@Lobster, Great points here. Daido Roshi speaks of the linage of teachers only succeeding if the student is beyond the teacher. If the student only matches the teacher, the linage has not continued/succeeded. Interesting comment about AI as Maitreya. Sounds very familiar of Terence McKenna, have a read if not familiar…

@James, Thanks, Gassho.

@Liara Covert, Totally agree. To compare and judge are relative, human concepts. A tree by itself, is a tree, yet when we place another on next to it, we start judging it’s height/color etc.. We lose objectivity when we have a pair. Hopefully this communication goes beyond the ego and souls.

May all beings be happy.

Gassho,

Wade

Everything changes – even everything changing . . .

When the next Buddha comes as an enlightened gender
independent AI we will all be with the program . . .

I guess there are 2 parts to this issue that has to be clearly defined.
1) The Dharma should always remain and should not be altered.
2) The presentation or packaging whatever you called it are means of spreading the Dharma. These means changes from time to time inorder to effectively spread the dharma.

Rather than altering the teachings and distorting it totally, the dharma should NOT be adapting to the world but rather it is the ways or means of spreading and communicating the dharma that is adapting and changing.

@Jihn, Interesting comments. I’m not sure that they are inline with the theme of this post. Interesting regardless, however. “Victory over negativity”, that’s a dangerous attitude. There’s is nothing to beat. Without negativity, there can be no positive. Inside negativity, there is positivity. Form is emptyness, emptyness is form. Trying to victor over, means there’s always something against something else. There’s always a separation of the whole. Thanks again for your comments.

@ReddyK, In total agreement with you, thanks for showing a different view in the same vein of TMcG’s and mine.

@David, Agree with you. Thanks for the reminder of that which is between thoughts and words. The space between, and developing awareness, and coming from that place. Yummy.

@Evan, I’m with you too, that these are living traditions, discussion and debate are healthy parts of keeping it relevant. To me the essence of any authentic tradition is a pointing to that which is beyond, focused on the present, personal, local, and global. The essence of dharma? The globe spins, connected to something larger, it wobbles, hanging by string it is.

Thank you all for a lively discussion. I’m hoping to get (The Other) Urban Monk [Albert is The Urban Monk.net] in here too. I’ve sent him the thread, here’s hoping he views and replies.

May all beings be blessed by the Dharma.

Gassho,

Wade

I grew up in fundamentalist christianity (in my city, Sydney, Australia some Anglicans are currently debating the ordination of women) and I’ve trained in acupuncture (in the blogosphere there is debate at the moment about how much the current teaching should rely on the original texts). This discussion applies to any tradition.

The question I think is the one raised by ReddyK – what is the essence of the tradition? Discussion of this should ensure that the tradition is kept alive.

In my experience the way forward is not to argue methods or system (those on both sides of any issue can usually use the same method or system).

Which leads me to ask you Wade: what is the essence of the dhama for you?

It flies between the thoughts and words.

This is an area which is really tricky. While I agree that the dharma is one thing and the packaging or presentation is another, the modifications which have occurred, especially in recent times, amount to the creation of a new religion.

There are certain eternal verities, about how the universe works, about how the human psyche works, which do not change. This is the essence of Buddha’s teachings. There have been those who present Buddha’s teachings as they wish they were, rather than how they are.

Thanissaro Bhikkhu phrased it well when he said, “Study after study has shown that mainstream Buddhism, both lay and monastic, has adapted itself thoroughly to the various societies into which it has been introduced—so thoroughly that the original teachings seem in some cases to have been completely distorted. From the earliest centuries of the tradition on up to the present, groups who feel inspired by the Buddha’s teachings, but who prefer to adapt those teachings to their own ends rather than adapting themselves to the teachings, have engaged in creating what might be called designer Buddhism. This accounts for the wide differences we find when we compare, say, Japanese Buddhism, Tibetan, and Thai. (empasis is mine.)

So a thorough grounding in the essence of Dharma is necessary before sensible adaptations to the presentation are done.