A few questions

[Zack]

Hello all,

I am not sure where, but I think I have seen one post on this forum in regards to my question (although I am not sure what the post is) I remember hearing, before I came to this forum, about something called "Dharma ages" or I believe (not sure) "The three ages of the Dharma" I'm sorry I don't have more information on this, as I read this on the internet some time ago. However, its something about how there are different times of the Dharma, the first one being the one closest in time to Shakyamuni Buddha, with the teachings being easily understood, and sattori easily obtained. The last era is that the teachings would not be easily obtained and sattori and understanding would be nearly impossible to obtain. Also, I read yesterday in a book about world religions, there was a statue and it was a Japanese diety and the description was "When the last of the Buddhas teachings are gone, this diety/Buddha (I think the name was Satrieya) will bring back the teachings. And lastly, what is a Buddhist arhat? Also, is there any way of telling which era of the dharma age we are in? My personal opinon is that we are in the beginning of the last age.

Thank you for your time.

Gassho


-Zack
Sat Today

[Kokuu]

Hi Zack

It is a good question but I must admit I tend not to buy into the ideas of degenerate ages of the dharma. Over the 2500 year period of Buddhist thought in different countries there have been ups and down in different traditions with periods where dharma practice seems to have stagnated and periods when it has been re-energised by great teachers.

As a westerner, I would say we are in one of the best ever times for Buddhist practice. There are a huge wealth of teachings available both in 'Buddhist languages' (the languages of traditionally Buddhist countries) and translation and many of us have sufficient food, shelter and free time to really practice without fearing starvation or homelessness. We also have unrivalled access to Buddhist teachers both in-person and via electronic communciation!

Maitreya is said to be the Buddha who arrives in the next age to continue the teachings. Mahayana Buddhism does not portray Shakyamuni Buddha (the historical Buddha) as the source of Buddhist teachings but one in a line of ancestral buddhas. Personally, I rather take this as mythic and symbolic, as buddha mind has always been a possibility, even before Shakyamuni began to teach or after any word of 'Buddhism' is lost.

An Arhat is an enlightened figure in Theravadin Buddhism. Mahayana Buddhists portray them as achieving enlightenment and freedom from suffering for their own needs but really most Theravada teachers work to teach others how to similarly free themselves, even if they don't explicitly adopt the bodhisattva vow of freeing all sentient beings.

This is my understanding at present but refer to Jundo for definitive answers.

Gassho
Kokuu
-sattoday/lah-

[Jakuden]

Hi Zack

It is a good question but I must admit I tend not to buy into the ideas of degenerate ages of the dharma. Over the 2500 year period of Buddhist thought in different countries there have been ups and down in different traditions with periods where dharma practice seems to have stagnated and periods when it has been re-energised by great teachers.

As a westerner, I would say we are in one of the best ever times for Buddhist practice. There are a huge wealth of teachings available both in 'Buddhist languages' (the languages of traditionally Buddhist countries) and translation and many of us have sufficient food, shelter and free time to really practice without fearing starvation or homelessness. We also have unrivalled access to Buddhist teachers both in-person and via electronic communciation!

Maitreya is said to be the Buddha who arrives in the next age to continue the teachings. Mahayana Buddhism does not portray Shakyamuni Buddha (the historical Buddha) as the source of Buddhist teachings but one in a line of ancestral buddhas. Personally, I rather take this as mythic and symbolic, as buddha mind has always been a possibility, even before Shakyamuni began to teach or after any word of 'Buddhism' is lost.

An Arhat is an enlightened figure in Theravadin Buddhism. Mahayana Buddhists portray them as achieving enlightenment and freedom from suffering for their own needs but really most Theravada teachers work to teach others how to similarly free themselves, even if they don't explicitly adopt the bodhisattva vow of freeing all sentient beings.

This is my understanding at present but refer to Jundo for definitive answers.

Gassho
Kokuu
-sattoday/lah-

Wow nice answer Kokuu, thank you!!

Gassho,
Jakuden
SatToday/LAH

[Jundo]

In addition to what Kokuu said ...

In a nutshell, neither Dogen nor most of the Zen Ancestors were big fans of the Mappo/Three Ages doctrine ...

http://http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mappo

... and believe that the Buddha is here and present, and Liberation is possible in this life, now ... and now ... and now ...

In Zuimonki (Okumura Translation, p 154), Dogen noted:

Many people in the secular world say, ‘Although I have aspiration to study the Way, the world is in the age of the Last Dharma. People’s quality has been declining and I have only inferior capabilities. I cannot bear to practice being in accordance with the Dharma. I would like to follow an easier way which is suitable to me, to just make a connection [with the Buddha], and expect to attain realization in a future lifetime.’”

Dogen expressed his counter-argument:

“Now, I say that this saying is totally wrong. In the Buddha Dharma, distinguishing the three periods of time — the age of True Dharma, Semblance Dharma, and Last Dharma — is only a temporary expedient. The genuine teaching of the Way is not like this. When we practice [following the teaching], all of us should be able to attain [the Way]. Monks while [Shakyamuni] was alive were not necessarily superior. There were some monks who had incredibly despicable minds and who were inferior in capacity. The Buddha set forth various kinds of precepts for the sake of bad people and inferior people. Each and every human being has the possibility [to clarify] the Dharma. Do not think that you are not a vessel. When we practice in accordance [with the Dharma], all of us should be able to attain [the Way]. Since we already have a mind, we can distinguish between good and bad. Since we have hands and feet, we don’t lack anything for doing gassho and walking. In practicing the Buddha Dharma, we should not be concerned with the quality [of people]. All beings within the human realm are all vessels [of the Buddha Dharma].

[Jundo]

In addition to what Kokuu said ...

In a nutshell, neither Dogen nor most of the Zen Ancestors were big fans of the Mappo/Three Ages doctrine ...

http://http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mappo

... and believe that the Buddha is here and present, and Liberation is possible in this life, now ... and now ... and now ...

In Zuimonki (Okumura Translation, p 154), Dogen noted:

Many people in the secular world say, ‘Although I have aspiration to study the Way, the world is in the age of the Last Dharma. People’s quality has been declining and I have only inferior capabilities. I cannot bear to practice being in accordance with the Dharma. I would like to follow an easier way which is suitable to me, to just make a connection [with the Buddha], and expect to attain realization in a future lifetime.’”

Dogen expressed his counter-argument:

“Now, I say that this saying is totally wrong. In the Buddha Dharma, distinguishing the three periods of time — the age of True Dharma, Semblance Dharma, and Last Dharma — is only a temporary expedient. The genuine teaching of the Way is not like this. When we practice [following the teaching], all of us should be able to attain [the Way]. Monks while [Shakyamuni] was alive were not necessarily superior. There were some monks who had incredibly despicable minds and who were inferior in capacity. The Buddha set forth various kinds of precepts for the sake of bad people and inferior people. Each and every human being has the possibility [to clarify] the Dharma. Do not think that you are not a vessel. When we practice in accordance [with the Dharma], all of us should be able to attain [the Way]. Since we already have a mind, we can distinguish between good and bad. Since we have hands and feet, we don’t lack anything for doing gassho and walking. In practicing the Buddha Dharma, we should not be concerned with the quality [of people]. All beings within the human realm are all vessels [of the Buddha Dharma].

Gassho, J

SatTodayLAH

[Zack]

In addition to what Kokuu said ...

In a nutshell, neither Dogen nor most of the Zen Ancestors were big fans of the Mappo/Three Ages doctrine ...

http://http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mappo

... and believe that the Buddha is here and present, and Liberation is possible in this life, now ... and now ... and now ...

In Zuimonki (Okumura Translation, p 154), Dogen noted:



Dogen expressed his counter-argument:



Gassho, J

SatTodayLAH

Thank you for clarifying this for me Jundo, I appreciate it very much.

Gassho

Sat today

[Zack]

Hi Zack

It is a good question but I must admit I tend not to buy into the ideas of degenerate ages of the dharma. Over the 2500 year period of Buddhist thought in different countries there have been ups and down in different traditions with periods where dharma practice seems to have stagnated and periods when it has been re-energised by great teachers.

As a westerner, I would say we are in one of the best ever times for Buddhist practice. There are a huge wealth of teachings available both in 'Buddhist languages' (the languages of traditionally Buddhist countries) and translation and many of us have sufficient food, shelter and free time to really practice without fearing starvation or homelessness. We also have unrivalled access to Buddhist teachers both in-person and via electronic communciation!

Maitreya is said to be the Buddha who arrives in the next age to continue the teachings. Mahayana Buddhism does not portray Shakyamuni Buddha (the historical Buddha) as the source of Buddhist teachings but one in a line of ancestral buddhas. Personally, I rather take this as mythic and symbolic, as buddha mind has always been a possibility, even before Shakyamuni began to teach or after any word of 'Buddhism' is lost.

An Arhat is an enlightened figure in Theravadin Buddhism. Mahayana Buddhists portray them as achieving enlightenment and freedom from suffering for their own needs but really most Theravada teachers work to teach others how to similarly free themselves, even if they don't explicitly adopt the bodhisattva vow of freeing all sentient beings.

This is my understanding at present but refer to Jundo for definitive answers.

Gassho
Kokuu
-sattoday/lah-

I agree Kokuu, thank you for the answer.

Gassho
Sat today

[Byrne]

The idea behind the Dharma ending age, as I understand it, is that the further in time and distance we are from a perfectly enlightened Buddha the more diluted and distorted the Dharma is delivered to aspirants towards Buddhahood. The message gets filtered as it is passed from generation to generation.

Mahayana has some very specific ideas about this. But similar ideas can be found in Theravada too. Here’s a great parable about a drum that over time cracks and is mended with a peg. Over long periods of time the drum is repaired over and over until it is all pegs and the original drum is gone. The Buddha says this will happen to his teachings and they will disappear. Until the next Buddha comes along.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn20/sn20.007.than.html

Gassho

Sat Today

[Jundo]

The idea behind the Dharma ending age, as I understand it, is that the further in time and distance we are from a perfectly enlightened Buddha the more diluted and distorted the Dharma is delivered to aspirants towards Buddhahood. The message gets filtered as it is passed from generation to generation.

Mahayana has some very specific ideas about this. But similar ideas can be found in Theravada too. Here’s a great parable about a drum that over time cracks and is mended with a peg. Over long periods of time the drum is repaired over and over until it is all pegs and the original drum is gone. The Buddha says this will happen to his teachings and they will disappear. Until the next Buddha comes along.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn20/sn20.007.than.html

Gassho

Sat Today

I tend to believe that, historically, the source of such beliefs is found in the fact that, with death and the passing of generations, our stories about the increasingly more ancient Buddha and other Ancestors tended to become more and more idealized and romanticized in a process known as "hagiography," the placing on a pedestal, dipping in gold and assigning of all manner of wonders and abilities regarding religious and other heroes.

hagiography is a biography, usually of a saint or saintly person, and usually written to idealize their life or justify their sainthood. In other words, a hagiography is usually a positive presentation of a life, rather than an objective or critical biography. When using a hagiography as a research source, the purpose and style must be taken into consideration, as the writer probably omitted negative information and exaggerated, or even created, positive information about the subject of the hagiography. Lives of the saints are typically hagiographies.

There is evidence that the process even may have begun during the Buddha's own lifetime, much as some currently or recently living modern religious leaders, gurus and the like have been attributed with extreme and miraculous powers by their worshipful followers. The process takes a very good, wise and beautiful person and turns them into a superhuman performer of miracles and unearthly wonders.

Some of the stories of our Ancestors likely are complete, or substantial, inventions of the religious imaginations of later authors. Of course, the characters in the legends exhibit amazing abilities and perfections.

Later followers would compare the then present state of Buddhism and Buddhist practitioners in their own time with that of the idealized stories and find a wide gap. For example, legendary figures and heroes would appear to become fully enlightened, speak and act perfectly for all situations, and frequently exhibit magical or extra-human powers and psychic abilities. Living people would not. Some would explain the gap as due to a decline of the state of the Dharma (granted that the various Buddhist communities did go through fluectuating periods of greater or lessor looseness in practice and moral decadence at various times in history). Flesh and blood, living people may be excellent and gifted, but they tend to fall short of perfection and lack obvious extra-human abilities to those who know them up close. Enlightenment, which in many of the early Suttas, seemed to be happening right and left, suddenly became something that was nearly impossible in this lifetime and might take countless lifetimes (probably due to living peoples' experiences falling short compared to the idealized images in legends. Fortunately, the Zen teachers brought it all back to this life, but there was still a tendency to idealize the Zen teachers and their humanity! We have even seen it in the modern Zen and Buddhist world, where a few Zen and other Buddhist group have tended to idealize their "master" into some kind of super being with cult-like devotion.)

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/sexual-assaults-violent-rages-inside-dark-world-buddhist-teacher/

Personally, I believe that Buddhism has actually developed and been refined, even "improved," over the centuries. I sometimes write this:

There are many flavors of Buddhism, none of them likely precisely the original historical Buddha's formulation, some of them much later adaptations (e.g., Mahayana Buddhism, Tibetan Buddhism, Zen, and even much of the modern "Theravada"). However, why such concern to find the Founder's intent? Something later might even be better (we don't drive Henry Ford's cars or the Wright Brothers' planes today). It is kind of an obsession with Buddhists to feel that earlier is better, rather than finding refinement and improvement in some of what came later as in many forms of development and evolution. In fact, there are many good paths. Of course, I personally recommend the way of Master Dogen and Shikantaza, tried and true, and others here Practice other variations on a Zen theme. When one is sitting Zazen, one can realize the Buddha's Truth in one's own heart. I will tell you that, whether or not this Zen Path is the historical Buddha's or a later remix, it works and I will keep walking it. Whether or not my own Path is exactly in line with the historical Buddha's original formulations (in fact, I am sure it departs in some significant ways), it seems a solid Path and I will stay on it. It is a timeless Path, and it is the Buddha's Path as all drops away on the cushion.

Let me just add that, as far as I know historically, the Buddha's original focus on the "basics" of non-self, impermanence, Dukkha and its cure, and many other basic Teachings are alive and well in Zen Buddhism. We have our own approaches to those sometimes, as do other flavors of Buddhism. However, there are many good and nutritious ways to cook tomato soup, and all are based on the same tomatoes. It may not be the original recipe of the founder of this bistro, but it is a good and healthful soup.

Dogen was different from Shakyamuni Buddha, who are both different from all of us.

But when we are sitting a moment of Zazen ... perfectly whole, just complete unto itself, without borders and duration, not long or short, nothing to add or take away, containing all moments and no moments in "this one moment" ... piercing Dukkha, attaining non-self, non-attached ... then there is not the slightest gap between each of us and the Buddha.

Gassho, J

SatTodayLAH

[Jakuden]

How could Buddhism stay the same, when it is a product of human thought? [emoji848] It’s going to be whatever contemporary humans make it, and humanity will never cease changing.

Gassho
Jakuden
SatToday/LAH



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Byrne]

Given that the words of Shakyamuni Buddha weren’t even so much as written down until centuries after his death it doesn’t seem that far fetched to me that true understanding of what was taught would distort over time. That doesn’t seem mythical or fantastical. That seems realistic. Though I’m not so sure anyone can map out these Dharma periods any more accurately than fantastics who predict the date of Armageddon.

So many Buddhist commentaries spend so much time defining and illustrating words in other languages, backtracking multiple centuries of commentaries and sutras to what they understand the words of Shakyamuni Buddha express. Hopefully we do our best to understand what is being taught and whether we believe it to be true more so than what we literally believe to be true or false.

When I was younger I used to play music with a guy who had a regular gig around NYC as a storyteller at all the big public parks. I asked him how you tell a meaningful story. He said, “Express something true without saying it, know your audience, and use words they understand.” Buddhism has an amazing way of catering to the needs of so many different people in different times, places, and cultures.

Gassho

Sat Today