HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: crago_l@cubldr.colorado.edu
Subject: Re: reincarnation in multiple bodies?
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 23:27:21 GMT

In article <1992Aug7.222309.16248@qiclab.scn.rain.com>, gst@gnosys.svle.ma.us (Gary S. Trujillo) writes:
> For whatever it's worth, I wanted to pass on the following article, and
> to ask whether the notion it presents is something talked about in any
> of the Eastern tradtions:
> 

> | 	jtulli@eagle.wesleyan.edu writes:
> |
> |>also, i have read that simultaneous physical lives is a possibility (space and
> |>time are illusions, right?  i think so).  i was also wondering if anyone has
> |>ever met another person with the same consciousness, or whether people think
> |>it might be possible to do so. 
> |
> | i know that the great tibetan teacher jamyang kontrul was asserted to have 
> | reincarnated in five different people, or emanations, simultaneously. they
> | were know by either different titles or as 'janyang kontrul of <>'. one of
> | them lived in canada till his death just three or four years ago. so certainly
> | they could meet each other.... but it does not mean that they would be meeting
> | identical people to themselves, as each had different life histories and
> | ways of dealing with situations, etc. a little odd at first glance, i guess,
> | but there you go.
> |
> | sp
> |
> | -- 
> | Scott Probst: Brain and Behaviour Laboratory, Psychology dept, SFU

> 
> --
>     Gary S. Trujillo                            gst@gnosys.svle.ma.us

In Tibetan belief there can be reincarnations of five different aspects of
a great tulku -- they are body, speech, mind, actions, and I believe the
last is quality. Scott is right, Jamgon Kongtrul (notice spelling) the Great
was believed to have had 5 reincarnations. He was not unique: it has happened
to other tulkus as well. A tulku with a remarkable facility for teaching
and public speaking might be considered to be a *speech* embodiment, as an
example. 

We in the West know very little about the part of a person, tulku or even an
ordinary person, that survives physical death and then reincarnates. We don't
really know its characteristics, its behavioral patterns, its basic
constitution. The Tibetans have worked intensely on this subject for many
hundreds of years, and appear to have fairly complete knowledge. 

Regards, Lou
From: dorothy@cvedc.prime.com (Dorothy Robinson)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: MCP ?
Date: 19 Aug 92 23:03:16 GMT
Article-I.D.: qiclab.1992Aug20.182530.20402
Organization: Computervision R&D, Beaverton OR

wong@rkna50.riken.go.jp (Wong Weng Fai) writes:
>Hi,
>Joe Stewart quotes MEHER BABA  taken from "Discourses Vol. III"...
>>As a rule, men excel in qualities of the head and will.  They are
>>capable of sound judgment and steadfast purpose.  As a rule,
>>women excel in qualities of the heart.  They are capable of
>>intense love which makes them welcome any sacrifice for the loved
>>one.  ...
>	Hmmm ... isn't this sexist and stereotypical ? Being a male, I can
>vouch that the first statement simply isn't true. Can't speak for the females
>though, may be some ladies can comment on this.

	Well, it's certainly not Politically Correct, but Meher Baba was a
product of his culture - as was Shakyamuni Buddha, who had to be vigorously
persuaded to allow nuns into his Order.  By the same token, people tend to
be what their culture makes them - so the stereotypes are descriptive of
the situation that men and women are born into.  I don't mind general-
izations, as long as exceptions are allowed.

	On the other hand, I tend to avoid religious organizations which
are too closely linked with male-dominated institutions of the East.  It's
charming when a lama says that Buddhist practice makes men stronger and women
more beautiful, but I'll opt for Lake Wobegon myself (where the women are
strong and the men are good-looking) ;-)

	To expand on this topic a little, I'm very suspicious that the
Tibetan teachings on sexual yoga omit the woman's best interest entirely.
I think there really are psychological differences between men and women
in the matter of sex, and I'm not at all sure that what is good for men
is also good for women.  I would trust this type of practice more if there
were more women teaching it.

===========================================================================
Dorothy Mokuren Robinson                           dorothy@cvedc.prime.com
     whose opinions are not those of...
Computervision             
14952 NW Greenbrier Parkway, Beaverton, Oregon 97006   Phone (503)690-7861
From: raj@utkvx4.utk.edu (S. KANAKA RAJ)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: Sri Ramakrishna and Swami Vivekananda
Date: 17 Aug 92 02:02:00 GMT
Organization: University of Tennessee Computing Center

In article <1992Aug16.181814.20593@cco.caltech.edu>,
jeffjc@cs.mcgill.ca (Jeffrey CHANCE) writes...

>On the subject of this post, I find the relationship between
>Ramakrishna and Vivekananda a very significant and inspiring
>one, and a learning tool or help of sorts for those who 
>follow a bhaktic Guru-disciple path. Everytime I read about
>Vivekananda's life history I always find myself intensely
>interested.


Thanks for that wonderful article. The relationship between Shri Ramakrishna
and Swami Vivekanandha can not be put in words and it is hard for general
people to believe that such a relationship can exist between two souls.
Initially Swami used to make fun of Shri Ramakrishna's trances and other acts
as nothing but mad. He called Shri Ramakrishna a mad man when he said that the
glass is God, the table is God, and so on. Initially Swami questioned each and
every one of Shri Ramakrishna's acts and speeches about God. But all the time
Shri Ramakrishna knew that these queries arise from Narendhra's (Swami
Vivekanandha) intense thirst after seeking answers for the purpose of human
life, what is God, what is religion, etc. Once Swami was convinced that the
mad man is truly a mad man after God and a man who talks from his own
experiences, he never waivered from his trust in Shri Ramakrishna. The relation
between them especially during the final stage of Shri Ramakrishna's stay in
earth is inspiring and will give a true understanding of the bond that should
exist between the seeker and the realised.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

	Each nation on earth has a mission to fulfil.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

S. Kanaka Raj (raj@utkvx.utk.edu)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
From: raj@globe1.att.com (Rajendra P Sharma)
Subject: Re: Enlightened Beings
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 15:24:58 GMT

Thomas writes:

> If you met a man who drinks and smokes and eats red meat and has sex,
> would you say he could not be enlightened?  Why or why not?


Enlightenment is what is. So there is nothing but enlightenment.


> What does it mean to be enlightened?


It means nothing. Since all is enlightenment alone.
One takes oneself to be un-enlighted; therefore there is a struggle
to be enlighted. Since there is nothing but enlightenment, the feeling
of being un-enlighted, the struggle for enlightenment are illusions that
do not go away until "what is" is seen clearly [and this "relative fact"
is known as enlightenment].

> Can we ever know whether or not someone else is really enlightened?


Can darkness see light?


---raj
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
From: sparta!asanders@uunet.UU.NET (USENET NEWS)
Subject: Re: In the beginning...
Organization: ----
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 21:17:35 GMT

(Sri Gopalakrishna) writes:

| This whole world is nothing but a manifectation of the cosmic mind...
| In reality, there is only Perfection...

		-Sri Gopalkrishna

Everything is perfect. All our suffering is merely an illusion...

This answer is fine if we are merely interested in discussing
philosophical theories. But, with all due respect, of what value
is this viewpoint to people who are suffering real pain, crying
real tears? Does not compassion for the suffering of others
(not to mention our own pain!) compel us to take another look
at these smooth explanations we learned in ashrams and
meditation halls?

To continue briefly where Roger Adams left off:

	All the world's a stage,
	and all the men and women merely players.
	They have their exits and their entrances,
	And each man in his time plays many parts.

	  		-William Shakepeare

With apologies for misquoting...

It is clear that things are not what they seem. Speaking for myself,
I have come to mistrust intellectual certainty most of all.

						-Alan
From: walsha@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (Beginning to think is beginning to be undermined - Albert Camus.)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: In the beginning...
Date: 19 Aug 92 15:55:24 GMT
Article-I.D.: qiclab.1992Aug20.182202.19993
Organization: ----

> | ...remembrance of our totality means we remember that every 
> | being has the knowledge it takes to move beyond suffering. 
> | They choose not to exercize that knowledge. And in that sense,
> | suffering certainly is an illusion.
> 					-Lorenzo  
> 
> People CHOOSE not to exercise that knowledge? 

even assuming that deep down we posess that knowledge, and deep
down we posess a pure and spotless nature, the ammount of time,
energy, dedication, skillful means... that it takes to uncover
that knowledge and exercise it is sometimes considerable - a 
whole lifetime's worth of work.

   ando.
From: farris@ruhets.rutgers.edu (Lorenzo Farris)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: In the beginning...
Date: 19 Aug 92 17:37:30 GMT
Article-I.D.: qiclab.1992Aug20.182252.20125
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

I write:
| ...remembrance of our totality means we remember that every 
| being has the knowledge it takes to move beyond suffering. 
| They choose not to exercize that knowledge. And in that sense,
| suffering certainly is an illusion.
					-Lorenzo  
>Alan responds:

>People CHOOSE not to exercise that knowledge? Forgive me for
>sounding inflammatory, but how is this different from saying of
>the homeless, "It's their own fault. They're too lazy to work."
>It seems to me that talking about "choice" in this context only 
>clothes a basically judgmental attitude in philosophical garb.
[. . . other stuff deleted]

>Yes, this is true. But WE can care, possibly MUST care in order
>to fulfill our destiny as human beings. What does it mean to
>BE HUMAN? Isn't this the question?

>			-Alan

I apologize for seeming to imply there is something wrong with the
suffering.  I meant anything but that.  And I certainly don't mean
to imply I don't care.
However, having made the small advances that I have, I can recognize
that ultimately, the suffering I have felt in my life, (and don't
be too quick to guess what experiences i may have gone through in
this life) is there primarily because of an attitude I have, one of
clinging.  I don't have any idea what it is in this world, or any
other, that gets me or someone to search for a better way of dealing
with the world.  Part of the problem with not knowing any better
is that you don't know any better, and you don't want to hear what
anyone else has to say about either, except to agree with you.  
So I have compassion for those that suffer, because I can certainly
identify with them.  But I don't feel BAD for them.  What a useless
state of mind.  Let's make the world a better place by having one
MORE miserable person.:(  I do what I can to improve their lot, but
my feeling bad for them sure doesn't do them or me or anyone else
any good.  
This is a pretty flamy note, but I'm pretty tired of people thinking
that you have to feel bad to care and to do any good.  Pity and
guilt are useless emotions.  They are very good for controlling
some people, but have very little to do with love and compassion.
My spiritual practice is to endeavor to put smiles on the faces of
all those I see, and those I don't see, starting with me.
:):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):)
Yours in happy endeavor,
	Lorenzo
From: jdavis@netlink.cts.com (James Davis)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Theosophy and Hinduism
Date: 16 Aug 92 18:21:15 GMT
Organization: ----


In response to your (portal) comments about the muddying effect of Theosophy
on scholarly Hinduism, I asked for elaboration from you:

James:
>Please summarize a few main concepts of scholarly Hinduism and tell how they
>differ from the corresponding ideas of Blavatsky.

Portal: 

>This would be quite an undertaking!  I refer you instead to the writings
>of [then you list Theosophical and Hindu philosophical works.]

I am familiar with Theosophy, and not unfamiliar with the basics of Hindu
thought.  I didn't ask for a treatise.  I just wanted you to justify your
comment by pointing out a few fundamental discrepancies or specify the exact
nature of the mud. Two paragraphs; a screen of info should do; a few bullets. 
You know, "Theosophy views the world this way, but in contrast Hinduism views
it this way."  "Hinduism teaches this, but the corresponding concept X in
Theosophy obscures the truth because..."

I might agree or disagree with you, but I can tell what you mean unless
you're more specific.  Your recent comment about not confusing old and new is
too general to respond to.



--                    
INTERNET:  jdavis@netlink.cts.com (James Davis)
UUCP:   ...!ryptyde!netlink!jdavis
NetLink Online Communications * Public Access in San Diego, CA (619) 453-1115
From: radams@cerritos.edu
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: The yogic attitude towards death
Date: 18 Aug 92 03:33:50 GMT
Article-I.D.: qiclab.1992Aug18.043150.3572
Organization: Cerritos College, Norwalk CA

Death is just a transition state from this physical dimension to another
dimension know as the astral world. Paramahansa Yogananda has said that if
your spiritual eye is open, you can see the astral world even while in this
physical dimension (in a physical form)) and you can also see astral beings.
Yogananda has said (from the Divine Romance) "Sometimes the astral form of
a person will be sitting right by your side. You won't see him, because you
can't see an astral being with the two physical eyes; but I can see him. You
need the 'X-ray vision' of the third eye, the spiritual eye, to see souls
in their astral forms. You have to develop that spiritual eye."

Some yogis just take on a young body (vacated of course :-) when their own
grows old and thus circumvent the process of dying and being born again.
Yogananda tells the following story (see above reference): "Once in India
a very old yogi came to the cremation grounds. Upon a funeral pyre was a
young man's body, ready to be cremated. The old man cried out, 'Stop! I
need that body.' And even as he said it, the young man's form, enlivened
by the spirit of the yogi, jumped up from the pyre and the saint's old
body fell dead. Wearing his new physical habitat, the yogi ran off and
soon disappeared in the crowd. The astonished mourners cremated his old
body."  The saints say we should treat the body as a temporary residence
and not be attached or bound by it. 

 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
	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 :-)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
From: "Arun K. Gupta" <ag3l+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: MCP ?
Organization: ----
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 20:34:43 GMT



Most Hindus that I know do think that gender, caste discrimination is wrong.
It is hard, however, for most people to admit, that they are following a
tradition that did/does have elements of these wrongs in them.

The day you should get worried about Hindu reform is when they start saying:
oh, if those people did that (bad thing) then they must not be Hindus !
(Just like the ideal Communism which has never existed !).

If you take a look at (the Republican view of America and especially
Marilyn Quayle's interview on PBS) America, in the 60s, the `Judaeo-
Christian' values that were the bedrock of society came to be
discredited because the society was racist, sexist, and was even
fighting in an unjustifiable war in Vietnam. As a result, the
entire set of values was discarded by some -- the counterculture.
Looking around today, it is clear that the abandonment of values
has had a great cost for American society.

The trick to reform is not to abandon everything that you have because
some of it is wrong. The question always arises though -- how can you
justify following a tradition that permitted so much evil ? I think the
hope is that the evil parts are not an essential part of the tradition,
and can be sloughed off.

The problem arises of course, when some people feel that no part of
the tradition may be touched without losing the whole -- the most
vivid example is in Islam, but certainly there are Hindus who think
that way.

-arun gupta
ag3L@andrew.cmu.edu
From: kish@titania.rutgers.edu (Kish)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: Enlightened Beings
Date: 19 Aug 92 14:12:23 GMT
Article-I.D.: qiclab.1992Aug20.181718.19795
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

In article <1992Aug19.081948.26026@qiclab.scn.rain.com>, bguest9@bsg9.Corp.Sun.COM (Kristian Skrinak) writes:
| Are there any genuinely enlightened beings on the planet? Who and where
| are they?
| 
| Please, reply directly as well as post.
| 
| --
| bguest9@bsg9.Corp.Sun.COM (Kristian Skrinak)

What do you mean by "genuinely enlightened" ?  I think if *you* try to answer
this question first, then *you* will eventually find a satisfying answer to
your original question.  I don't think anyone can really answer this for you.
They can give their opinions, but your original question won't be answered
until you check things out for yourself.

-Bill
-- 

PHONE: (908) 932-5026
UUCP : {ames,att,harvard}!uunet!rutgers!jove.rutgers.edu!kish
INTERNET: kish@jove.rutgers.edu
From: raj@globe1.att.com (Rajendra P Sharma)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: Proper understandings and renunciation
Keywords: Buddha Nature, "Renunciation of non-duality"
Date: 13 Aug 92 18:18:30 GMT
Organization: ----


Pat writes:

>... Although i think the term second Buddha would be OK for him [:-)]

	
	Buddha is only one.
	Therefore, the term "second Gautama" may be more appropriate.


> Is it possible to become attached to Buddha Nature?


	The Buddha Nature is the only nature; one and undivisible;
	the "ground of being."

	Therefore, all is already attached to Buddha Nature.

	When one is "attached" to "other things," attachement to Buddha
	Nature will automatically "get rid of" all other
	attachments (which are temporary anyway).

	This [the attachment to Buddha Nature] will be the last
	"attachement" one will experience.


> Is it advisable to renounce nonduality?


	The "one" who "attempts to renounce nonduality" is "in
	duality." The "nonduality," by definition, is beyond
	duality; in fact does not know "duality;" but is the
	basis of "duality" as well.

	Therefore, the question is absurd.

	 [Please don't take it to mean that the questioner is absurd;
	  the subject can never be absurd, (as the subject is always
	  Buddha.)]


---raj
From: forman@ide.com (Bonnie Forman)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: reincarnation in multiple bodies?
Date: 13 Aug 92 18:19:11 GMT
Organization: IDE, San Francisco

In article <1992Aug12.171418.15105@cco.caltech.edu> jeffjc@cs.mcgill.ca (Jeffrey CHANCE) writes:
>Earlier I wrote:
>>>Supreme enjoying Himself in a little game, a little wierd sort of
>>>funny and unique experience. Another example of this class of
>>>phenomenon (IMO) is when a soul reincarnates as a different sex.
>>>In both these cases, the phenomenon is a very rare occurance but
>>>still occurs every now and then as part of the richness and
>>>completeness of the Divine Lila.
>
>
>To which Pat Monardo replied:
>>the Supreme what? the Supreme object of wild speculation?
>>a soul now incarnates only in one sex? how silly!
>>i find the above paragraph extremely annoying.
>>human existence will remain a metaphysical hell
>>as long as religious leaders continue burdening people with
>>notions of Spirit and God. it's a bad game.
>
>
>
>As for the part about the soul almost always reincarnating
>as the same sex, this is my belief based on what my teacher,
>Sri Chinmoy, has said about this. I know that a lot of these
>new age teachers say that it is quite common for a soul to
>come back as a different sex. But, their words don't have
>any meaning for me personally. Not that these topics are
>particularly important, but if Im going to have an opinion
>on such things I base it on the writings of those who I
>consider to be God-realized or almost so. These include
>my teacher Sri Chinmoy, Yogananda, Yukteswar, Vivekananda,
>Ramakrishna, Aurobindo, Maharshi, and others (probably
>Meher Baba too, except I haven't read any of his works).
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>From what I have read, only Sri Chinmoy has addressed this
>particular question and hence based on what he said I
>happen to believe that souls almost always stay as the
>same sex throughout their human incarnations. This makes
>sense also if you happen to believe that each soul is
>meant to manifest something particular, some particular
>quality or set of qualities, regardless of the incarnation. 
>
>
>Jeff
>

  Actually, no.  Meher Baba teaches that we come back
  sometimes as man, and sometimes as woman.


			Bonnie


--
********************************************************************
 forman@ide.com   * ``Things that are Real are given and received  *
 !sun!ide!forman  *            in Silence''      M.B.              *
********************************************************************
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
From: bguest9@bsg9.Corp.Sun.COM (Kristian Skrinak)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: Enlightened Beings
Date: 20 Aug 92 00:32:25 GMT
Article-I.D.: qiclab.1992Aug20.182651.20494
Organization: Sun Microsystems

Hi, Kristian. Have you heard of Master Nome in Santa Cruz? He is an
enlightened disciple of the Indian Sage Ramana Maharshi. His
teaching is in accordance with Advaita Vedanta (or Non-dualistic
Vedanta) as taught by Shankara and the Sages of the Upanishads.
He is quite conversant with Buddhist forms of Non-duality, also.

He has a thriving lineage, with many disciples (including enlightened
disciples). His teaching is direct and genuine, it is no mere
theory or formal philosophy. If you meet him one time, you will
see for yourself a liberated, fully realized enlightened master. 
If you are genuinely seeking enlightenment, there is no better
aid on the path than the guidance of an enlightened sage.
People who know only books, cannot even imagine the glory to be found
in the company of true sage. The greatest scriptures and holy
texts pale into insignificance in the living presence such a genuine sage, 
as a firefly before the light of a million suns. 

If you are a sincere seeker, and are truly looking to meet a
realized being, not out of mere curiosity, but to fulfill a
real yearning for knowledge of Truth--if this is the case, then
this message will be the most significant message you have ever
received in your life.

Consider it a golden key. By grace it has fallen into your hand. It is
up to you to use it. There is nothing else that could ever compare
to this.

--
bguest9@bsg9.Corp.Sun.COM (Kristian Skrinak)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern