Age of the Sages: The Axial Age in Asia and the Near East Kindle Edition

Leaving never heard of the axial age I bought this non-technical book as an overview. It reads well, though flowery at points. Some points are not well supported but one can only do so much in one volume. This hoes with one of The Great Courses by this author so I can read when I cannot watch.

For any student who wants to trace the roots of contemporary religious thinking, this is the best analysis you will probably find. From an indepth grasp of Zoroaster, Confucius, Hinduism, Buddhism and the emergence of human philosophy, Muesse brings the similarities, philosophies and underlying belief structures into focus. Excellent glossary of terms as well.

This approach fails to consider the larger complexity of the 'Axial Age' which transcends sages, religion, and works on whole cultures. The Greek Axial Age is an example. It is worth checking out the larger context of 'axial age's in a sequence stretching back to the Neolithic. The whole idea of the Axial Age has been confused by the way it was defined, and the way in which it is confused with the Israelite 'age of revelation'.
Check out John Landon's World History and the Eonic Effect, and Enigma of the Axial Age (Amazon).

In The Age of the Sages, Prof. Muesse does a great job tying together the various religious and philosophical traditions that emerged form the Axial Age based on the common questions they ask, their unique but sometimes related solutions, and the social circumstances that gave rise to both. I have used this book as a introductory text on Asian Philosophies in a college class for students who had absolutely no prior knowledge of the subject. They found Muesse's book extremely helpful and, of the several texts we used in the course, this one was by far their favorite and the one that was most successful in helping them grasp the ideas, which can be a struggle for some. This text is ideal to provide students with the early background of Asian philosophies and religions and could pair well with primary sources and a text that further explores the relevant philosophical and religious concepts.

Now, former Harvard Professors are just trolling for bucks. This book was not written for scholars. Other Harvard Professors would throw it at his head. It is like this guy wrote a book before ever reading any. he was writing it for stupid people and so why put any real work into it. For instance, he sees the Caste System and Doctrines of Reincarnation and Karmic Retribution as part of the rise of a Moral Impulse in Religions. Yes, I see that side of it, but what of the other side, that the Doctrines of Karma and Reincarnation were fabricated only to bolster the Caste System, that is, to explain why the Low Castes were the Slaves and the Aryan Castes were the Masters --- it was all because of Good or Bad deeds done in some Past Lives that nobody can remember. Professor Muesse sees the Doctrine of Karma as providing an intellectual framework for supporting Moral Behavior, but what of the actual Hopelessness that anybody in the bottom rungs of the Caste System would experience... not knowing the terrible deeds one did to drop to the bottom of such a veritable hell, and only supposing that if Experience is any Guide, that no good deed would ever be great enough to change any of it even by jot. Nothing ever got better for anybody, did it? so how is such a Hopeless Morality supposed to improve things. Wouldn't it rather lead to a Moral Apathy and Indifference. But Professor Muesse sees it all as an unqualified wonderful thing. Those Wonderful Hindus.... so Enlightened!

Oh, and then there is the way Professor Meusse glossed over Buddhism. We are told that Buddha negated the belief that there was some independent and substantial Self and that the sense of Self is illusory or at least simply connected with the apparatus of the body. With Hinduism he also expresses some surprise, that with everything the Hindus negate, they manage to keep the individual selves -- people's 'souls'. Now, yes, we can see in Hinduism why they decided to retain the Self -- because it was a necessary thread in the Doctrine of Reincarnation and Karmic Retribution. One couldn't justify relegating the masses into the Classes of Servitude, unless you could blame them for evil done in Past Lives, and so there would need to be Selves that could continue from Life to Life. But what would Buddhism need the Notion of Self for? Well, why do I have to think about it? Isn't that what a Harvard Professor who writes a book on the subject... isn't that what he should be doing? Anyway, I suspect that the Buddha probably did take the next logical step after negating the Self, to conclude that Reincarnation, which depends upon the continuity of a Self, was simply a Fable... not even 'illusory' since nobody even has a sense of their Past Lives but must be indoctrinated into the system and have it explained to one why everyone always forgets everything from the Past Lives. But what would such a Conclusion do for the Creation of a Religion, and a for the establishment of a Professional Clergy, which is what happened after the death of Buddha. Looking at Buddhism, its Reason for Being, well it is to enable us to escape the wheel of Samsara, and to liberate us from the all the endless Rebirths. Well, they could not simply announce the Fact that there simply is no Rebirth, and that everybody, whatever they moral condition or mental attitudes, could rest assured of at least one thing in Life, and that was that once they were dead they would certainly stay that way. As we say in the West, by some remarkable Insight, they could 'Rest in Peace'. Well, that would blow their entire Religion, wouldn't it. Nothing big to escape anymore. Buddhism would be turned into a kind of Self Help Book on just coping with life for the simple sake of coping with Life. That would not have been so bad, if they had thought about it. There could have been an appeal to Morality, and the Idea that the Continuity of Life consists in the Survival and Wellbeing of the Race, or with a wider view, of all of Humanity, or even of all Life in General... there could have been an appeal for the welfare or at least the intelligent maintenance of the Animal Species -- a start at Environmentalism. But, no, Buddhism decided to establish itself on a fantasy that its founder had renounced. And what good did it do? We can see what Hinduism did with the Concept of a Surviving Self -- they took this sense of Self and spun around it the idea of Reincarnation and Retributive Karma and used it to subjugate the masses, and while there are some deep moral drawbacks there, well, at least it contributed in some way to the stabilization and maintenance of a Society, of a Civilization -- it was a System that at a certain level worked and survived for hundreds of years. But Buddhism simply told the Individual to worry about himself. And therefore every Civilization that in whatever degree adopted Buddhism was thereby weakened by it -- a Religion that encourages people to simply drop out. Mahayana Buddhism later addressed this concern, but Professor Muesse dismisses it as out of the period with which his book deals, and we are left with the sense that the good Professor feels the Mahayana reforms were a corruption of the Purer Brand of Primitive Buddhism.

and then there is Professor Muesse's praise of Daoist Anarchy... the Best Government is no government... he doesn't just say that this is what was said by the Daoists...no, HE AGREES WITH IT, says that they were right. Honestly. Has he read no History? Every Civilization so far that we know of has come into being because there was a firm and secure Government there to protect and nurture it in its infancy, and Every Civilization, thus far, has ended just as soon as its Government failed and collapsed... having been eroded and abandoned by such overly enlightened parties as Professor Meusse and his beloved Daoists. Historically speaking, there IS NO Civilization without Government... Government is the one necessary foundation for everything else we hold dear. But Professor Muesse comes off like some Tea Party Harvard professor, if there could ever be such a strange animal.... who does he think is going to buy his books?

Now, it sounds like I am taking sides, and I am sorry for that, because I would intend that no Scholar should take a side and look at things narrowly and with an agenda. Scholarship needs a wide, open and inclusive view. show one side and then show the other. a great many particulars before getting around to Generalizations. and given such a scholarly criteria, well, Professor Muesse's book is probably next to useless. Its just too thin and too weak. Professor Muesse didn't really seem to discuss anything important... not without seeming to get it wrong when he did.

Maybe another reviewer will point us to what we should be reading... something a bit more thoughtful and substantial.

Oh, and there was an annoying habit the Professor had. he would start dangling out ancient foreign words, and before one could get used to them, he would suspend all use of English and just talk in this code of gibberish. If one reads the book in one sitting and can keep all these new words straight as one goes along, well, its not a problem. but if you read now and then, on the fly and on the go, then it is annoying to pick up where one left off to be swamped down figuring out the syntax and grammars of ancient languages, when it would hurt nothing to simply stick with English... or to keep the English close by in parenthesis. But I guess Professor Meusse had to show his scholarship somehow, hoping to dazzle us with dead words.

This is a brilliant book that clearly shares with the reader the way many Eastern religions and movements became established, evolved and transformed within the nations and within the ages. A reader is able to understand clearly the origins of Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Confucianism and Daoism. A person can understand how and when some of the various variations in the movements have taken place over the ages. The reader is actually taken on the historical journey of each of the religions and the movements that shaped them. This is a book that is ideal for a person searching for greater understanding, a class that is seeking a general overview of the formation of these religions, and a reference for gaining quick understanding of these religious movements.

Dr. Muesse's work is extremely helpful and offers fresh perspicuity to broad overarching themes and important details. There is no doubt, such a work is helpful for anyone wishing to study the subject, deeply reflect on personal experience, or simply read an intriguing book. I've also had the privilege of meeting with Dr. Muesse's calm-natured and delightful intellect as a student and aspiring protégé. Two thumbs up.

Complex subjects made understandable and very well presented. I am amazed by the clarity and volume of information presented. No wonder the author is a master teacher.