A Buddhism expert sees similarities to Nichiren's teachings in the dharma promoted by a new center in Utah:
"Dorje Chang Buddha III has already begun the transmission of the Mahamudra of Liberation, the highest Buddha-dharma, that offers a shortcut or quick path to liberation from the sufferings of this world," she says. "This is the dharma that all living beings must learn to become Buddhas."Charles Prebish, a Buddhism expert at Utah State University and director of the school's Religious Studies Program, has never heard of Dorje Change Buddha III, nor, he says, have any of his Buddhist studies colleagues.
He indicated that virtually no Western forms of Buddhism teach the idea of a "Dharma-Ending Age." In the 13th century, the Nichiren School of Buddhism in Japan argued that it had the right teaching for the age of "Mappo" or the "Decline of the Dharma," Prebish says. "I have never seen this concept used in the context of Chinese or Tibetan Buddhism."
Still, Prebish says, the group uses appropriate ideas and references -- although he is withholding judgment on the new master's claims.
Anyone have more info about this group?
5 comments
Cracks me up, Buddha IIIWho's grandpa Buddha? Wouldn't he be a reincarnation of Shakyamuni also, creating a family lineage. I could just as easily say that I'm the karmic reincarnation of someone and experts in BS could put me through unprovable tests based on opinion. You can't argue faith. You can only discredit the person.
Just as a theologian, an expert in theology and the properties of external deities with no ability to be falsified because they are based on unprovable faith, it has always struck me as ludicrous to be a "credentialed" expert in metaphysics. Everyone here who reads, writes and thinks has the same qualifications as any supposed authority because all proof is subjective. Thus we are all equally credentialed experts.And how come it's always gender specific? Time for some more imagination in our charlatans.
I don't agree that we are equal to credentialed experts. I think they can all be considered frauds while the uncredentialed may be honestly sharing insights they have found true for themselves.
I apologize for being unclear and apparently sending a mixed message. Suffice it to say it is ludicrous having credentials for qualities that does not have falsifiability.
Someone is a priest in the Catholic Church so if I accept the authority of the church I accept that this person is legitimate. According to some Hindus if the Guru didn't have a Guru then he is not considered legitimate because he is not vouched for by some lineage. The zen master can make the pronouncement that someone is qualified to teach. If you really had faith that someone was an enlightened teacher you would accept them on their own. If you realize that you can not tell an enlightened teacher from a charlatan then you need some governing body that you have faith in to tell you who is who. But if you don't believe the authorities than their opinion carries no weight.