HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: farris@ruhets.rutgers.edu (Lorenzo Farris)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: On Surrendering
Date: 23 Jan 1993 11:53:03 -0800
Organization: ----
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: gap.caltech.edu

My apologies for retaining almost all of Tawit's post. ;-(

In article <1jpcfnINNau5@gap.caltech.edu>, fstawit@icomp01.lerc.nasa.gov (Tawit Chitsomboon) writes:
:In article <1993Jan17.200759.4192@qiclab.scn.rain.com:
:farris@ruhets.rutgers.edu (Lorenzo Farris) writes:
:>There are essentially two main paths two enlightenment. Mental and
:>emotional. Bhakti yoga and jnana yoga. Meditation and devotion.
:
:To me there is only one path -- the path of wisdom. By wisdom i mean
:a complete wisdom in terms of both wordly and spiritual. Wordly
:wisdom (ie, to know how to grow wheat, to weave cloth, etc.) will 
:give one enough physical freedom to search for spiritual freedom. 
:
:True love will come automatically through spiritual wisdom.
:So TRUE love, imo, is not a prerequisite but rather a byproduct.
:To me, there is no such thing as being smart without love.

Here there are difference of opinion. The flip side of the coin is
that spiritual wisdom is inevitable a product of true love. IMHO,
love=wisdom.

:On the contrary, love alone without wisdom will lead one to be
:at best a compassionate fool and at worst a fanatic.
:Love alone without wisdom is not love but selfishness, delusion....
:Note that a mother's love for her child (a perenial metaphor for 
:unconditional love) is mainly if not purely driven by selfishness.

I don't think you and I are talking about the same love, my friend.
True love drives one to acquire the wisdom to best serve the beloved.
It was an idealized metaphor that I used, I am sure. But examples of
unconditional love are as hard to find in this world as examples true
wisdom. ;-)

				cheers,
					Lorenzo
-- 
Happiness is just a                     ******************************
remembrance away.                       *  Lorenzo Farris            *
                                        *  farris@ruhets.rutgers.edu *
                                        ******************************
From: fstawit@icomp01.lerc.nasa.gov (Tawit Chitsomboon)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: Unselfishness and spirituality
Date: 22 Jan 1993 09:58:16 -0800
Organization: ----
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: gap.caltech.edu

In article <1jheogINN5ho@gap.caltech.edu> 
Roger Adams <RADAMS@cerritos.edu> writes:
>.................
>........................... Now, Mother Teresa said that she could
>have gone back to get some more rice to give to this woman that 
>evening but she decided to wait until the next day. Why? "Because", 
>she said, "I wanted her to feel that Joy that comes from unselfishness". 

This otherwise extremely touching story is spoiled by, alas, Mother
Teresa herself. She should not let the poor woman feel the Joy of
unselfishness.

>.........................................This is surrender, ie. a
>surrender of ego, a surrender and giving up and letting go of 
>selfishness, no more "i".

How could she let go of her selfishness when she 'enjoy' it?
The "i" of hers might have forever been capitalized.

True love/unselfishness/and-all-those-goodies manifests itself
through giving/personal-sacrifice without expecting anything
in return whatsoever, be it in this life on in the after life.
If this condition is not met then love is a mere extension of ego.
But, i'll take this kind of inter-religious love over killing
over a god's property in Ayodhya, any time.

-tawit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you think stop doing bad deed is difficult, try stop doing good deed.
                                       -(quotationized) Buddhadasa
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: fstawit@icomp01.lerc.nasa.gov (Tawit Chitsomboon)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: On Surrendering
Date: 22 Jan 1993 09:56:07 -0800
Organization: ----
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: gap.caltech.edu

In article <1993Jan17.200759.4192@qiclab.scn.rain.com> 
farris@ruhets.rutgers.edu (Lorenzo Farris) writes:

>..............
>There are essentially two main paths two enlightenment. Mental and
>emotional. Bhakti yoga and jnana yoga. Meditation and devotion.

To me there is only one path -- the path of wisdom. By wisdom i mean
a complete wisdom in terms of both wordly and spiritual. Wordly
wisdom (ie, to know how to grow wheat, to weave cloth, etc.) will 
give one enough physical freedom to search for spiritual freedom. 

True love will come automatically through spiritual wisdom.
So TRUE love, imo, is not a prerequisite but rather a byproduct.
To me, there is no such thing as being smart without love.

On the contrary, love alone without wisdom will lead one to be
at best a compassionate fool and at worst a fanatic.
Love alone without wisdom is not love but selfishness, delusion....
Note that a mother's love for her child (a perenial metaphor for 
unconditional love) is mainly if not purely driven by selfishness.
 
-tawit

------------------------------------------------------------------
The holiest water is the sweat. Soak yourself well and you'll be blessed.
                           -(paraphrased) Buddhadasa Bhikkhu
------------------------------------------------------------------
From: mjsmith@cac.washington.edu (Martha Smith )
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: Unselfishness and spirituality
Date: 22 Jan 1993 18:25:14 -0800
Organization: ----
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: gap.caltech.edu

In article <1jpcjoINNavg@gap.caltech.edu>, fstawit@icomp01.lerc.nasa.gov (Tawit Chitsomboon) writes:
|> 
|> How could she let go of her selfishness when she 'enjoy' it?
|> The "i" of hers might have forever been capitalized.
|> 
|> True love/unselfishness/and-all-those-goodies manifests itself
|> through giving/personal-sacrifice without expecting anything
|> in return whatsoever, be it in this life on in the after life.
|> If this condition is not met then love is a mere extension of ego.

A good example of the problem of communication across religious boundaries.
The "i" of which Mother Teresa speaks has nothing to do with "ego" nor does
enjoyment imply attachment.  Just as a fully enlightened one still experiences
the weather turning hot or cold, the food being sweet or tangy etc. so one
can experience joy and sorrow - neither desiring nor identifying with the
sensation.  Zaehner, however, does an interesting (though imperfect) job
of distinguishing the mystical experiences of the Buddhist from that of the
Christian - a difference that does revolve around the concept of relationship.
From: mcfarlan@corona.math.washington.edu (Thomas J. McFarlane)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: On Surrendering
Date: 22 Jan 1993 18:29:55 -0800
Organization: ----
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: gap.caltech.edu

In article <1jpcfnINNau5@gap.caltech.edu> fstawit@icomp01.lerc.nasa.gov (Tawit Chitsomboon) writes:
>True love will come automatically through spiritual wisdom.
>
>On the contrary, love alone without wisdom will lead one to be
>at best a compassionate fool and at worst a fanatic.
>Love alone without wisdom is not love but selfishness, delusion....

Since love without wisdom is not true love, true love must then
imply the presence of wisdom.  Wisdom and love are inseparable at
the purest levels.  One is not the cause of the other.

At lower levels, one may have a preference.  But the path of love
and the path of wisdom converge simply because the pure form of
either is the pure form of both.

Tom McFarlane
From: srose@mizar.usc.edu (Steve Rose)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: Pleasure from travelling, an example of its baselessness
Date: 20 Jan 1993 21:52:20 -0800
Organization: ----
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: gap.caltech.edu

Getting inspired (and challenged) by having read the words of Krishnamurti
and the authors of letters on the topic, I decided to conduct an experiment.

I was feeling like getting some exercise.  So, I went for a walk in the
neighborhood which I work - in a direction different than I have ever walked
before.  This, for me, is a similar experience to "travelling" - and I wanted
to try to consciously monitor what I was experiencing and learning so that I
could share it.

I met a homeless man who I have been friendly with in the past, and chatted
a minute or two.  I saw an area which I had driven past before but never
walked through.  I found a store which sells fresh produce (which was 
something I have kindof been looking for), and bought a banana.  I was looking
forward to having the banana with a meal tomorrow.  I got some fresh air
(well, relatively fresh - by Los Angeles standards - if you don't have to
chew it, it's fresh!).  I got some exercise, which I needed.

It was clear that a large part of the attraction of this experience for me
was that it helped to put me into an "altered state".  In fact, these types
of experiences (travel and, even more so, travel through nature) are the
only sure way that I have found of entering into an altered state -
which other people seem to attain by meditiation or other techniques.  It
works for me - although I try at times to see if I can learn how to experience
the same states by meditation or other "practices," so far they don't seem
to work as well (partly, perhaps because I am in too big a rush for results 
to be willing to stick with practices - oh, so that's why they're called
practices! :)  ).  (I am aware that the notion of an "altered state" is not
necessarily the "goal" and am often able to experience a similar heightened
awareness in my everyday life.)

Anyway, on the way back from my walk, I met my acquaintance, the homeless man,
again.  He seemed hungry - so I asked him if he would like the banana.  He
said he would - and that bananas were one of his favorite foods.  I gave it
to him.  I would have "prefered" to keep it - so that I could enjoy it
tomorrow.  But, for me it was really not a big deal (no shit, giving up a
banana was no big deal - gosh I must be enlightened!).  And it was more 
important clearly that he have a bit more to eat.

I am clear about the fact that I could have gotten an equivalent amount of
exercise by staying right outside of work, and doing some exercises.  So,
since this option is one which I would not prefer to do, I will try it out
tomorrow or the next day, and report my experience and what I learned from
it.

Habib Rose
From: krashok@mse.ogi.edu (Ashok Krishnamurthy)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: A Passage from the Rig Veda
Date: 22 Jan 1993 09:57:23 -0800
Organization: Oregon Graduate Institute, Material Science & Engineering
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: gap.caltech.edu

  A month ago,murgesh@entropy.esd.sgi.com(Murgesh Navar)
  posted the following fascinating passage from the Rig
  Veda:

>
               A Passage from the Rig veda 
                ---------------------------

        Then there was neither being nor non-being:
        There was no air, nor firmament beyond it.
        Was there a stirring ? Where ? Beneath what cover ?
        Was there a great abyss of unplumbed water ?

        There was no death nor anything immortal;
        Nor any sign dividing day from night.
        That One thing, in the stillness, breathed quiescent;
        No second thing existed whatsoever.

        Darkness was hidden in a deeper darkness;
        This All was as a sea without dimensions;
        The void still held unformed what was potential,
        Until the power of Warmth produced the sole One...

        Who truly knows, and who can here declare it ?
        Whence it was born, and how this world was fashioned ?
        The gods came later than the earth's creation:
        Who knows then out of what the world has issued ?

        Whatever he made the world or did not make it,
        He knows whence this creation came, he only
        Who in the highest heavens guards and watches;
        He knows indeed, but then, perhaps, he knows not!


>

        I have the following comment to make:

        The last line is similar to St.John's statement in
        the Fourth Gospel of the New Testament:

             " And the light shineth in the darkness;and    
               the darkness comprehendeth it not."

        Probably the above lines and the last line of the
        passage indicate that the creation of the universe
        is a spontaneous process rather than a self-willed
        one.          

        If there are any other opinions/comments,please
        e-mail them to me as I do not read this newsgroup.

Ashok Krishnamurthy,
Dept. of MS & E,
OGI,Oregon,USA.
---------------
From: mw@ki.fht-mannheim.de (Marc Wachowitz)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: Pleasure from travelling, an example of its baselessness
Date: 22 Jan 1993 18:22:02 -0800
Organization: Fachhochschule fuer Technik, Mannheim (FRG)
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: gap.caltech.edu

Steve Rose (srose@mizar.usc.edu) wrote:
: I would like to respond, as a person who happens to love traveling, to the
: following:
[... my reply to Dinkar Sitaram's statements about travelling deleted ...]
: 
: For me, this issue - as well as many others, seem to depend on "where we are
: at" in terms of our own development. Perhaps at some points in our own paths,
: there will be no purpose to traveling - and we will experience each moment
: as a totally new and fresh experience.
Don't understand anything I wrote as arguing against travelling or against
staying at home - though I would e.g. recommend those who like travelling to
do it with momentary awareness, not as accumulation of experiences.

You know, there's this joke about the tourist bus where all but one person were
constantly making photos. One of them asked the non-photographing tourist why
he would not make pictures? "I see it immediately."

(Please don't flame me for arguing against photos - I'm just recommending not
 to make sure your load of recorded experience doesn't become too heavy and
 avoid someday only living in records of the past :-)

: Perhaps when I attain enlightenment, all experiences will be the same.
All the statements here are different from eachother, none are the same.
All the statements here are (on) the screen, therefore are all the same.
One and many, same and different - so many concepts.
Whatever "it" is, it is none of them ...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Marc Wachowitz, mw@ki.fht-mannheim.de   /  news zombie - reply by e-mail, too
  *  wonder everyday    *    nothing in particular    *    all is special  *
From: raj@globe1.att.com
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: Pleasure from travelling, an example of its baselessness
Date: 22 Jan 1993 09:58:49 -0800
Organization: ----
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: gap.caltech.edu

Habib writes [about his experiment with walking a different path
              (other than his usual path)]:


> ... it helped to put me into an "altered state".  In fact, these types
> of experiences (travel and, even more so, travel through nature) are the
> only sure way that I have found of entering into an altered state -
> which other people seem to attain by meditiation or other techniques.
> It works for me ...


	If walking a different physical path can have such effect,
	what effects lie undiscovered for the traveler of the
	inner path?
	
	Experimentation (with walking a different path) is truly
	helpful [in discovering for oneself - without doubt].
	
	How nice of you to share your direct experience with us!
	
	
---raj
From: raj@globe1.att.com
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: Unselfishness and spirituality
Date: 24 Jan 93 20:39:29 GMT
Article-I.D.: qiclab.1993Jan25.094511.23830
Organization: AT&T

Tawit writes:

> ... But, i'll take this kind of inter-religious love over killing
> over a god's property in Ayodhya, any time.

	Isn't the whole universe God's property?

---raj
From: <BANNON@maine.maine.edu>
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: Learning
Date: 22 Jan 1993 09:51:56 -0800
Organization: ----
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: gap.caltech.edu


While drifting along this electronic river to somewhere
else I became distracted by this group.  I am not
very familiar with all the terms and concepts but I
will pose this question nonetheless, this thing that
we are all a part of, you, me, the dirt, the bugs and
the stars,--is it something that is capable of learning?
If it could, what is there to learn?

L.
From: raj@globe1.att.com
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: The Search
Date: 24 Jan 93 21:10:15 GMT
Article-I.D.: qiclab.1993Jan25.094552.24034
Organization: AT&T


	The search
	keeps me
	too busy
	that I don't see
	what is
	in my face [always staring].
	
	The experiences,
	their descriptions,
	in flowering words
	[refined -
	more and ever more]
	keep me away from me.
	
	The yogas:
	Bhakti, Gyana, Karma,
	and the mighty Raja,
	don't leave a moment,
	for me,
	to be me.
	
	Buddha - the awakened one,
	waits and waits,
	patiently,
	compassion itself [beyond time]
	waits
	for me to be done with
	my meditations,
	and the sittings;
	to teach me,
	talk to me,
	to fill my heart with joy,
	that only Buddha is.
	
	But, alas, busy I am,
	too busy
	with my serach
	for Buddha;
	to be with
	Buddha
	Now!
	which is Ever!
	
	
---raj
From: fstawit@icomp01.lerc.nasa.gov (Tawit Chitsomboon)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Responses to Two Posts
Date: 22 Jan 1993 09:51:20 -0800
Organization: ----
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: gap.caltech.edu

For some reason, my BBS's not been updated for several days.
I log onto an independent system of my friend and see a lot of
responses to my posts but i only read some of them. Would those
of you who responded to my posts the past couple of days please kindly
email me their posts.

For now, i'll try to respond to the 2 posts that i read.

>Thyagi (i think) said my logic (about God's desire to create desire)
>was faulty. He said airplane creates vortex without a desire.

But i was talking about sentient beings (beings with mind, desire).
If we're just like vortex of God's wing, why do we need to pay
respect to he-she-it anyway since we were not intentionally created
in the first place?  Also, it require the presence of a sentient
being to realize that something is created without desire, otherwise
there is no creation (to that particular sentient being).

Also, the Tantric technique of using sensation to realize spiritual
bliss (as you said) is very dangerous at best. It's not for the
average masses. If an average person try such a thing, s/he will
be forever deluded by the omni-facet of sensation. 

>Bill Kish (i hope) said the uglification of food as practiced by
>some thai monks is a kind of samatha (concentrative)  meditation .

No, this is as vipassana (contemplative) meditation as can be.
Buddhadasa used to say that if you do vipassana you automatically
do samatha (but not vice versa) because the mind has to be
concentrated to do vipassana. In fact, when you do vipassana you
are endowed completely in trisikha (three educations): sila,
samadhi, panna (morality/ordinariness, concentration, wisdom.)
For this reason, most of the buddha's teaching is vipassana, not samatha.
And to vipassana on the ugliness of food and body is claimed by
some (at least the theravadhin) to be the original teaching of
the buddha. This is, imo, one way to see things as what they really
are, not a sense denying as someone had accused.

Sure, one can use the sensation itself to realize 'truth' . This
sensation itself is in fact also the way things really are. But that
require a very advanced spiritual insight after much practice (otherwise
one is just teasing oneself around with lofty philosophy) 
And do not think that the theravadhin never contemplate on such pleasure. 
In fact, they do it all the time.


-tawit

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Meditation is not sitting still for hours on end.
Chicken can do that much better than man.
  --(paraphrased, translated from Thai) (The late) Ajahn Cha
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: lyeh@alleg.edu (Hun Lye)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Teaching From the Silent Mind
Keywords: Buddhism:  Thai Forest Tradition
Date: 25 Jan 93 00:49:20 GMT
Article-I.D.: qiclab.1993Jan25.094657.24227
Organization: Allegheny College

Below are some passages quoted from a book by a teacher of the Thai Forest  
Tradition.  If they are helpful the one's practice, take them.  If they  
are not - maybe they are just a joke.

_____________________________________________________________________


_Realisation is Not Gaining_

	Realisation is not gaining, is it?  You don't `gain' realisation.   
You realise something which you have all the time, yet which you never  
notice.  meditation is not a gaining process, either.  We are not here to  
make ourselves into Buddhas, or bodhisattvas or arahants or anything else,  
nor to try to just condition our minds into being Buddhist.  You might  
think you just have to have a religious brainwash, throw away all your  
Christian habits and simply train yourself to think like a Buddhist - wear  
the robe, try to look like a Buddha image, use all these Pali words and  
call ourselves `Buddhists.'  Another costume, isn't it?  Another act,  
another role to play.  So the purpose of our meditation is not to become  
`Buddhists' either.


_I Hear Buddhists Say...._

	I hear Buddhist say, `Buddhists don't believe in God, and we don't  
believe in the soul.  If you're a real Buddhist, you don't have any of  
that stuff, souls and gods; soulless and godless is what we are.'  But  
that's an annihilationists teaching, isn't it?  That's pure  
annihilationism.  Disbelieving in God and a soul is just the opposite of  
the other, of believing:  it's not a realising of truth.  It's only the  
believing of a negation rather than the believing of an affirmation.  I  
meet Buddhistswho were Christians at one time, and somehow they have been  
very disillusioned and they ahve become very anti-Christian.  Because of  
that, they use Buddhism as a justification.  They put down Christianity  
and they think, `Those Christians believe in God.  They're stupid.  But we  
don't.  And those Christians believe in an eternal soul, but we don't!'   
But that is not what the Buddha was teaching.  Thai is also a trap of the  
mind, limited, deluding us.


________________________________________________________________________
More postings in the future.  Reponses welcomed - e-mail me and save the  
space at s.r.e!  

Hun Lye
lyeh@alleg.edu