did buddha have blue eyes?
Richard Bailey
I heard this from a buddhist organization
robohen
On 6 Jan 1997, Richard Bailey wrote:
> I heard this from a buddhist organization
They were blue and crawling with maggots when he died.
rick
Richard Bailey wrote:
>
> I heard this from a buddhist organization
There are the 32 features which are listed somewhere, but I don't
know if blue eyes is one of them
Rick
Joseph Crea
Hello, Brian!
br...@brianb.u-net.com (B Barlow) wrote:
>rick <stc...@mit.edu> wrote:
>
>>There are the 32 features which are listed somewhere, but I don't
>>know if blue eyes is one of them
>
>Hi.
>Yes blue eyes is one of them. I read of the 32 marks of a Buddha a
>while back and I was curious to know what they were and i've just
>found a list of them on the internet.
>If you're interested go to (http://www.tunglinkok.ca/buddhistdoor/).
>Then go to the glossary.
>It is arranged alphabetically and under the letter 'T' is Thirty-two
>Forms.
>
>Blue eyes ? - does that mean that I can't become enlightened because I
>
>have brown eyes ?.
No, it simply means you aren't cut out to be a Buddha this time around.
Enlightenment/Awakening is another matter all together.
With Mettaa,
Joseph Crea
<Josep...@worldnet.att.net>
Kent Sandvik
In article <5aup05$o...@rapture.u-net.net>,
>Hi.
>Yes blue eyes is one of them. I read of the 32 marks of a Buddha a
>while back and I was curious to know what they were and i've just
>found a list of them on the internet.
>If you're interested go to (http://www.tunglinkok.ca/buddhistdoor/).
>Then go to the glossary.
>It is arranged alphabetically and under the letter 'T' is Thirty-two
>Forms.
>
>Blue eyes ? - does that mean that I can't become enlightened because I
Your eyes -- and mine -- are based on our evolutionary actions, so there's
little one could do about those, maybe change the color with color lenses
and so on. Same with Buddha's original eyes, they were what they were
based on his own evolutionary actions.
The marks of a buddha are rather the marks of the so called enjoyment
body of a buddha that those who are on the path to enlightenment
will create (Mahayana Buddhism). So your enjoyment eyes will indeed be
blue! It's all emptiness anyway, there are no such things as self-existent
blue eyes of a Buddha, it's the evolutionary outcome of one becoming
enlightened.
--Kent
--
---
May this be a contribution towards the harmonious growth of goodness and virtue.
Kent Sandvik - Silicon Graphics, Inc, Cosmo Applied Engineering
san...@sgi.com Phone: (415) 933 6417
Bill Snyder
br...@brianb.u-net.com (B Barlow) wrote:
>rick <stc...@mit.edu> wrote:
>
>>There are the 32 features which are listed somewhere, but I don't
>>know if blue eyes is one of them
>Yes blue eyes is one of them.
> (snip)
>Blue eyes ? - does that mean that I can't become enlightened because I
>have brown eyes ?.
Perhaps that would make your brown eyes blue? Also consider that a
central teaching in many sects (Theravadin and Mahayana) is that there
are no marks of a Buddha. The sentient order in which marks exist is
through and through illusion. As for whether Gautama had blue eyes;
it is certainly possible. But remember this warrior-prince
(kshatriya) lived a thousand years or so after the coming of the
Indo-Europeans to what is now India and Pakistan. So both ethnic
mixing and beneficial mutation would make it unlikely.
Roger Snowden
Actually, he was wearing colored contact lenses. He was quite the fashion
maven in his time.
Richard Bailey <reck...@phish.nether.net> wrote in article
<5aqgll$j...@news.cic.net>...
Joseph Crea
Hello, Roger!
"Roger Snowden" <rsno...@labinterlink.com> wrote:
>Actually, he was wearing colored contact lenses. He was quite the fashion
>maven in his time.
>
Of course! It all makes sense now! The blue eyes accentuated those
stylish saffron robes he always wore! Thanks ever so much for clearing
this up. ;-)
Randy Jewett
In article <5aup05$o...@rapture.u-net.net>
br...@brianb.u-net.com (B Barlow) writes:
>Hi.
>Yes blue eyes is one of them. I read of the 32 marks of a Buddha a
>while back and I was curious to know what they were and i've just
>found a list of them on the internet.
>If you're interested go to (http://www.tunglinkok.ca/buddhistdoor/).
>Then go to the glossary.
>
> have brown eyes?
>
Deluded persons, not caring to peer beneath surfaces, are content
to snatch at images.
this 32 marks sutra is prolly jus somethin thrown in to appease Brahmins
it's silly
robohen
On Thu, 9 Jan 1997, Randy Jewett wrote:
> >Yes blue eyes is one of them. I read of the 32 marks of a Buddha a
> >while back and I was curious to know what they were and i've just
> >found a list of them on the internet.
> >If you're interested go to (http://www.tunglinkok.ca/buddhistdoor/).
> >Then go to the glossary.
> this 32 marks sutra is prolly jus somethin thrown in to appease Brahmins
> it's silly
To the contrary, this is the wisest teaching Buddhism has ever taught.
What other sutra more honestly describes the Buddhist agenda?
Bill Snyder
treal...@aol.com (TReale7145) wrote:
>It is highly likely that the Buddha did have blue eyes.
Did Arjuna? How about Krishna? Or Shiva? Or Zarathustra? Or Jesus?
Or the Yellow Emporer?
Koji Takakuwa
>
> The question: Did the Buddha have blue eyes?
The only physical description I'm aware of,
which the Buddha gave of himself, was that his
body was one fathom length long. He did also
describe his neighbors as dark, dusky and yellow.
Koji Takakuwa
Kent Sandvik
In article <5b988i$k...@sympathy.u-net.com>,
>and
>Kent wrote
>>, they were what they were based on his own evolutionary actions.
>>So your enjoyment eyes will indeed be blue!
>What evolutionary actions would make someone's eyes blue ?
>
>Does buddhism say that the mind can control anything ? So if I want
>red eyes or green eyes then I can have them?
You could indeed have any eye colors you want, it's up to you. If you
sincerely wish for blue eyes just now, you could get contact lenses. If
you do causes that will trigger you to have blue eyes, then that will
happen. For example, many of those living in the Nordic countries have
blue eyes, such as me. I don't personally really care about my karmically
generated eyes, as those are the ones I got due to past actions, and
that's what I have to live with today. And what's really the difference of
blue or brown eyes, both work just fine.
The idea of lets say blue eyes being somewhats more pretty than brown eyes
- and vice versa -- is a good example of labelling, where the prettiness
factor is really imputed by our own judgement, not by some thing that
exists from it's own side telling that blue eyes are better than brown
eyes, or the other way around.
Anyway, going back to the blue eyes of a buddha, these are not the eyes of
a karmic body. The eyes are colored based on the enjoyment body of a
Buddha. And those who have purified their background and have a good big
dose of positive energy might see such blue eyes.
So what about the spectrum of light and colors? That's again a prime
example of labelling, as you know light is just quantum packets or waves,
in a specific wavelength, and we humans have labelled them (again). So
ultimately there's nothing special with the color blue as well. It's just
that most of us can't escape the trap of such labelling, we name things
all the time, such as the coloring of a Buddha's eye. The cure is to
experience emptiness directly, but in order to get to that state there's a
lot of deliberate labelling happening (what could you do? :-) ).
Thx, Kent
robohen
On Sat, 11 Jan 1997, B Barlow wrote:
> robohen <Rob...@concentric.net> wrote:
> >To the contrary, this is the wisest teaching Buddhism has ever taught.
> >What other sutra more honestly describes the Buddhist agenda?
> why do you say it is wise, and what does it say about the buddhist
> agenda ? - please explain.
It proves that the Buddha was a great leader worthy of Adolf Hitler. Like
Nazism, Buddhism wishes for blue-eyed Teutonic peoples to rule the
Earth.
> Why are blue eyes so important ? - science
> says blue is just another frequency of light.
Siddhartha thought they are - maybe you should dig up his grave and ask
him.
> What evolutionary actions would make someone's eyes blue ?
None other than eugenics. Siddhartha belived, as Nazis did, in the
inherent elightened superiority of the Aryan race.
> Does buddhism say that the mind can control anything ? So if I want
> red eyes or green eyes then I can have them?
I doubt he would appreciate pretenders to the throne.
Stephen Evans
In article <17AF18415S...@nervm.nerdc.ufl.edu> you wrote:
: In article <5aup05$o...@rapture.u-net.net>
: br...@brianb.u-net.com (B Barlow) writes:
: >Yes blue eyes is one of them. I read of the 32 marks of a Buddha a
I don't recall blue eyes as one of the 32 marks -- and I had to
memorize them at one point -- still there could be varient lists
or I could just have forgot. I do recall that many of these
are so fanciful as to be absurd (knees hinged like a deer, fingers touch
the knees without bending over, imprint of 1000 spoked wheels on the soles
of the feet, etc.)
In other descriptions he is "fair" "golden" colored.
There are cogent arguments that he was mostly Aryan, hence lighter (but
probably not so light as to have blue eyes).
There are also cogent arguments that he was more Dravidian, hense
darker & african-like. The "fair" argues Aryan, the curly hair (there
are two marks concerned with which way his hair curls) argues
Dravidian. Arguments from culture can go either way as well. As for
the use of "Aryan" in the suttas -- it had, by this time lost racial
connotation, and meant: nobility.
Etc. etc.
But -- who cares?
"Santipala
dena elizabeth hodes
You are very sick. There is nosuch thing as the Aryan race. Aryan is a language
spoken by many, not your weak, ignorant blue eyed idea of a race. Get out and learn
a little. Buddha rejected extremes and said all are buddha.
robohen
So, you think that I am a white supremacist. ahahahahahahahahahahhaaha
hahahahahahahhaha shows how good your reading skills are.
JulianLZB87
robohen "poison drum" wrote:
> So, you think that I am a white supremacist. ahahahahahahahahahahhaaha
> hahahahahahahhaha shows how good your reading skills are.
No. I think the general consensus is that you are confused,
bitter and twisted.
But we like that as it gives us something to play with.
robohen
On Wed, 15 Jan 1997, JulianLZB87 wrote:
> robohen "poison drum" wrote:
> > So, you think that I am a white supremacist. ahahahahahahahahahahhaaha
> > hahahahahahahhaha shows how good your reading skills are.
> No. I think the general consensus is that you are confused,
> bitter and twisted.
I think there is a lynch mob here that is confused, bitter, unscientific,
and twisted.
> But we like that as it gives us something to play with.
It's a win-win situation for me. By calling me names, you make buddhism
appear for what it is. Otherwise, I guess you'll just have to accept
somber defeat.
robohen
On 16 Jan 1997, Lau Siu Wo wrote:
> In article <5bhm48$5...@camel1.mindspring.com>,
> dena elizabeth hodes <new...@atl.mindspring.com> wrote:
> >You are very sick. There is nosuch thing as the Aryan race. Aryan is a language
> >spoken by many, not your weak, ignorant blue eyed idea of a race. Get out and learn
> >a little. Buddha rejected extremes and said all are buddha.
> According to a Compton's Interactive Encyclopedia (a CD ROM), here is the
> definition of Aryan:
> "Aryan is one of the peoples believed to have migrated into Europe and India
> from central Asia; parent stock of the Hindus, Persians, Greeks, Latins,
> Celts, Anglo-Saxons, etc."
> I appreciate someone should do some homework before responding to an
> argument. Otherwise, it may turn anything into a pointless and angry
> exchange of words.
That's right, hysterical buddhists should learn how to spell and do their
homework. My iron fist of discipline is here to guide them. Blessed are
the iron-handed, for the unfit shall flee before them!
Lau Siu Wo
In article <5bhm48$5...@camel1.mindspring.com>,
dena elizabeth hodes <new...@atl.mindspring.com> wrote:
>You are very sick. There is nosuch thing as the Aryan race. Aryan is a language
>spoken by many, not your weak, ignorant blue eyed idea of a race. Get out and learn
>a little. Buddha rejected extremes and said all are buddha.
According to a Compton's Interactive Encyclopedia (a CD ROM), here is the
definition of Aryan:
"Aryan is one of the peoples believed to have migrated into Europe and India
from central Asia; parent stock of the Hindus, Persians, Greeks, Latins,
Celts, Anglo-Saxons, etc."
I appreciate someone should do some homework before responding to an
argument. Otherwise, it may turn anything into a pointless and angry
exchange of words.
Regards,
LAUsw
>
Martin ELLISON
robohen wrote:
>
> On 16 Jan 1997, Lau Siu Wo wrote:
>
> homework. My iron fist of discipline is here to guide them. Blessed are
> the iron-handed, for the unfit shall flee before them!
Compton's as cited is wrong here. Consult any standard text on the
Indo-Europeans.
1. There are a large number of languages which derive from a language
called Indo-European about 3500 years ago.
2. The original speakers of Indo-European lived in the south of what was
recently the Soviet Union. In all probability they were the ancestors of
the present inhabitants of this area, who are short, dark and definitely
not blue-eyed.
3. As the Indo-Europeans were the originators of agriculture (or at
least early adopters) their language was adopted by neighbouring peoples
as they copied agricultural techniques.
4. The Indo-Europeans (or some of them) had a word something like
'eryos' meaning 'noble'. In the Sanskrit language (which is one of the
derivatives of Indo-European) this becomes 'arya' with much the same
meaning.
5. Don't believe cheap encyclopaedias -- they are often wrong.
6. There is no such thing as a 'race'. The word has no objective
significance -- in Buddhist terms it is a false view.
7. Robohen, is your 'iron fist of discipline' strong enough to 'guide'
yourself?
---------------------------------------------------
Martin Ellison mailto:mar...@mpce.mq.edu.au
http://www.jrcase.mq.edu.au/~martin/
robohen
On Thu, 16 Jan 1997, Martin ELLISON wrote:
> 2. The original speakers of Indo-European lived in the south of what was
> recently the Soviet Union. In all probability they were the ancestors of
> the present inhabitants of this area, who are short, dark and definitely
> not blue-eyed.
Not all Aryans have blue eyes. But then, only Aryans have blue eyes.
Aryans dominate the brahmin castes of India, from where Siddhartha
came. Buddhism believes in Aryan supremacy.
> 4. The Indo-Europeans (or some of them) had a word something like
> 'eryos' meaning 'noble'. In the Sanskrit language (which is one of the
> derivatives of Indo-European) this becomes 'arya' with much the same
> meaning.
Yes, the Aryan eightfold path attests to this.
> 5. Don't believe cheap encyclopaedias -- they are often wrong.
Don't believe in expensive encyclopaedias either, they are often wrong.
> 6. There is no such thing as a 'race'. The word has no objective
> significance -- in Buddhist terms it is a false view.
Don't believe in modern PC fads either.
> 7. Robohen, is your 'iron fist of discipline' strong enough to 'guide'
> yourself?
Plentily.
JulianLZB87
robohen wrote:
> It's a win-win situation for me.
Good. Any win-win situation for you is a win-win situation for me.
> By calling me names, you make buddhism appear for what it is.
I did not start calling you names. Your parents and you, yourself,
started and I just joined in.
> Otherwise, I guess you'll just have to accept somber defeat.
I am happy to accept all and everything.
I am a grateful receiver.
dar westlake
On 14 Jan 1997 21:05:11 GMT, t...@access.usa.net (Stephen Evans) wrote:
>In article <17AF18415S...@nervm.nerdc.ufl.edu> you wrote:
>: In article <5aup05$o...@rapture.u-net.net>
>: br...@brianb.u-net.com (B Barlow) writes:
>: >Yes blue eyes is one of them. I read of the 32 marks of a Buddha a
>
Time to give it up Stephen. Robohen has caught us all out in the
Buddhist, Aryan, Nazi, Banker, Capitalist Commie ( did i forget
someone?) International Conspiracy.
But as long as he doesnt catch on to the
( flash, crash)
Frankenbuddha Project
(deep sonorous cords)
we should be ok.
>I don't recall blue eyes as one of the 32 marks -- and I had to
>memorize them at one point -- still there could be varient lists
>or I could just have forgot.
Wink o sure, the "I dont recall." protocol.
> I do recall that many of these
>are so fanciful as to be absurd (knees hinged like a deer, fingers touch
>the knees without bending over,
The arm extension system while painful i dont think is going to be a
problem. We have our friends in Russia to thank for that one.
And Ru Paul has signed on to be the penile retraction trainer.
> imprint of 1000 spoked wheels on the soles
>of the feet, etc.)
>
Now you know that has been sent to sub-committee, and i think its
unfair to bring the debate over tatoos versus laser branding here!
>In other descriptions he is "fair" "golden" colored.
>
I though this problem had reached solution with the tanning bed. No?
>There are cogent arguments that he was mostly Aryan, hence lighter (but
>probably not so light as to have blue eyes).
>There are also cogent arguments that he was more Dravidian, hense
>darker & african-like. The "fair" argues Aryan, the curly hair (there
>are two marks concerned with which way his hair curls) argues
>Dravidian. Arguments from culture can go either way as well. As for
>the use of "Aryan" in the suttas -- it had, by this time lost racial
>connotation, and meant: nobility.
>
As soon as the gene sequencing is finished on buddha's tooth at
Le Blanc Lotus's underground lair, we'll finally have the answers to
all that.
>Etc. etc.
The conspiracy is still open to suggestions on many of the other
technical problems such as the 10 foot halo, back lighting, lasers,
would solar panels be in order, plasma charging the bodhi field,,,,
Etc, etc, indeed.
>But -- who cares?
Indeed.
Still feasibility studies need to be continued on many of these;
1.Level feet
2.thousand-spoke wheel-sign on feet
3.long slender fingers
4.pliant hands and feet
5.toes and fingers finely webbed
6.full-sized heels
7.arched insteps
8.thigh like a royal stag
9.hands reaching below the knees
10.well-retracted male organ
11.height and stretch of arms equal
12.every hair-root dark coloured
13.body hair graceful and curly
14.golden-hued body
15.a ten-foot halo around him
16.soft smooth skin
17.two soles, two palms, two shoulders and crown well rounded
18.below the armpits well-filled
19.lion-shaped body
20.erect
21.full shoulders
22.forty teeth
23.teeth white even and close
24.the four canine teeth pure white
25.lion-jawed
26.salvia improving the taste of all food
27.tongue long and broad
28.voice deep and resonant
29.eye deep blue
30.eye lashes like a royal bull
31.a white urna or curl between the eyebrows emitting light
32.an usnisa or fleshy protuberance on the crown.
I know some of these look difficult but between technology and
perversity i'm sure we can figure them all out.
But making all that 'cute' too?
I dunno,,,,
dar westlake
infoserve.net!duhh
* emptiness is a dead beer *
Lau Siu Wo
Hi Martin:
>Compton's as cited is wrong here. Consult any standard text on the
>Indo-Europeans.
>
>1. There are a large number of languages which derive from a language
>called Indo-European about 3500 years ago.
...... <ship>
>
>5. Don't believe cheap encyclopaedias -- they are often wrong.
If my US$80 Compton Encyclopedia is wrong, here is some more references:
[1996 Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia]
"Aryan is a term formerly used to denote both a linguistic and an assumed
racial category related to the language family now known as Indo-European...
Thus it was argued that, in contrast to the darker-skinned Dravidians of
southern India, the northern Indians were, racially speaking, Aryans,
sharing a common descent with the people of Western Europe"
Just for your reference. The definitions of almost anything will never be
the same from any two references. However, Aryan is sometimes defined as
the speakers of the Indo-European and sometimes defined as a special race.
In my opinions, after that many centuries of cross marrage, the definition
of Aryan "race" is quite obscured in India.
Regards,
Stephen Evans
dar westlake (infoserve.net!duhh) wrote:
: Still feasibility studies need to be continued on many of these;
Hmmm -- this //is// a different list (I think) from the one I memorized
(from the Pali suttas) Now I'll have to go home and look it up -- more
tomorrow!
"Santipala
dar westlake
On 20 Jan 1997 15:19:37 GMT, t...@access.usa.net (Stephen Evans) wrote:
>dar westlake (infoserve.net!duhh) wrote:
>: Still feasibility studies need to be continued on many of these;
[snip the 32 horrible disfigurements of a buddha]
>Hmmm -- this //is// a different list (I think) from the one I memorized
>(from the Pali suttas) Now I'll have to go home and look it up -- more
>tomorrow!
I've been informed there are also 80 not quite so disgusting minor
signs. Anyone have that list?
Think we'll have to go for government funding :(
>"Santipala
Derrick Chapman
> ls...@np.ac.sg (Lau Siu Wo) wrote in article
<5bpdj1$q...@triton.np.ac.sg>...
>Aryan is sometimes defined as the speakers of the Indo-European
>and sometimes defined as a special race.
>In my opinions, after that many centuries of cross marriage, the
>definition of Aryan "race" is quite obscured in India.
Obscured not only in India, but everywhere.
I must point out that the concept of "race" is a cultural one, not a
scientific one. The notions of racial types, racial purity, race mixing,
and racial characteristics are not supported by modern science.
Scientifically speaking, people are of one type, with genetic variations
based on ancestry. I have a particular hair texture because the genes
that determine hair texture are present in my inherited code, not because
I fit into some arbitrary pigeonhole of racial typing that defines me as
Nordic, Mediterranean, East Asian, or some other bogus category dreamed up
in the past few centuries of bigotry disguised as fact.
This race nonsense should have died with Hitler.
To sum it up as a bumper sticker:
Race is racism.
