Why can't Dalai Lama be reincarnated as woman?

[Montalban]

I believe he was speaking of the political role of the Dalai Lama has the head of Tibet in Exile. That is why I gave you the link to the government site.

So are you going to have a Dalai Lama who’s political head, and a Dalai Lama who’s spiritual head?

 

[Montalban]

Let me share a little background before asking a related question.

The Beatles followed the dalai lama, but Paul M. lost “faith” because the dalai was sleeping around with all the young dollies!

As another has pointed out, the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi was the Bealtes ‘spiritual guide’ for a while, and yes he wasn’t all that was cracked up to be… hence John’s vitriollic song “Sexy Sadie” (which was about the Yogi)

“Dear Prudence” was about Mia Farrow’s sister who was at the aschram

Sexy Sadie what have you done
You made a fool of everyone
You made a fool of everyone
Sexy Sadie, ooh, what have you done

Sexy Sadie you broke the rules
You laid it down for all to see
You laid it down for all to see
Sexy Sadie, ooh, you broke the rules

One sunny day the world was waiting for a lover
She came along to turn on everyone
Sexy Sadie the greatest of them all

Sexy Sadie how did you know
The world was waiting just for you
The world was waiting just for you
Sexy Sadie, ooh, how did you know

Sexy Sadie you’ll get yours yet
However big you think you are
However big you think you are
Sexy Sadie, ooh, you’ll get yours yet

We gave her everything we owned
just to sit at her table
Just a smile would lighten everything
Sexy Sadie she’s the latest
and the greatest of them all

Ha, She made a fool of everyone
Sexy Sadie
Ha, However big you think you are
Sexy Sadie

 

[notself]

So are you going to have a Dalai Lama who’s political head, and a Dalai Lama who’s spiritual head?

Neither, I am not a Tibetan Buddhist.

 

[Montalban]

Neither, I am not a Tibetan Buddhist.

Great point!

Are they going to?

 

[notself]

Great point!

Are they going to?

You really need to ask a Tibetan Buddhist.

Do you have any questions about Pure Land Buddhism or Theravada Buddhism? Fa Chan and I will do our best to answer.

 

[Montalban]

You really need to ask a Tibetan Buddhist.

Then perhaps you should bow out of this thread because it’s rather odd you wade in to tell me where I’m wrong. I ask you questions and you suggest I go read something else, or ask someone else, but you’re still able to tell me where I’m wrong.

You need to make up your mind whether you want to defend them or not.

 

[notself]

Then perhaps you should bow out of this thread because it’s rather odd you wade in to tell me where I’m wrong. I ask you questions and you suggest I go read something else, or ask someone else, but you’re still able to tell me where I’m wrong.

You need to make up your mind whether you want to defend them or not.

Your last question was addressed to me and I responded. That is not “wading in”.

I erroneously thought that you were interested in information. I didn’t realize your motive was to attack Tibetan Buddhism.

At your request, I will no longer respond to you posts. I wish joy and contentment in your beliefs what ever they may be.

 

[Fa_Chan]

Then perhaps you should bow out of this thread because it’s rather odd you wade in to tell me where I’m wrong. I ask you questions and you suggest I go read something else, or ask someone else, but you’re still able to tell me where I’m wrong.

You need to make up your mind whether you want to defend them or not.

This was addressed to notself but I felt like you needed to hear it

You simply don’t understand. You’re trying to understand a tradition that begins 2500 years ago and which has different traditions and practices. What’s odd is that even though you are a Christian you think you are the one who is right and these two Buddhists are wrong.

Tibetan Buddhism is part of the Vajrayana tradition of Buddhism in contrast to the Mahayana tradition I have followed and the Theravada tradition that notself follows. Though there are similarities and comparable beliefs the practices or methods can be vastly different.

The position of the Dalai Lama is not a simple one. Though Buddhist principles are the foundation of who he is, the merging of political and religious is one that even I don’t fully understand. To me it doesn’t matter. And I’m Buddhist. You’re Christian.

What’s more is that a Tibetan Buddhist has responded to you and you still don’t like the answers you are given. I am moving on and I suggest you do too. Look at the links provided and do some more research on your own. It’s not our job to do the research for you. As a matter of fact, why not just contact the office of the Dalai Lama??? Now, there’s an idea

Peace…

Fa Chan

 

[Montalban]

Your last question was addressed to me and I responded. That is not “wading in”.

If you want to consider your last response in isolation. So according to this rule, you’re allowed to wade in, but if I ask you direcrly you won’t answer me. Hmmm

I erroneously thought that you were interested in information.

I erroneously thought you were here to discuss, but you’ve attempted point scoring the last few posts and to believe that the point of discussion is to avoid answering questions and telling people to go research it somewhere else. How silly of me!

I didn’t realize your motive was to attack Tibetan Buddhism.

You can’t even make up your mind if you’re willing to defend it or not. You do on some points until pressed then feign ignorance of the whole issue! You obviously think that by doing this it’s the best way of advertising Buddhism!

At your request, I will no longer respond to you posts. I wish joy and contentment in your beliefs what ever they may be.

Cool. Some people can point-score, be evasive and still attempt to take the moral high-ground!

Funny to when it was my ‘request’ for you to give me an answer, you couldn’t.

 

[Montalban]

This was addressed to notself but I felt like you needed to hear it

Sure if you want to post another item that doesn’t answer any questions, that’s up to you

You simply don’t understand. You’re trying to understand a tradition that begins 2500 years ago and which has different traditions and practices. What’s odd is that even though you are a Christian you think you are the one who is right and these two Buddhists are wrong.

In part you are correct. I am trying to understand. But it’s difficult because when pressed you guys
a) accuse me of attacking you
b) urge me to go research swathes of material somewhere else
or
c) wish me peace and leave the debate altogether.

Tibetan Buddhism is part of the Vajrayana tradition of Buddhism in contrast to the Mahayana tradition I have followed and the Theravada tradition that notself follows. Though there are similarities and comparable beliefs the practices or methods can be vastly different.

Perhaps so, but Notself would enter the debate, claim I’m wrong. I’d press him on something and suddenly he’d not know, urge me to go somewhere else, or wish me peace, though accuse me of attacking your faith.

The position of the Dalai Lama is not a simple one.

I don’t doubt it.

Though Buddhist principles are the foundation of who he is, the merging of political and religious is one that even I don’t fully understand. To me it doesn’t matter.

That’s not the point. The point is made that the Dalai Lama might one day be elected. But it seems that Notself suggests that there’s going to be a split between a spiritual and a temporal leader.

This is not dependent on whether you think it matters or not. And me asking the question might suggest that someone would respond. If you don’t think it matters, you don’t have to respond.

And I’m Buddhist.
You’re Christian.

Indeed

What’s more is that a Tibetan Buddhist has responded to you and you still don’t like the answers you are given.

You mean that because the answers evoke more questions?

I am moving on and I suggest you do too.

That’s fine too. You don’t want to answer, it’s up to you. You bowed out of this thread, now you re-enter to say you’re bowing out again?

Look at the links provided and do some more research on your own.

I’ve already noted that one link made me ask more questions here.

This is after-all a discussion site. Those links are not.

It’s not our job to do the research for you.

It’s not my job to do the research for you. If you enter this thread and start a discussion, and you suddenly want to direct people to other sites, that’s entirely up to you.

As a matter of fact, why not just contact the office of the Dalai Lama??? Now, there’s an idea

Peace…

Fa Chan

I don’t see how saying “peace” negates not answering questions on a discussion site no one’s forcing you to be part of.

 

[Montalban]

I would still hope that some Buddhists here would like to engage in discssion.

I hope that people realise that questions, and answers can evoke other questions.

Further, I’d like to note that I didn’t start the thread.

The direction to go view a site that says that the Dalai Lama might one day be elected does provoke more questions

If there’s going to be a split between a temporal and a secular lama; the site doesn’t say.