Path: Supernews69!supernews.com!news.ktb.net!news.cs.ucla.edu!drivel.ics.uci.edu!csulb.edu!news.sgi.com!howland.erols.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-sea-19.sprintlink.net!news-in-west.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!Sprint!205.232.174.12!node2.frontiernet.net!news.his.com!boingo.amil.jhu.edu!news.jhu.edu!news From: Joe Newsgroups: alt.philosophy.zen,alt.zen,alt.magick.tyagi,alt.religion.buddhism,talk.religion.buddhism,talk.religion.misc Subject: Re: JGraham: Influences on Zen?? (for michael) Date: 30 Jun 1997 14:26:50 GMT Organization: undecided Lines: 40 Message-ID: <5p8fna$mu@news.jhu.edu> References: <01bc7584$98049020$LocalHost@default> <5nq063$422@kudo20.kudonet.com> <33A0DE05.616A@mindspring.com> <33A7BD3D.1E74@digmo.org> <33AB0F1A.739D@digmo.org> <5or856$gvr@news.jhu.edu> <33B1F154.3F78@mindspring.com> <33B283E7.2556@dnc.net> <33B344E0.367A@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu> <33B5311C.5358@dnc.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.220.45.83 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit) Xref: Supernews69 alt.philosophy.zen:15651 alt.zen:65858 alt.magick.tyagi:13339 alt.religion.buddhism:993 talk.religion.buddhism:37849 talk.religion.misc:301181 daniel wrote: >Joe, > >Well, I was out of line with my comment. Everyone once in a while, just > when I think I am getting it together,.. > >I apologize. No problem. [...] >Imagine that someone came along and reached "enlightenment" (whatever >that is) on their own. Would they be an "Honorary Buddist?" Would >they be a Buddist? If not, then what would this enlightened person >have to do to become one? How would someone stop being one? To be a Buddhist means you accept the teachings of the Buddha and the Buddhist tradition. It refers much more to a particular spiritual *path* than a goal. If you dedicate yourself to this path, then you're a Buddhist. "Enlightenment" is not really the issue. Heck, I prostrate to the ground before *anyone* who has truly realized and manifests the essential oneness of us all. Wouldn't give a hoot *what* they are. Such a person you would recognize by certain unmistakeable qualities. For one, they certainly wouldn't announce to you that they were "enlightened". Secondly, they wouldn't profess to know everything about your religion when they clearly hadn't the faintest idea. In other words, you'd expect a certain degree of modesty, humility, and self-control from a genuinely enlightend individual (the fact that I am sorely lacking in these departments speaks for itself). Well, suffice to say that these qualities are notably absent in the people I was talking about (which is not to say they don't have potential, of course.) Many thanks for your kind words, Joe