I was wondering if there’s anything in the suttas that link age and the capacity to grasp the Teachings? Is there any kind of identification of life stages (childhood, youth, early adulthood, middle-aged etc.) which come into play when being exposed to the dhamma? E.g. one could argue that being young, it might be harder to grapple with things like dukkha or anicca because the prospect of dying is far away and everything is new and exciting…… Or for the middle-aged as looking for sensual pleasures is their compensation for working to pay off bills?
But this can also hold true for the elderly as I found this curious passage under the entry „youth“ in RF:
If an elder, though eighty, ninety, or a hundred years old, still dwells in the midst of sensual pleasures, enjoying them, consumed by thoughts of them, burning with fever for them, and eagerly seeking more, they are reckoned as a child, not a senior.
AN5.59:1.1-4:
“Mendicants, it’s hard to find someone gone forth when old who has five qualities.
What five?
It’s hard to find someone gone forth when old who is sophisticated, well-presented, and learned, who can teach Dhamma, and has memorized the monastic law.
It’s hard to find someone gone forth when old who has these five qualities.”
AN5.60:1.1-4:
“Mendicants, it’s hard to find someone gone forth when old who has five qualities.
What five?
It’s hard to find someone gone forth when old who is easy to admonish, retains what they learn, and learns respectfully, who can teach the Dhamma, and has memorized the monastic law.
It’s hard to find someone gone forth when old who has these five qualities.”
But generally speaking, the suttas feature people of all ages who have reached high stages of realization. I think the novice Cunda is said to have attained awakening at the age of seven, while princess Sumanā waits with her going forth until her grandmother does no longer need her care when she dies at the age of 120. At that point Sumanā must be 70 or 80, and she too reaches awakening.
This made me curious, so I went looking for information about the minimum-age rule for ordination and found this, in which Ven. Brahmali says:
The origin stories to the rules that deal with the minimum age for ordination all have to do with the ability of the ordinand to deal with the hardships of monasticism.
So apparently, not having to do with inability to learn dhamma.
It seems that Venerable Bhadda attained arahantship at seven years old in Thag 7.3.
I was an only child,
loved by my mother and father.
They had me by practicing
many prayers and observances.
Out of sympathy for me
wishing me well and wanting the best for me,
my mother and father
took me to see the Buddha.
“We had this son with difficulty;
he is delicate and dainty.
We offer him to you, Lord,
to attend upon the victor.”
The teacher, having accepted me,
declared to Ānanda:
“Quickly give him the going-forth—
this one will be a thoroughbred!”
After he, the teacher, had sent me forth,
the victor entered his dwelling.
Before the sun set
my mind was freed.
The teacher didn’t neglect me;
when he came out from seclusion,
he said: “Come Bhadda!”
That was my ordination.
At seven years old
I received ordination.
I’ve attained the three knowledges;
oh, the excellence of the teaching!
I would speculate that the extraordinary people in the suttas who attain at a very young age have virtue, concentration, and wisdom well in previous lives. They may have practiced under previous Buddhas’ dispensations. They might have been stream-enterers or once returners and this was their final body.
I would think that, in rebirth, a stream of consciousness that had previously heard the dhamma and reached mediation in the fine material realm would be ripe for stream entry or beyond.
Interestingly, in the Pali commentaries’ account of the ten stages of life, one’s forties are reckoned to be (ceteris paribus) the most dhammically optimal period. They’re named the “decade of understanding” (paññādasaka) and are said to be the period in which the five faculties are likely to be at their most mature.
TEN DECADES
Mandadasaka
The first ten years of a person with a hundred years’ life are called the tender decade; for then he is a tender unsteady child.
Khiḍḍādasaka
The next ten years are called the sport decade; for he is very fond of sport then.
Vaṇṇadasaka
The next ten years are called the beauty decade; for his beauty reaches its full extent then.
Baladasaka
The next ten years are called the strength decade; for his strength and power reach their full extent then.
Paññādasaka
The next ten years are called the understanding decade; for his understanding is well established by then. Even in one naturally weak in understanding some understanding, it seems, arises at that time.
Hānidasaka
The next ten years are called the decline decade; for his fondness for sport and his beauty, strength, and understanding decline then.
Pabbhāradasaka
The next ten years are called the stooping decade; for his figure stoops forward then.
Vaṅkadasaka
The next ten years are called the bent decade; for his figure becomes bent like the end of a plough then.
Momūhadasaka
The next ten years are called the dotage decade; for he is doting then and forgets what he does.
Sayanadasaka
The next ten years are called the prone decade; for a centenarian mostly lies prone.
Thanks everyone - there were many interesting replies!
I had no idea that even children were able to attain arahantship in the suttas. And I also find it curious that there doesn’t seem to be a minimun age for ordination. I know from someone knowledgeable that in Sri Lanka young boys (about 10 years old) enter the monastic life, so maybe every monastery has its own rule?
What strikes me is that many people in the suttas seem to have reached an advanced age. I would have thought life-spans up to 100 years or even older were relatively rare 2500 years ago. Or maybe it’s because 100 years is a nice and clear-cut time unit? But then what do I know…
So it’s seems and this is also in d’accord with the list Ven. @Dhammanando cited from Vism. that there doesn’t seem to be a natural, linear relationship as in: “the older you get - the wiser you are”.
If a royal bull elephant passes away untamed and untrained—whether in their old age, middle age, or youth—they’re considered a royal bull elephant who passed away untamed. In the same way, if a mendicant passes away without having ended the defilements—whether as a senior, middle, or junior—they’re considered as a mendicant who passed away untamed.
If a royal bull elephant passes away tamed and trained—whether in their old age, middle age, or youth—they’re considered a royal bull elephant who passed away tamed. In the same way, if a mendicant passes away having ended the defilements—whether as a senior, middle, or junior—they’re considered as a mendicant who passed away tamed.”
This whole thread feels like a to-do list for my index work, lol. So happy to see the topic explored.
As far as I know, the Apadāna verses are the sole Pali source for five-year-old arahants, and even there there are only three of them: the monks Pañcasīlasamādāniya and Paduma, and the nun Candanamāliya. All the other Apadāna infant arahants adhere to the EBT norm of seven.
Coming forth from my mother’s womb,
both comprehending and mindful,
when I was only five years old
I attained my arahantship.
It occurs to me that if jāti in the case of the five-year-olds is to be understood in the sense of “parturition”, but in the Vinaya sense of “conception” in the case of the seven-year-olds, and if the five-year-olds attained when they were nearly six, and the seven-year-olds when they’d only just turned seven, then there wouldn’t really be much difference between their ages. But I don’t know if there’s any justification for taking the word in these different ways.
Mental decline in the eighties is still so very common. This must be one of the main impediments to learning and practicing dhamma.
It can also start much younger. This raises a question regarding if dhamma practice can prevent decline. (Apologies for venturing off topic - mods are of course welcome to delete this or move it).
I wonder if long practice of dhamma can protect against the ancient description of cognitive decline and dementia in the eighties?
I see Ajahn Sumedho at 90 years old is still teaching, albeit not sitting on the floor these days:
Things like not drinking alcohol, intermittent eating with less obesity and diabetes, mindfulness, good social supports etc might perhaps help bhikkus avoid the epidemic of dementia?
Does it seem aging bhikkus are doing better then expected in terms of mental clarity?
I think there is a number of studies that support this. Unfortunately, the scientific articles I found are hidden behind a pay-wall. But the overall echo seems to be: yes, it might be possible to prevent or at least offset mental decline.
