforts to restore integrity to the Dharma?
Bless you, Ch'an Noob, for this gift. _/\_
I often recall hearing stories that early Christians were accused of drowning babies and cannibalism by those who didn't understand baptism and the eucharist.
I personally tend to not be a big fan of Tibetan Buddhism, mostly because I am not fond of total reliance upon a guru, not fond of "secret" teachings, (and it is so pervasive on message boards these days that it sort of eclipses all other traditions)...but....and this is a huge but....The reality is I have never practiced TB. I view it from the outside and thus don't really understand it enough to make such criticisms with any real validity. I have a couple friends who are TB though and they are lovely people with a good understanding of the Dharma, and when we talk, we are generally in 100% agreement on the teachings (once we get past them not understanding Japanese Buddhist words and me not understanding Tibetan ones! lol). So while I am not especially attracted to that tradition myself, I have to put my pre-conceived ideas aside and acknowledge that the limits in my own understanding are undoubtably the biggest problem.
Also.....some people like chocolate, others vanilla. Fortunately the Buddha-Dharma comes in a number of flavours!
Myself, I am a follower of Jodo Shinshu. This tradition is largely misunderstood by westerners who are uncomfortable with the superficial similarities between Pure Land and Christianity, and its non-meditative approach. Even other Pure Landers are sometimes in disagreement with Shin's tendency towards a non-literal interpretation, and then of course the fact that it has the longest tradition of allowing its clergy to marry and have families. Ultimately Shin is probably the most liberal tradition due to its reliance on Tariki rather than Jiriki (other power rather than contrived ego power for attaining enlightenment) and of course there will always be those with a more conservative bent who will be uncomfortable with this.
To the discussion of Dharma ending age, this is an idea strong in the development of Shin Buddhism. Personally I don't give it much thought though.
I think we can all agree that where abuse occurs, Teachers taking advantage sexually or financially of students for example, this is a bad thing, and I think we should not take the approach the Catholic Church did of trying to sweep it under the rug. I think we should be as transparent as possible. But I would be hesitant to get into being critical of other traditions practices.
I should also add, that in my personal experience of talking with Theravadan Monks, Zen teachers, and students of Tibetan along with of course Jodo Shinshu teachers and followers, the sectarian arguments are almost non-existant. It seems far more common on internet forums like this than the actual Buddhist communities I have encountered.
So for me I think we should stand up for Buddhism, but bringing on a lot of sectarian bickering is not the way to do that.
Rather I think we stand up by working together. Maybe a good step in that direction would be for all of us to try to understand other traditions better.
I agree that the article could be construed in such a way as to pit one school against another, and I don't think that would be at all constructive. Let it be for each school to police itself, and apply the points the article raises within its own membership. I don't think this diminishes the value of the article.
You think as Buddhism disappeared in India, the few remaining Buddhists didn't claim it was the decline and ending of Buddhism? You think when Buddhism was almost extinguished in Tibet, the few monks in hiding didn't believe that was the decline prophesied? How about when China outlawed almost all religious expression? How about the fact that until the West began exploring the Dharma in all its flavors, Buddhism was stagnant and on the decline in much of the East as only empty ritual?
And who gets to say what is and isn't the True Dharma? Who gets to appoint themselves the position of integrity police?
Vague prophesies of some future collapse of Buddhism have no place in a living religion. All it does is reinforce our fear of change in any form and our tendency to worship tradition simply because it's tradition.
Have a little faith in the power of the Dharma. Peel away the mystic mumbo jumbo of Tibetan Buddhism and the Dharma shines through. Shake the smug certainty out of a Zen Buddhist and the Dharma is revealed. Beat it, stomp on it, wrap it in tinfoil and make party hats out of it, and the Dharma remains a force that cannot be denied. It will be here ten thousand years from now, and ten times ten thousand. As long as there are people who read the Noble Truths, there will be Buddhas in the world.
Good post imho.
The Dharma isn't doomed. The future of it is in our hands.
The Zen community in the US has been struggling for 30 years with how to deal with unscrupulous teachers. These problems won't solve themselves, it's up to members of that community to take a stand, and to stand united when teachers make a travesty of the precepts and the Dharma. The future of the Dharma is, indeed, in our hands.
In my opinion the practices are the least corrupted over the years.
Instead of slandering traditions that maybe corrupted, in many ways by the students themselves. Why not just look for trust worthy schools that still operate at fully moral capacity?
http://www.greatdreams.com/sacred/age_kali.htm
Personally, I don't worry or think of the time we are in as a religious epoch. There are great challenges that we all need to address, immediately. The world economy is collapsing and so is the ecology of our planet. Soon there will be 7 billion people on our planet.
http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/
The Dharma teaches us to know our true nature. Once that is known, it is time to be involved in compassionate endeavors, no matter when this is.
Gate, Gate, Paragate,Parasamgate Bodhi Swoha!
The very definition of a Buddha is someone who
rediscovered the dhamma.
Some common sense will tell you that of course
the dhamma can be lost.
The arguments about sexual practices in some schools
shows that we dont know what the true dhamma is.
Buddha warned that confusion will reign before the
dhamma is lost. Just count the number of buddhist
sects in the world today.
My opinion is that a honest Christian disciple who keeps the commandements doesn't not even know Buddhism (hence no chance of slander) might possibily end up in a better place at the end of life compared to a skeptic who "dabbled" in Buddhism.
Thdn again, some time back to 500 years after the buddha's death there were alot of changes to the suttas, some scholars say that the dharma was finally written down with some officialism, and around the same time the mahayana suttas were revealed and documented, ch'an soon followed, and about one thousand years later at our 1500 mark the west was in generally good trade and discourse with the far east (thanks to marco polo and ghengis khan). On into today.
So if is true, which it could seem to be; then the buddha predicted it, and if he predicted it to end wiyh the comming of maitrya buddhas comming then it is as it should be. So we must focus on our practice, remain vigilent against what we might find to be false preaching or false dhamma, and continue on our path, there is nothing to worry about.
And if it is not true and it is itself false dhamma then we know it is evidence of imperfection within the transfer of dhamma through history. So we must focus on our practice, remain vigilent against what we might find to be false preaching or false dhamma, and continue on our path, there is nothing to worry about.
And if it is not true or false dhamma then we learn that the written dhamma is innately subject to the consiquences of perception and emotion, and this can lead us down a wrong path. So we must focus on our practice remain vigilent against what we might find to be false preaching or false dhamma and continue on our path, there is nothing to worry about.
"Killing is evil only in the event that the killer fails to recognize his victim as empty and dream-like. On the contrary, if one no longer sees his opponent as a living being separate from emptiness, then he is free to kill him at will."
I SO want Ch'an to be a bastion of morality in Mahayana, but I keep running into problematic quotes. This one scares me.