Commentary Thread: Feminine and Enlightenment (Dan V Sam)

[BMcGilly07]

This from the "Ultimate Extinction of the Dharma" Sutra:

"When the Dharma is about to disappear, women will become vigorous and will at all times do deeds of virtue. Men will grow lax and will no longer speak the Dharma.

"When my Dharma disappears it will be just like an oil lamp which flares brightly for an instant just before it goes out. After this time it is difficult to speak with certainty of what will follow.

"Good persons will be hard to find; at most there will be one or two. Men will die younger, and women will live longer."

Kevin, this Sutra used to be available as a prologue to one of your downloadable, DOS versions of Venom Crystals or perhaps it was Evil Wisdom, but it's no longer found anywhere on the website. The only other place I've ever seen it in print was in a prologue to the Shurangama Sutra, it was included by the Chinese Buddhist Hsuan Hua, and then failed to transcribe it. Do you have the short text available for download? I think it should be universally accessible on your website as it once was.

Sorry for the threadjack.

[Lydiia Knightjoy]

If a person is unqualified to judge whether women are spiritually and philosophically inferior to men, then their judgements will be invalid. That's all there is to it.

There is no question that the above statement is true, however, how does it help anyone in their understanding of the subject being discussed? To whom would it not be obvious?

Allow me to illustrate the pointlessness of the statement. In any argument, disagreement or difference of opinion, isn't it clear that each participant feels that the other is unqualified in their assessment of the issue? Wouldn't they otherwise be in agreement?

If such a statement or similarly pointed phraseology is made at any point in a debate, it is nothing more than a failure to come up with anything substantive to support one's position. You may as well say "You stupid fuck. You have no idea what you're talking about."

Let me finish with this: If a person is unqualified to judge whether he is spiritually and philosophically superior to others, then his judgements will be invalid.

[Kevin Solway]

If a person is unqualified to judge whether women are spiritually and philosophically inferior to men, then their judgements will be invalid. That's all there is to it.

There is no question that the above statement is true, however, how does it help anyone in their understanding of the subject being discussed? To whom would it not be obvious?

My point was that people are asking the wrong questions and seeking for something that is impossible. Unsatisfied with obvious truths people seek something more palatable.

Our standard education, including the academic world, and religion, encourages us to think that anyone can make valid judgements about anything - especially if they have enough peer support. For example, you have Robert Larkin claiming that people are enlightened when people within their own religion judge them to be enlightened. This brainwashing needs to be undermined.

[sue hindmarsh]

Lydiia,

Kevin’s conclusion -

If a person is unqualified to judge whether women are spiritually and philosophically inferior to men, then their judgements will be invalid. That's all there is to it.

- is a logical one, for it accords with Dan’s description of the feminine mind:

The feminine is trapped in relation to the detail of the world and cannot step back to see the proverbial “big picture”. Indeed, the feminine cannot step back at all precisely because its engagement with phenomena is passive. In short, the feminine is characterised by relation.

Being thus “trapped”, she is unable to step outside of her own immediacy to reflect and judge. Thereby making her judgements of others, as Kevin describes, “invalid”.

[sue hindmarsh]

And I should have added that being "trapped" also invalidates judgements made about their own self.

[Kevin Solway]

I should also note that Samadhi's posts, being unfocussed, rambling, and pointless, is indicative of the feminine mindset. Samadhi seems unable to stand back from the discussion and discern which parts of it are significant and which parts aren't. Therefore he feels the need to respond to each and every portion of it in turn - which results in his vastly over-length posts which never get around to saying anything.

This is what Dan means by being trapped in a relationship to all things in the world - unable to stand back and see things in perspective.

[sue hindmarsh]

Kevin wrote:

Our standard education, including the academic world, and religion, encourages us to think that anyone can make valid judgements about anything - especially if they have enough peer support. This brainwashing needs to be undermined.

Yes, indeed. For from this lack of rational discrimination arises the petty-minded, and unfounded discriminations, such as, sexism and chauvinism.

[sue hindmarsh]

Kevin wrote:

Samadhi seems unable to stand back from the discussion and discern which parts of it are significant and which parts aren't.

This inability of Sam's also means that his judgements about, for example, motherhood and female oppression, do not stem from any deep understanding of the roots of those concepts - but are brought to the discussion because they are part of the standard worldview - and therefore will be accepted at face value. Dan, in his replies, has thankfully put paid to that idea.

[Faust]

Kevin wrote:

Our standard education, including the academic world, and religion, encourages us to think that anyone can make valid judgements about anything - especially if they have enough peer support. This brainwashing needs to be undermined.

Yes, indeed. For from this lack of rational discrimination arises the petty-minded, and unfounded discriminations, such as, sexism and chauvinism.

Explain this Sue. It also depends what you mean by "sexism," for there are obvious physical and psychological differences between the two sexes

[Lydiia Knightjoy]

Our standard education, including the academic world, and religion, encourages us to think that anyone can make valid judgements about anything - especially if they have enough peer support. For example, you have Robert Larkin claiming that people are enlightened when people within their own religion judge them to be enlightened. This brainwashing needs to be undermined.

Another example: You have QRS claiming that they are enlightened when people within their own Genius Forum judge them to be enlightened. This brainwashing needs to be undermined.

[Kevin Solway]

You have QRS claiming that they are enlightened when people within their own Genius Forum judge them to be enlightened. This brainwashing needs to be undermined.

Just because we might believe we are enlightened, and some others might think so as well, doesn't mean we are enlightened.

[sue hindmarsh]

Lydiia wrote:

You have QRS claiming that they are enlightened when people within their own Genius Forum judge them to be enlightened. This brainwashing needs to be undermined.

Over the years there have been a few posters that "judged" Quinn, Rowden, or Solway to be enlightened, but many more have judged them to be un-enlightened. In both cases, those making the judgements usually didn't accept that their judgement came from their own 'enlightened' state. They'd explain this by saying that different degrees of consciousness do not exist; thereby making enlightenment either something no one had, or something everyone already had. And then, inconsistent as it obviously is, they'd proclaim that some long-dead-god, or long-dead-historical figure, or even some modern day guru-type were, or are, "enlightened".

Holding such inconsistent beliefs is very, very common - which is great news for those who hold those beliefs - but extremely detrimental for the advancement of Wisdom.

[Dan Rowden]

Just to let everyone know my next response to Sam will arrive in a few hours. Lots to consider in that last post.

[sue hindmarsh]

Faust wrote:

Kevin: Our standard education, including the academic world, and religion, encourages us to think that anyone can make valid judgements about anything - especially if they have enough peer support. This brainwashing needs to be undermined.

Sue: Yes, indeed. For from this lack of rational discrimination arises the petty-minded, and unfounded discriminations, such as, sexism and chauvinism.

Explain this Sue. It also depends what you mean by "sexism," for there are obvious physical and psychological differences between the two sexes.

According to Dictionary.com
Sexism:
1. attitudes or behaviour based on traditional stereotypes of sexual roles.
2. discrimination or devaluation based on a person's sex, as in restricted job opportunities; esp., such discrimination directed against women.

Those discriminations are based on Society’s values - values that change over time due to changing circumstances. For example, in the past it was thought females were incapable of being educated. In the modern era, that idea is mostly considered incorrect. Another example is that males are not nurturing enough to take proper care of children - a belief that has been shown to be untrue as more fathers take on the traditional female roles in the raising of their children.

So even though males and females do have “physical and psychological differences”, none of them are necessarily a constant disadvantage, or advantage. Times change, and so does our discriminations.

Society’s discriminations aren’t based on what is true, they’re based on lies and falsehoods which work to maintain and foster Society‘s values.

[RobertGreenSky]

Some of those women are recognized as enlightened successors, meaning they are recognized in Buddhism as 'sages'.

It doesn't mean anything whatsoever that people are recognized as enlightened successors. All the Catholic Popes are recognized as being essentially enlightened successors, and yet they are almost without exception incredibly ignorant on every score.

It doesn't mean anything to me, but it might mean something to someone. The recognition of women as enlightened masters by the dharma community is better evidence that women are sages than all your references to cows put together is evidence against it.

This from the "Ultimate Extinction of the Dharma" Sutra:

"When the Dharma is about to disappear, women will become vigorous and will at all times do deeds of virtue. Men will grow lax and will no longer speak the Dharma.

"When my Dharma disappears it will be just like an oil lamp which flares brightly for an instant just before it goes out. After this time it is difficult to speak with certainty of what will follow.

"Good persons will be hard to find; at most there will be one or two. Men will die younger, and women will live longer."

Unfortunately you didn't make any attempt to understand what was being said in those incredibly profound words.

They describe exactly what is happening today - down to a tee.

Men no longer speak the Dharma and so the Dharma is dead. Religion becomes filled with women. The world worships Women and holds them to be the paragon of all Virtue. Men are dwindling.

I understood the words which is why I was ridiculing them. Since you did not - and cannot - establish that the sutra is necessarily referring to these times then the words are no more profound than any apocalyptic literature, whether Revelations or the noodlings of Nostradamus. Was the sutra true 500 years ago? Will it be true 500 years from now? All it is, is pseudo-prophetic noodling which expresses the point of view of some bigoted bonehead who wanted to pretend he could foresee the future. How fundamentalist of you to use it. There are obviously such people as Buddhist fundies.

As the men grow increasingly profligate and the health of men generally suffers the resilient and perservering women become healthier and live longer; good thing for us they do since the lazy shiftless Dharma-rejecting men are dying younger.

You don't seem to understand that as women thrive, the Dharma dies.

However, that's not the fault of women.

You don't seem to understand that the author(s) of the useless sutra are boneheads and their predictions about the future would concern only people who are both the Buddhist equivalent of Nostradamus groupies and who have an axe to grind about women.

How are you going to establish for us that it is 1) prophetic literature in the first place and 2) that it is applicable to this time? In the meanwhile, legitimate evidence about the equal capacity of women, Dogen, above, has not been answered except to call it a lie and a mistranslation. Why haven't you gone to trouble first of establishing that you were correct in labeling it dishonest, and second, if you cannot, and you can't, then why haven't you actually answered it with real evidence instead of quoting the useless work of boneheaded would-be prophets?

Dogen's successor did acknowledge the transmission of the dharma to women.

As I mentioned above, it is completely meaningless whom is whoever's successor.

The Zen Master Hakuin was "passed" as his Master's successor. But Hakuin later discovered that his Master wasn't actually qualified to pass him, even though his Master had been "passed" by his own Master in the accepted way, and had a piece of paper saying that he was qualified.

Maybe rocks can attain Buddhahood.

Not "maybe" - they definitely can - given the right conditions. It is in this manner that all things in the Universe have an equal capacity for enlightenment - including women.

Unfortunately for you, the Dogen is still legitimate evidence and it says men and women have equal capacity. The Holy All-Seeing Prophetic Sutra of the Cows on the other hand is apocalyptic nonsense.

[Kevin Solway]

Was the sutra true 500 years ago? Will it be true 500 years from now?

"The Ultimate Extinction of the Dharma" Sutra speaks of any age in which the Dharma dies and the feminine prospers.

Dogen, above, has not been answered except to call it a lie and a mistranslation.

I have said that it is either a lie or mistranslation, or it is true in the sense that all things in the Universe have an equal capacity for enlightenment.

In the strict sense, not even two individuals of the same sex have an equal capacity for enlightenment, let alone two genders as physically and psychologically different as men and women.

[RobertGreenSky]

Robert, unfortunately your above post has nothing to do with the topic of the debate. There is no debate that women have intuition, but so do cows. Therefore it is clear that merely having the power of intuition does not make for wisdom. Otherwise all cows would be wise.

Wisdom is not the same as intuition, even though, in the enlightened person, wisdom is intuitive. As Dan says, "Wisdom is spontaneity after reflection."

Kevin,

You are entirely mistaken that the post does not relate in full to the debate, and even though I do not once reference cows, and your obsession with cows is btw becoming questionable. In his use of 'intution' as his fourth term, Sam referred to a key element of Mahayana theory and practice.

Intuition is a way to access information from an inner perspective. The realization of an inner perspective is a large part of what enlightenment is about. In enlightenment, information may come through the ego or persona but it isn’t the ego/persona that operates on the information. One isn’t calculating, what’s best for me? So how does one know what to do? Intuition. In the sutras, they call it prajna, or heart-wisdom. It arises from within. The presence of the heart-wisdom is subtle. Most people are familiar with conscience, the inner directive that can serve as a watchdog of right and wrong if one has not been overwhelmed or subverted. Intuition goes beyond conscience in that it can serve as a guide and not just a monitor of one’s actions.

The post you cheaply ignore by merely labeling it irrelevant deals precisely with prajnaparamita, the compassion inherent in the Bodhisattva, and even with the famous 'Buddha Twirls A Flower' story. Observe that Sam's view in the debate encompasses Mahakashapa's realization, but how does Dan's? Sam's reference to 'intuition' and 'prajna' are sufficiently inclusive that Mahakashapa's realization can be supported in it, but howso that realization under the material Dan has given us? The post you so cheaply ignored includes:

At first sight, The Perfection of Wisdom is bewildering, full of paradox and apparent irrationality. Yet once one accepts that trying to unravel these texts without experiencing the intuitions behind them is not satisfactory, it becomes clear that paradox and irrationality are the only means of conveying to the reader those underlying intuitions that would otherwise be impossible to express.

Ataraxia, above, knowingly drew our attention to intution. Whatever are the debate dynamics, Sam has expressed a view in accord with Mahayana theory and practice. The fact is supported by reference both to prajnaparamita and to the Buddha twirling a flower.

[Kevin Solway]

Intuition is a way to access information from an inner perspective.

Like cows do.

One isn’t calculating, what’s best for me?

Cows are not calculating, what's best for me?

Once again your post has nothing to do with femininity, which makes it irrelevant to the topic at hand.

You need to establish that the intuition of enlightened beings is the same as the intuition of women (which is the same as the intuition of cows).

[RobertGreenSky]

Was the sutra true 500 years ago? Will it be true 500 years from now?

"The Ultimate Extinction of the Dharma" Sutra speaks of any age in which the Dharma dies and the feminine prospers.

Dogen, above, has not been answered except to call it a lie and a mistranslation.

I have said that it is either a lie and mistranslation, or it is true in the sense that all things in the Universe have an equal capacity for enlightenment.

That is terribly cheap response to legitimate points. Would you mind showing us some other times where the Sutra was borne out? I mean, what times were those?

You cannot verify the Holy All-Seeing Prophetic Sutra of the Cows is necessarily referring to this time. Your personal opinion that the dharma is dying - yet observe its rebirth in the West - is useless to someone needing real evidence rather than your mere opinion. Fundies can always claim that their favorite apocalyptic literature is being proven true; Revelations says that times will be bad and times are bad, aren't they? Nostradamus was real close, after all, having referred to 'Hister'.

What is even more cheap is your sly attempt to use the boneheaded author's denigrations of women as if they were necessarily correct. The Dogen is better evidence that men and women have equal capacity - never mind your useless noodling about rocks, because at that point men and women and cows and rocks would all be equal, making it an inane observation.

The Dogen stands, The Holy All-Seeing Prophetic Sutra of the Cows fails, except for the fundies who believe if it has 'Sutra' on it that it must be correct, and for the time being what the evidence shows is that men and women have equal spiritual capacity.

[RobertGreenSky]

Intuition is a way to access information from an inner perspective.

Like cows do.

One isn’t calculating, what’s best for me?

Cows are not calculating, what's best for me?

Once again your post has nothing to do with femininity, which makes it irrelevant to the topic at hand.

You need to establish that the intuition of enlightened beings is the same as the intuition of women (which is the same as the intuition of cows).

I don't care if you are the 'S' in QRS, if you can't answer me any better than that then I'm going to ignore you. No, my post was not about femininity. My post was about the debate and this is the debate commentary thread.

You have mindfully ignored evidence that Sam is in accord with Mahayana Buddhism and so that evidence stands. It stands until there is evidence presented against it - the claim that comments on the debate have no place in the debate commentary thread is not an answer.

Additionally, you've quoted Sam but attributed it to me, and your patented reliance on cows might be revealing of an intellectual limitation although having no interest in cows myself perhaps I simply fail to understand the attraction. It's generally good advice to vary your material, here before the lowing of the cows puts us all to sleep.

[RobertGreenSky]

If a person is unqualified to judge whether women are spiritually and philosophically inferior to men, then their judgements will be invalid. That's all there is to it.

There is no question that the above statement is true, however, how does it help anyone in their understanding of the subject being discussed? To whom would it not be obvious?

My point was that people are asking the wrong questions and seeking for something that is impossible. Unsatisfied with obvious truths people seek something more palatable.

Our standard education, including the academic world, and religion, encourages us to think that anyone can make valid judgements about anything - especially if they have enough peer support. For example, you have Robert Larkin claiming that people are enlightened when people within their own religion judge them to be enlightened. This brainwashing needs to be undermined.

Kevin, you need to pay attention.

We do have recourse in contemporary Buddhism to observing whom is a recognized master and which will include women. However, I am going to gleefully muddy that water by referring us to an older thread here at GF in which Victor Danilchenko brought up how recognized masters in Japan before and during World War II supported the fascist government and nationalist and even outright racist beliefs. I believe it is Intelligence and the desire to reproduce.

If recognized masters could not be said to be enlightened, then of what does the recognition 'master' or 'enlightened' within the 'dharma community' really assure us? And the answer is 'nothing', and the implications go far beyond Japan in the 1930's and 1940's, because if the recognition of the enlightenment of D. T. Suzuki by the Japanese Zen community was meaningless, then how can the recognition of the enlightenments of Hakuin, Rinzai, Hui-neng, Bodhidharma, Nagarjuna, and the Buddha himself be said to be meaningful?

Suddenly we are arrived where mere belief in the enlightenment of those figures is shown foolhardy. And the individual is left with this, that either they help you or they don't. Nagarjuna remains fine evidence in these discussions, but that is all he is (and all he ever was). Nagarjuna is a benchmark of sorts but not because he was enlightened - we have just made sure we cannot reasonably claim that of anyone, and interestingly, also of QRS since their supposed perfect agreements with Nagarjuna, etc., are rendered useless. Nagarjuna is however a benchmark on the supposed meanings of Buddhism, particularly topics relating to him like 'emptiness'. Bodhidharma is now exponent of method. He is still a broken-down gap-toothed old barbarian, but we cannot reasonably accept his enlightenment.

I do not think the Patriarchs would have it any other way. The Buddha urged us to question everything he said, and which cannot be successfully done if you believe the Buddha was enlightened. I have great affection for the Patriarchs but not because I believe they attained some cosmic status, but rather because they have touched my life; I am changed for having 'known them'. If they do not help you, then what are they but 'evidence' in a message board argument?

- RGS, above, Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 4:28 pm

If you don't pay attention to what I write then don't bother interpreting it because you're going to fuck it up. I've thrown out everyone's claims to enlightenment. Your claim is being exhibited in your masterful work with cows and with apocalyptic sutras.

That the dharma community holds someone is enlightened is evidence, if not unimpeachable proof. What do you have to counter it? Nothing of any substance, discounting Appeals To Bovines and The Holy All-Seeing Prophetic Sutra of the Cows.


And hello, Lydiia! Charming women, she.

[RobertGreenSky]

The Buddha Speaks the Ultimate Extinction of the Dharma Sutra

Thus I have heard. At one time the Buddha was in the state of Kushinagara. The Tathagata was to enter nirvana within three months and the bhikshus and Bodhisattvas as well as the great multitude of beings had come to pay homage to the Buddha and to bow in reverence. The World Honored One was tranquil and silent. He spoke not a word and his light did not appear. Worthy Ananda bowed and asked the Buddha,

”0 Bhagavan, heretofore whenever you spoke the Dharma, awesome light would naturally appear. Yet today among this great assembly there is no such radiance. There must be a good cause for this and we wish to hear the Bhagavan’s explanation.”

The Buddha remained silent and did not answer until the request had been repeated three times. He then told Ananda,

”After I enter nirvana, when the Dharma is about to perish, during the evil age of the five turbidities, the way of demons will flourish. Demonic beings will become shramanas; they will pervert and destroy my teachings. Monastics will wear the garb of laypersons and will prefer handsome clothes. Their precept sashes will be made of multi-colored cloth. They will use intoxicants, eat meat, kill other beings and they will indulge in their desire for flavorful food. They will lack compassion and they will bear hatred and exhibit jealousy even among themselves.

”Even then Bodhisattvas, Pratyekabuddhas, and Arhats will reverently and diligently cultivate immaculate virtue. They will be respected by all people and their teachings will be fair and egalitarian. These cultivators of the Way will take pity on the poor, they will be mindful of the aged, and they will save and give counsel to those people they find in difficult circumstances. They will at all times exhort others to worship and to protect sutras and images of the Buddha. They will do meritorious deeds, be resolute and kind, and never harm others. They will make physical sacrifices for others’ benefit. They will hold no great regard for themselves but will be patient, yielding, humane, and peaceful.

”As long as such people exist, the hordes of demonic bhikshus will be jealous of them. The demons will harass them, slander and defame them, expel them from their midst and degrade them. They will ostracize the good monks from the monastic community. Thereafter these demons derive no virtue from their practice. Their monastic buildings will be vacant and overgrown with weeds. For want of care and maintenance their Way-places will drift into ruin and oblivion. The demonic bhikshus will increase their greed for wealth and will amass great heaps of goods. They will refuse to distribute any of it or to use it to gain blessings and virtue.

”At this time, the evil monks will buy and sell slaves to till their fields and to slash and burn the mountain forests. They will do harm to living creatures and they will feel not the least bit of compassion. These slaves will themselves become bhikshus and maidservants will become bhikshunis. Totally lacking in Way-virtue, these people will run amok, indulging in licentious behavior. In their turbid confusion they will fail to separate the men from the women in the monastic communities. From this generation on, the Way will be weakened. Fugitives from the law will seek refuge in my Way, wishing to be shramanas but failing to observe the moral regulations. Monastics will continue to recite the precepts twice a month, but in name alone. Being lazy and lax, no one will want to listen any longer. These evil shramanas will be unwilling to recite the sutras in their entirety and they will make abbreviations at the beginning and at the end of the texts as they please. Soon the practice of reciting sutras will stop altogether. Even if there are people who recite texts, they will be unlettered, unqualified people who will insist, nonetheless, that they are correct. Bumptious, arrogant, and vain, these people will seek fame and glory. They will put on airs in the hope of attracting offerings from other people.

”When the lives of these demonic bhikshus come to an end their essential spirits will fall into the Avichi Hell. Having committed the five evil deeds, they will suffer successive rebirths as hungry ghosts and as animals. They will know all such states of woe as they pass on through eons as numerous as sands on the banks of the Ganges River. When their offenses are accounted for they will be reborn in a border land where the Triple Jewel is unknown.

”When the Dharma is about to disappear, women will become vigorous and will at all times do deeds of virtue. Men will grow lax and will no longer speak the Dharma. Those who are genuine shramanas will be looked upon as dung and no one will have faith in them. When the Dharma is about to perish, all the gods will begin to weep. Rivers will dry up and the five grains will not ripen. Pestilences will frequently take millions of lives. The masses will toil and suffer while the local officials will plot and scheme. No one will adhere to principles. Instead, the human race will multiply, becoming like the sands of the ocean-bed. Good persons will be hard to find; at most there will be one or two. As the eon comes to a close, the revolutions of the sun and the moon will grow short and the lifespan of people will decrease. Their hair will turn white by the time they are forty. Because of excessive licentious behavior they will quickly exhaust their seminal fluids and will die at a young age, usually before sixty years. As the lifespan of males decreases, that of females will increase to seventy, eighty, ninety, or one hundred years.

”The mighty rivers will flood and lose harmony with their natural cycles, yet people will not take notice or feel concern. Extremes of climate will soon be taken for granted. Beings of all races will mix together at random, without regard for the noble and the mean. Their births and rebirths will cause them to sink and float, like feeding aquatic creatures.

”Even then Bodhisattvas, Pratyekabuddhas, and Arhats will gather together in an unprecedented assembly because they will all have been harried and pursued by the hordes of demons. They will no longer dwell in the assemblies but the Three Vehicles will retreat to the wilderness. In a tranquil place they will find shelter, happiness, and long life. Gods will protect them and the moon will shine down upon them. The Three Vehicles will have an opportunity to meet together and the Way will flourish. However, within fifty-two years the Shurangama Sutra and the Pratyutpanna [Standing Buddha] Samadhi, will be the first to change and then to disappear. The twelve divisions of the canon will gradually follow until they vanish completely, never to appear again. Its words and texts will be totally unknown ever after. The precept sashes of shramanas will turn white of themselves. When my Dharma disappears it will be just like an oil lamp that flares brightly for an instant just before it goes out. So too, will the Dharma flare and die. After this time it is difficult to speak with certainty of what will follow.

”A period of ten million years will follow before the time when Maitreya is about to appear in the world to become the next Buddha. At that time the planet will be entirely peaceful. Evil vapors will have dissipated, rain will be ample and regular, and crops will grow abundantly. Trees will grow to a great height and people will grow to be eighty feet tall. The average lifespan will extend to 84,000 years. It will be impossible to count all the beings who will be taken across to liberation.”

Worthy Ananda addressed the Buddha, “What should we call this Sutra and how shall we uphold it?”

The Buddha said, “Ananda, this sutra is called The Ultimate Extinction of the Dharma. Tell everyone to propagate it widely; the merit of your actions will be measureless, beyond reckoning.”

When the four-fold assembly of disciples heard this sutra they grieved and wept. Each of them resolved to attain the true path of the Supreme Sage. Then bowing to the Buddha, they withdrew.

End of The Buddha Speaks the Ultimate Extinction of the Dharma Sutra.


From the Seng You Records, translator anonymous.
Appended to the Song Annals.

- Ultimate Extinction of the Dharma Sutra.

Anonymous? I wouldn't put my name on that piece of shit either.

Ten million years until the Maitreya shows? The demonic bhikshus will commit the five evil deeds and and fall into Avichi Hell ... Learn well The Holy All-Seeing Prophetic Sutra of the Cows and propagate it widely. The merit of your actions shall surely be great laughter, and the cows shall contentedly moo their approvals.

[Lydiia Knightjoy]

Another example is that males are not nurturing enough to take proper care of children - a belief that has been shown to be untrue as more fathers take on the traditional female roles in the raising of their children.

I don't think you can look to what is happening in the world to draw any useful conclusion about the nature and abilities of men and women. For example, if you examined the rate at which fathers are awarded custody of their children, you might conclude that they must be terrible at raising children. My understanding is that the figure is in the 2% range. I don't know for certain exactly how men compare to women in raising children and I'm not sure anyone has sufficient data to substantiate any specific position. But lacking clear evidence one way or the other, one must ask why the courts so highly favour women.

[Lydiia Knightjoy]

And hello, Lydiia! Charming women, she.

Hello, Robert. I was unaware that I have been charming women; or even men for that matter...that Lothario Laird, notwithstanding.

[RobertGreenSky]

And hello, Lydiia! Charming women, she.

Hello, Robert. I was unaware that I have been charming women; or even men for that matter...that Lothario Laird, notwithstanding.

Oh dear Lydiia, you've caught me at a typo. Careful we don't spend too much time on this. Having pointed out fundamental inconsistencies in what we've read, skewered apocalyptic literature, drawn useful comparisons between Sam's pov in the debate and Mahayana Buddhism, and refused to pay attention to mindless analogies about cows, we are liable at any minute to be thrown off Genius Forum for shamelessly flirting. Well I won't give up to that lothario and one day you'll be mine.