HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mw@ki.fht-mannheim.de (Marc Wachowitz)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Trap into the boundless
Date: 25 Dec 1992 16:09:24 -0800
Organization: Fachhochschule fuer Technik Mannheim
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandman.caltech.edu

"There is a wonderful book by Hubert Benoit ["The Supreme Doctrine"], where he
 writes: 'All that must disappear is my belief not to be enlightened.'
 One should have faith in this.
 Then you are no longer the person who says: 'I had this or that experience'.
 Exactly now, just where you are, it is happening. And tomorrow something
 entirely different happens. One cannot cling to it. Today the sun shines and
 tomorrow it rains. But all together is only - wheather. And when you suppose
 that all is just wheather, it is no more of great importance whether it rains
 or not, since then the sun does always shine. Or it does always rain, that
 depends on what you are.
 Disappear must the belief considering oneself not to be enlightened.
 It is not about telling that to oneself or be brainwashed, that one were
 or would become enlightened; what matters is that one finally stops searching,
 or that the search at least becomes a not-search - a stop.
 One says: 'Okay, when I am enlightened and have nothing to do for that,
 then I'll stop and look what exactly is happening'.
 The attitude 'I must immediately become enlightened' would still be a trip.
 First one is on the trip of not being enlightened, then then that one is
 enlightened. It will not work this way.
 When one recognizes that one needs patience, the tendency for trips
 automatically decreases. One does need some trust for this. When one
 allows oneself simply to be natural, the energy will return to its natural
 state and then likewise arise naturally.
 'Until now I'm moving like I have learned it. Learned ways. Even my search,
 its whole form, comes from what I have read, heared and believed, from what
 I have received from others. Therefore not even the search is my own search,
 at best it is my version.'
 [...]
 And more and more one lets go everything, comes to ones nature and begins
 to live out of this space - completely natural and without plays, since this
 means the end of all plays. That infects others, since they get a glimpse
 of complete naturality and normality."

Taken from a book by Michael Barnett (it seems there's no English version of
this one available; the German original is named "Falltuer ins Grenzenlose",
meaning "Trap into the boundless").

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Marc Wachowitz, mw@ki.fht-mannheim.de   /  news zombie - reply by e-mail, too
  *  wonder everyday    *    nothing in particular    *    all is special  *
From: farris@ruhets.rutgers.edu (Lorenzo Farris)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: An old woman's gift to Buddha
Date: 25 Dec 1992 15:53:03 -0800
Organization: ----
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandman.caltech.edu


In article <47575@ogicse.ogi.edu>, vaisnavi@m-net.ann-arbor.mi.us (vaisnavi) writes:
> 
>     Buddha smiled at the King and then replied,  "Because,  King,
> she  gave  her  *all*,  while  the  rest  of  you  merely  gave a
> *fraction* of what you have."
> 

Just out of curiousity, could you please give the source of this
story, and the approximate date it was recorded. While it is a nice
story, it sounds more Christian than Buddhist to me.

			-Lorenzo
-- 
Happiness is just a                     ******************************
remembrance away.                       *  Lorenzo Farris            *
                                        *  farris@ruhets.rutgers.edu *
                                        ******************************
From: farris@ruhets.rutgers.edu (Lorenzo Farris)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: Buddha and Malunkya Putta
Date: 28 Dec 92 18:10:27 GMT
Article-I.D.: ogicse.47834
Distribution: world
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

In article <47768@ogicse.ogi.edu>, dlittlej@csulb.edu (Darren
Littlejohn) writes:
[lots deleted....]
:amazing process. See, I don't trust ANY ONE TEACHING absolutely. And, I havent
:trusted my own self so much either. So, the truth lies within, and what
:commonalities exist among sources that stir up my spirit and motivate me
:to practise are the mirrors of the truth. It may sound wacky, but it's
:my path. 
:-- 

IME and IMHO, when you get past the externals, all the religions and
related philosophies I have examined point to the same whatever-it-is.
I like Meher Baba's metaphor of religion being like a large spoked
wheel. On the rim of the wheel, the various religions are very far
apart. But they all move toward one common hub.

Each way provides a different metaphor, and different praxes and
attitudes to adopt. They are each suited to different starting points
and different temperaments. The challenge for each person is to find
that path that is suited to them.

In my own experience, for example, I am very suspect of americans
adopting a path of guru devotion, as it smacks of magic pill/"please do
it for me" typical of our culture. Not to say that there aren't any
americans who can give true devotion. But it certainly wouldn't work
for me, as I am now.

The very practical test I have for myself on these matters, and which
later my teacher echoed, is that every year, every week, every day,
you should feel better about yourself, your interactions in the world,
and your general level of happiness should increase.

I'm sure someone will tell me how happiness is just another form of
attachment, but IMO it is of a different order.

			cheers,
				Lorenzo
-- 
Happiness is just a                     ******************************
remembrance away.                       *  Lorenzo Farris            *
                                        *  farris@ruhets.rutgers.edu *
                                        ******************************
From: darsie@eecs.ucdavis.edu (Richard Darsie)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: 4 Noble Truths
Date: 25 Dec 1992 16:10:11 -0800
Organization: ----
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandman.caltech.edu


In article <47420@ogicse.ogi.edu>, kris@bsg8.Corp.Sun.COM (Kris Skrinak) writes:
> 
> 
> I've got a problem with the 4 Noble Truths.
> 
> I think that 'suffering' as a basis of spirituality has no relevance in
> Western culture.
> 
> I am not suffering. I am wealthy, healthy, in touch with my
> surroundings and those around me. Further, I am happy and optimistic.
> 
> I believe and espouse non-dualistic teachings. But avoiding or ending
> suffering has nothing at all to do with it.
> 
> Can someone out there tell me what role 'suffering' plays in such a
> life?
> 
> -Kris

Well, first of all, the term "suffering" is the usual translation of the
word the Buddha used, "dukkha". My understanding of this term is that
it doesn't refer specifically to active, agonizing suffering, although
that is certainly a part of dukkha. What dukkha means, in my understanding,
is that there is an element of unsatisfactoriness in our lives which
arises from the transience of existence. One of the early sutras
defines dukkha as "contact with that which is unpleasant, and lack of
contact with that which is pleasant" - which kind of defines all levels
of suffering in a nutshell. 

Another thing the Buddha taught is that we are all deluded. This means
that we are subject to a fundamental misperception of "the way things
really are". To feel that you are not suffering at this point and to
therefore extrapolate from that to an opinion that because of this
the Buddha's teaching is not "relevant" to your situation is a form
of delusion. If a loved one of yours were to die tomorrow, would you
then be suffering? Would the Buddha's teaching be "relevant" then?
Of course all the teachers say that "pain is a great teacher" - 
without some measure of suffering in our lives why would we even be
drawn to any kind of spiritual searching?  

A teacher with whom I have had some contact talks about "dharma pain".
This is when you are sitting alot, getting deep into your practice
and you have a lot of pain in your legs or back or wherever. There
may be no physical "reason" for you to be experiencing pain as severe
as you are feeling, but it's there anyway. This is a direct experience
of dukkha, of the pain that's always there though our minds tend to
mask it and pretend that everything is ok.

Richard Darsie
darsie@eecs.ucdavis.edu
From: mw@ki.fht-mannheim.de (Marc Wachowitz)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: What is pleasure, fun, joy ?
Date: 25 Dec 1992 16:00:49 -0800
Organization: Fachhochschule fuer Technik Mannheim
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandman.caltech.edu

Abhay Bulsari VT (abulsari@abo.fi) wrote:
: What is  pleasure ? When we ask ourselves this  question, we find that
: there is no simple answer to  it,  and the concept is somewhat hollow.
What is an answer? When we ask ourselves this question, we find that
there is no simple answer to it, and the concept is somewhat hollow.

: We  have  conditioned  our  minds  to  think  that certain  things are
: pleasant, even  though they  might be  painful  (scratching,  drinking
: bitter drinks, etc.)
We have conditioned our minds to think that certain things are
understood, even though they might be unknown (insert any concepts ...).

: It should be easier to attain a balanced state of mind (sthitapragnya)
: once one realises  the hollowness  of these  concepts of  pleasure and
: pain.
It should be easier to feel the balance of mind once one realizes the
hollowness of these concepts of question and answer.

: What is fun  ?
This - though it is serious, too.

: What  is joy ?  What is ecstasy ? It is  a feeling which arises in the
: mind  under  some  circumstances.  That  arising,  however,  is  again
: baseless. Some circumstances result  in  joy,  others  don't. How does
: mind decide what is joyful ?
What is self, what is other ? It is a concept which separates the experience
under some circumstances. That separation, however, is again baseless.
Some experiences are called inside, some are called outside.
How does mind decide what is inside?

: I will be glad to have some answers from you.
What answer does a thirsty person need?
What is the taste of orange juice?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Marc Wachowitz, mw@ki.fht-mannheim.de   /  news zombie - reply by e-mail, too
  *  wonder everyday    *    nothing in particular    *    all is special  *
From: mcgehee@noao.edu (Peregrine McGehee)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: Mother Meera
Date: 28 Dec 92 16:44:45 GMT
Article-I.D.: ogicse.47833
Distribution: world
Organization: National Optical Astronomy Observatories, Tucson AZ

[reformated to 80 cols -a]

I have had several phone conversations with Christina Cox of Meeramma
Publications in New York which indicate that Mother Meera MAY be coming to
the States sometime in the spring. The location is unknown but hopes are
for the Bay Area. It's all up to Mother's will.

No, I haven't been to Thalheim but there is something about Meera that
is very familiar to me.

She is not the first avatar of Divine Mother I've encountered: I've spent
time at a Sri Sri Ma Anandamayi ashram and have had the darshan of Holy
Mother Mata Amritanandamayi on several occasions.

Namaste,
Peregrine M. McGehee			
Gemini 8-m Telescopes Project
mcgehee@noao.edu
From: abulsari@abo.fi (Abhay Bulsari VT)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: What is pleasure, fun, joy ?
Date: 27 Dec 92 08:22:06 GMT
Article-I.D.: ogicse.47841
Distribution: world
Organization: Abo Akademi University

In article <1hg7bhINNab7@sandman.caltech.edu> mw@ki.fht-mannheim.de (Marc Wachowitz) writes:
>What is an answer? When we ask ourselves this question, we find that
>there is no simple answer to it, and the concept is somewhat hollow.

>We have conditioned our minds to think that certain things are
>understood, even though they might be unknown (insert any concepts ...).

I don't even understand if this is supposed to be sarcastic.

<part deleted>

Now that you don't see the point in it, you have some questions in
Raj's style. Thanks.

>What is self, what is other ? It is a concept which separates the experience
>under some circumstances. That separation, however, is again baseless.
>Some experiences are called inside, some are called outside.
>How does mind decide what is inside?
>
>: I will be glad to have some answers from you.
>What answer does a thirsty person need?
>What is the taste of orange juice?

Thanks.

Abhay
From: pjm@isis.cshl.org (Pat Monardo)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: What is pleasure, fun, joy ?
Date: 25 Dec 1992 15:55:16 -0800
Organization: ----
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandman.caltech.edu

In article <47569@ogicse.ogi.edu> abulsari@abo.fi (Abhay Bulsari VT) writes:
>Earlier I mentioned that pain and  suffering  are to a good extent due
>to  mental conditioning. This can be extended to pleasure, joy and fun
>as well. Happiness might be a different thing. I hope some people will
>disagree with me.

the Bodhisattva should not take refuge in the view of morality
because perfect purity of morality does not result from taking
refuge in the view of morality. i interpret the "view of morality"
to mean exactly what you are doing: is it wrong to drink liquor,
enjoy pleasure, so on and so on? the answer is, it depends.
so the Boddhisattva sees no value in this type of reasoning and
instead devotes himself entirely to developing superknowledge,
which is all that really matters anyway.

-- 
-- Pat Monardo
-- pjm@cshl.org
From: mw@ki.fht-mannheim.de (Marc Wachowitz)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: A Parable
Date: 25 Dec 1992 16:01:33 -0800
Organization: Fachhochschule fuer Technik Mannheim
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandman.caltech.edu

Abhay Bulsari VT (abulsari@abo.fi) wrote:
[...]
: I get a feeling that Raj mostly writes paradoxes or questions in
: response to others. Those questions don't normally enlighten me
: very much, but distract me from what was being discussed.
Could it be the [way of] discussion distract you from yourself,
from "real life", and the questions are meant to distract from distraction?
[In Zen there's the metaphor of turning out a thorn in your foot with the help
 of another thorn - and then throwing away both.]

(Well, some might like to add that there's no real distraction,
 so you are free to be "distracted" when you enjoy it :-)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Marc Wachowitz, mw@ki.fht-mannheim.de   /  news zombie - reply by e-mail, too
  *  wonder everyday    *    nothing in particular    *    all is special  *
From: dprosser@titan.ucc.umass.edu (DANIEL W PROSSER)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: 4 Noble Truths
Date: 25 Dec 1992 15:58:36 -0800
Organization: ----
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandman.caltech.edu
Keywords: dukkha

In article <47420@ogicse.ogi.edu> kris@bsg8.Corp.Sun.COM (Kris Skrinak) writes:
>I've got a problem with the 4 Noble Truths.
>I think that 'suffering' as a basis of spirituality has no relevance in
>Western culture.
>I am not suffering. I am wealthy, healthy, in touch with my
>surroundings and those around me. Further, I am happy and optimistic.
>I believe and espouse non-dualistic teachings. But avoiding or ending
>suffering has nothing at all to do with it.
>
>Can someone out there tell me what role 'suffering' plays in such a
>life?
>-Kris

	Actually, the original word that the Edwardian English
translators gave as ``suffering''  was _dukkha_.  Personally, I
think they were being a little too melodramatic.  I have also heard
it translated as ``alienation'' or ``dissatisfaction'', which seems
more to the point when taken together with the rest of the teachings.
I'm not always suffering or in pain, but as long as I'm experiencing
duality I am alienated.

						dp



-- 
_________________dp  ==> dprosser@titan.ucc.umass.edu______________________
``Cowboy coffee, chemical cream --- Ride ride ride on my stallion of green.
	Midnight showers, sleep in the flowers, and dream hurricane, 
     break-neck-speed, rapid-fire dreams!'' ---the mighty, mighty bosstones
From: billc@devnull.mpd.tandem.com (Bill Carter)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: 4 Noble Truths
Date: 25 Dec 1992 16:08:14 -0800
Organization: ----
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandman.caltech.edu



In article <47420@ogicse.ogi.edu> kris@bsg8.Corp.Sun.COM (Kris Skrinak) writes:
>I think that 'suffering' as a basis of spirituality has no relevance in
>Western culture.
>
>I am not suffering. I am wealthy, healthy, in touch with my
>surroundings and those around me. Further, I am happy and optimistic.
>
>I believe and espouse non-dualistic teachings. But avoiding or ending
>suffering has nothing at all to do with it.
>
   I think this is a pretty good, key issue.  I was thinking it over
   and your statement that "I am not suffering. I am wealthy, healthy,"
   etc. makes a good point.  I mean, most people here in the West aren't
   in physical pain and muddle along okay mentally.  So what's so true
   about the First Noble Truth, that suffering (dukkha) is a condition
   of all existance?
   
   I don't presume to speak for Buddhists, I'm out on the periphery,
   but I'll take a shot at explaining it anyway.  The word 'dukkha'
   is usually translated to mean 'suffering', but the literal
   translation refers to an ill-made axle and therefore implies a
   wheel that is awry.  It's not the kind of suffering where you
   are in bed with the stomach flu and wish you were dead.  It's
   more like things are out of kilter.

   People in general, the theory goes, have insatiable appetites and
   unattainable desires.  Money, fame, success, power, etc. don't
   satisfy the way one might expect.  People continue to blindly pursue
   the objects of their many desires anyway, what else is there to do,
   even though the result is a mouthful of ashes?

   Put this way I think the First Noble Truth is plenty relevant
   to Western culture.  I know the people I see around me aren't
   very serene or peaceful.  They are stressed out, keeping score,
   getting ahead, looking out for number one, and making it dangerous
   for me to drive to work and back.

   -Bill Carter
From: asanders@adobe.com (Alan Sanders)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: 4 Noble Truths
Date: 25 Dec 1992 15:55:57 -0800
Organization: ----
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandman.caltech.edu

| I am not suffering. I am wealthy, healthy, in touch with 
| my surroundings and those around me. Further, I am happy 
| and optimistic...
|
| Can someone out there tell me what role 'suffering' plays 
| in such a life?
		     -Kris

Everyone without exception, even the richest man in the world,
can lose everything he has, can become fatally ill (or die 
accidentally) AT ANY MOMENT. To realize this fact is suffering.
To live with this realization calls into question ALL our
assumptions about life. To be distracted by trifles is, of
course, a kind of way out. But the bill eventually comes due!

					-Alan
From: fstawit@convx1.lerc.nasa.gov (Tawit Chitsomboon)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: 4 Noble Truths
Date: 25 Dec 1992 15:50:53 -0800
Organization: ----
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandman.caltech.edu

In article <47420@ogicse.ogi.edu>
kris@bsg8.Corp.Sun.COM (Kris Skrinak) writes:
>
>I've got a problem with the 4 Noble Truths.
>
>I think that 'suffering' as a basis of spirituality has no relevance in
>Western culture.
>
>I am not suffering. I am wealthy, healthy, in touch with my
>surroundings and those around me. Further, I am happy and optimistic.

Happiness itself, according to buddhism, is sufferring, insofar as
there exists attachment to happiness. I've been thinking why the
buddha used the word sufferring (dhukkha) to denote this phenomenon.

There are at least three possibilities:

1. Lack of better words.
2. Dhukkha (in those days) connoted much more than mundane sufferings.
3. He intentionally used the word to provoke the world.

-tawit    fstawit@icomp01.lerc.nasa.gov

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the beginning, God gave diseases to control population.
Men out do God with modern medicine.
So she gives religious conflicts as a new means.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Roger Adams <RADAMS@cerritos.edu>
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: What is pleasure, fun, joy ?
Date: 25 Dec 1992 15:57:20 -0800
Organization: Cerritos College, Norwalk CA
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandman.caltech.edu

In article <47569@ogicse.ogi.edu>, 
abulsari@abo.fi (Abhay Bulsari VT) writes:

> What  is joy ?  What is ecstasy ? It is  a feeling which arises in the
> mind  under  some  circumstances.  That  arising,  however,  is  again
> baseless. Some circumstances result  in  joy,  others  don't. How does
> mind decide what is joyful ?
> 
> I will be glad to have some answers from you.

Joy is. Our true nature is joyful, Joy is always present but most of us,
in our desires, postpone the feeling of joy until we get something that
we desire, and the things we desire have a lot to do with the conditioning
of our mind by environment (including heredity). Yogananda said that if
you make up your mind to be happy, no one can make you unhappy. The mind
should decide that joy should be experienced unconditionally, not just when
some petty desire is met or when conditions are optimal (according to your
conditioning as to what is optimal) but regardless of outward circumstances.
If you are depressed or sad and come into the presence of someone who is
joyful, you immediately cheer up, don't you? Being joyful then uplifts others
and when it is unconditional, it is unselfish and of service to others by
your very presence. So the mind simply decides (for most) whether or not to 
allow the joy within us to manifest, depending on whether or not a desire is
fulfilled - based on conditioning which is varies from person to person.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
	Roger Adams
	radams@cerritos.edu               To those in whom love dwells,
	Cerritos College                  the whole world is one family.
	11110 Alondra Blvd                             A Hindu Proverb
        Norwalk, California 90650
	USA        		          292 Dwapara :-)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: abulsari@abo.fi (Abhay Bulsari VT)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: What is pleasure, fun, joy ?
Date: 27 Dec 92 08:18:31 GMT
Article-I.D.: ogicse.47842
Distribution: world
Organization: Abo Akademi University

In article <1hg750INNa89@sandman.caltech.edu> Roger Adams <RADAMS@cerritos.edu> writes:
>In article <47569@ogicse.ogi.edu>, 

>If you are depressed or sad and come into the presence of someone who is
>joyful, you immediately cheer up, don't you? Being joyful then uplifts others
>and when it is unconditional, it is unselfish and of service to others by
>your very presence. So the mind simply decides (for most) whether or not to 
>allow the joy within us to manifest, depending on whether or not a desire is
>fulfilled - based on conditioning which is varies from person to person.

Perhaps Paramhansa  Yogananda did  not state  clearly enough  that the
world  is  an illusion  (Maya),  but  this  is  what  I am  trying  to
understand. I  think many of  our  concepts  are  hollow  and lead  to
illusions.

Abhay