moorthy@hctdemo.leis.bellcore.com (moorthy) (05/30/91)
What do different Buddhistic schools say about the next Avatar? (Is there a concept of Avatar in Buddhism?) Is there an authentic account of "Kalki" Avatar ( the next Avatar) in Hindu scriptures? /moorthy
radams@cerritos.edu (05/30/91)
moorthy@hctdemo.leis.bellcore.com (moorthy) writes: > What do different Buddhistic schools say about the next Avatar? > (Is there a concept of Avatar in Buddhism?) > > Is there an authentic account of "Kalki" Avatar ( the next Avatar) in > Hindu scriptures? > /moorthy What is an avatar? A divine incarnation. In a sense, we are all avatars since the divine is incarnated in all beings - sentient and insentient. An avatar, as it is described in the AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF A YOGI by Paramahansa Yogananda, is a fully liberated soul, who became liberated in a previous incarnation, and who returns to this physical dimension to help yet unliberated souls to also be free. The AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF A YOGI describes in detail what an avatar is, what are some of the traits an avatar has, and names some of them including some who were still around at the time of the writing of this book. This seems to indicate to me that there is no such thing as THE AVATAR or THE NEXT AVATAR except in certain sects or religions. 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 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
dogen@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (John Chq) (05/30/91)
In article <1991May29.192025.13902@nas.nasa.gov> moorthy@hctdemo.leis.bellcore.com (moorthy) writes: > > What do different Buddhistic schools say about the next Avatar? > (Is there a concept of Avatar in Buddhism?) > > Is there an authentic account of "Kalki" Avatar ( the next Avatar) in > Hindu scriptures? > /moorthy Concerning Buddhism, as I recall, during this 'cycle of time' there are 3 bodhisattvas, Dipankara who arrived before the Buddha, Siddhartha who was the historical Buddha, and Maitreya who is yet to arrive (though the Theosophists claim Krishnamurti was the incarnation of Maitreya). There is an interesting Buddhist 'prophesy', in the Tibetan tradition (?) which states that "when the iron bird flies and horseless carraiges are used, the Dharma will be born in the land of the red man." I'm not exactly sure of the accuracy of my recollection. I'm sure others on this board are more knowledable on this subject. I should also add that the zen tradition, while not disagreeing with this prophesy, says it is of little importance whether or not the Avatar Maitreya comes or not. What is most important is your awarness of this present moment of existence. Of course, this is also the tradition that says "If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him!" (Please don't take this literally). 8-) J. C. -- ******************************************************************************* -- John Cha "The present is always more interesting than the future or the past" *******************************************************************************
cyee@bruce.cs.monash.edu.au (Chut Ngeow YEE) (05/30/91)
Roger Adams writes: >moorthy@hctdemo.leis.bellcore.com (moorthy) writes: > >> What do different Buddhistic schools say about the next Avatar? >> (Is there a concept of Avatar in Buddhism?) >> >> Is there an authentic account of "Kalki" Avatar ( the next Avatar) in >> Hindu scriptures? >> /moorthy > >What is an avatar? A divine incarnation. In a sense, we are all avatars This is what Da Avabhasa (Da Free John) has to say about the parodox of an Avatar: "But people want the Guru to be the Avatar. They want that exclusive God image, whereas God doesn't exist in the exclusive sense. God is absolute. And the Guru lives as the Present Divine, not because he has attained anything, but because he has been undone. So he doesn't represent himself as the Divine in the exclusive sense. In his ecstatic speech he claims identity with the Divine, but he is not making a statement about himself, about his ego or his personal qualities in some exclusive sense. He is making a statement about all beings and worlds, about the Nature of Reality, the Condition that is God. Of course until there are others who realize that same happiness, that same enjoyment, he seems unique, and he functins for them as the Source of the operation of the Divine Sidhhi[spiritual power] in order to generate the life of Understanding in them. But in fact he doesn't exist as God in any exclusive sense whatoever. so there is no Avatar except the whole [of mankind and all beings], if it makes any sense to use such words at all." DA AVABHASA Grabage and the Goddess >since the divine is incarnated in all beings - sentient and insentient. >An avatar, as it is described in the AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF A YOGI by Paramahansa >Yogananda, is a fully liberated soul, who became liberated in a previous >incarnation, and who returns to this physical dimension to help yet unliberated >souls to also be free. Saying that the divine is incarnated in all beings implies that the ego is divine, to be glorified after fulfilling some grand path to enlightenment. I agree more to the view that the ego and the phenomena world is a temporary and spontaneous activity rising and falling in God or Buddha Nature or Transcendental Consciousness or Reality or One-Mind or whatever you want to call it. So the destiny of the ego (the re-incarnating entity), the imaginary disease of separation and unelightenment, is ultimately to be undone. And all realizers serve that purpose in one way or another. Here is another quote from Da Avabhasa: "The Disposition of the Enlightened one is paradoxical. It is a bodily Disposition, because he is, in a conventional sense, enbodied, and he therefore represents the past and its movement toward the future. And, paradoxically, his obligation is to somehow serve the Enlightenment of other beings. But from the point of view of Enlightenment itself there are no other beings, and those conventions of experience that we call other beings are not in fact failing to be Enlightened. They are --- Enlightenment. They are themselves only the Radiant Transcendental Consciousness. Therefore, all that we are confronting is a conventional concept of bondage and the need to survive. It is a superficial concept, and yet all beings are profoundly organized around these notions of bondage and survival. They create their daily lives around motives based in these notions. Thus, all beings appear to be tormented, and yet their torment is totally superficial and insignificant. The affair of life is unnecessary, but it is inevitable. The best description of it is that it is absurd. The entire universe and all experience exist only to be transcended. The Spiritual Master is absurd, like everything else. He is a Function that serves to Enlighten or Awaken beings from this condition that is absurd and unneccessary to begin with. The occupation of the Spirutial Master is as absurd as anything anyone else does, you see. Therefore, it requires a Sense of Humour, or the Enlightened point of view...." DA AVABHASA The Enlightenment of the Whole Body
jwl@mvutd.att.com (James W Lacey) (05/31/91)
In article <1991May29.192025.13902@nas.nasa.gov> moorthy@hctdemo.leis.bellcore.com (moorthy) writes: > > What do different Buddhistic schools say about the next Avatar? > (Is there a concept of Avatar in Buddhism?) The future Buddha is called Maitreya, with more "attention" being paid to Maitreya in Central Asia than South Asia. In Tibet, numerous mountains would be inscribed with, "Come, Maitreya, come!" (Source: Buddhist Scriptures, published by Penguin.) If by avatar you mean a 'divine being' of some kind, then some Buddhists would belive that Maitreya is an avatar, while others think that any talk about 'divine beings' is just idle speculation. -- |Jim Lacey | |my own opinions | |att!cbnewsl!jlacey |
Paul.Gillingwater@actrix.gen.nz (Paul Gillingwater) (06/01/91)
In article <1991May30.155617.8703@nas.nasa.gov> dogen@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (John Chq) writes: > Concerning Buddhism, as I recall, during this 'cycle of time' there are 3 > bodhisattvas, Dipankara who arrived before the Buddha, Siddhartha who was > the historical Buddha, and Maitreya who is yet to arrive (though the > Theosophists claim Krishnamurti was the incarnation of Maitreya). There is Sorry, not quite true. The theosophists never claimed that K. was the actual incarnation of the Maitreya Buddha. They did claim that he was a particularly special person, who was being trained to act as a "vehicle" for the Maitreya, who would "overshadow" Krishnamurti. Some observers from that time suggest that this "overshadowing" may have occured on a few occasions, but K. chose a different path, one which IMHO is more appropriate to current secular conditions. Early theosophical leaders made the mistake that their "Masters" had warned them of, i.e. establishing a theosophical "popery". The decision by K. to repudiate all claims to messiahship was the only realistic option he could take. His subsequent life and teachings show how perceptive this early teachers (Leadbeater et. al.) were in identifying him as something quite special. > an interesting Buddhist 'prophesy', in the Tibetan tradition (?) which > states that "when the iron bird flies and horseless carraiges are used, the > Dharma will be born in the land of the red man." I'm not exactly sure of > the accuracy of my recollection. I'm sure others on this board are more > knowledable on this subject. There have been some extremely interesting prophetic manuscripts translated at the University of Dharmasala in northern India in recent years, particularly one set by a US scholar. Although I have not seen the translations personally, while visiting India four years ago I heard descriptions of a great southern land with a large red rock (Australians may recognize uluru), plus a geographic description of a country with two large islands and one small island (NZ). -- Paul Gillingwater, paul@actrix.gen.nz