Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
I'd point out that at their root, the Buddhist teachings on hell and other lower births may not be a morality check so much as a reality check. Lower rebirths aren't punishment; they're natural cause and effect. They serve the purpose of a morality check, but that check should work for us mainly because we understand the concept that harm breeds harm.
It's not that you are banished to hell by someone telling you you did wrong; being reborn as an animal or hell-being or less-fortunate human is, in Buddhist terms, just the natural science of existence.
This is very different from the Abramic tradition of a punishing God.
If you put your finger in a candle, does God punish you by burning your finger, or is your pain just the result of natural laws?
Yes, Buddhist teachers bring up lower rebirths a lot, but that's because 1) they believe in the science they're teaching and 2) human life, and all the opportunities it gives you to affect your own and others' science, is short.
I really feel that one of the ways Buddhism will make more and more sense to Westerners is by continuing to refine translations of Eastern terminology and concepts until they make more sense to the Western mind, while not losing accuracy.
@Dandelion There are reports of NDE's where people went to a hellish place. I think Raymond Moody collected some of those, you could look in his books. But also Kimberly Clark had one or two NDE's, and reports all kinds of interesting things. Some kind of psychic vision opened up for her after her NDE. Her story is fascinating. You could probably find her book by looking her up on Amazon. She's a nurse in Seattle.
@Jeffrey Didn't you have some teachings from your lama about how the realms were mental states? I think teachings for both aspects--physical and mental--are in the Tibetan literature.
This question, although natural enough, is hopelessly naive. Before we can even begin to answer it we need to get some inkling of what exactly "reality" is anyway. And that is far from a straightforward question.
We could turn this question on its head and ask just how real is this familiar human realm we live in? It is a plain fact that everything we know and experience is a product of our sense organs. We never know the external world itself, but only our fabricated image of it, built up by the mind from incoming sense data. The ultimately real remains an elusive abstraction.
Some writers have tried to explain away the various realms as purely psychological states. There may be some truth to this, so long as we are consistent enough to include the present "reality" as well. It is certainly true that we can access heavenly and hellish mind-states while in the human form. But that does not at all preclude the possibility of arising after death into a more intense and inclusive form of those states.
To deny categorically the possibility of heaven and hell being, in some sense at least, real, is to be very narrow-minded. Who can say what possibilities exist within the universe? Why should the limit of the familiar be the limit of the real?
Finally, it should be noted that the Buddha himself was quite clear on this question.
Since there actually is another world, one who holds the view "there is another world" has right view. (Majjhima 60)
It is known to me to be the case, that there are gods. (Majjhima 100)
There can be no doubt of the sense in which the Buddha taught about karma, rebirth and the various realms.
I'd point out that at their root, the Buddhist teachings on hell and other lower births may not be a morality check so much as a reality check. Lower rebirths aren't punishment; they're natural cause and effect. They serve the purpose of a morality check, but that check should work for us mainly because we understand the concept that harm breeds harm.
It's not that you are banished to hell by someone telling you you did wrong; being reborn as an animal or hell-being or less-fortunate human is, in Buddhist terms, just the natural science of existence.
This is very different from the Abramic tradition of a punishing God.
If you put your finger in a candle, does God punish you by burning your finger, or is your pain just the result of natural laws?
Yes, Buddhist teachers bring up lower rebirths a lot, but that's because 1) they believe in the science they're teaching and 2) human life, and all the opportunities it gives you to affect your own and others' science, is short.
I really feel that one of the ways Buddhism will make more and more sense to Westerners is by continuing to refine translations of Eastern terminology and concepts until they make more sense to the Western mind, while not losing accuracy.
Well, go to Thailand and start visiting temples throughout the country, and after you've seen a lot of temples with their paintings and in some cases statue gardens depicting Thai Buddhists being punished in hell...then come back and tell me how you've changed your viewpoint of Buddhist thought that "It's not that you are banished to hell by someone telling you you did wrong".
I am convinced heaven and hell realms are simply premodern cosmology, from what I have read there is no way we can link the constructed self which we currently experience and which, the majority of scientists say, is intrinsically connected with having our particular history and sets of relations in the world around which our biological brain has grown to be as it is. Take any key part of the brain away and we wont even recognise ourselves... so what is going to be reborn in hell or heaven and how - is something that has already been solved by science. There is not a lot of doubt about it: no embodiment - no mind - even if we believe the mind is a quantum radio, it is still a very embodied relationship which will be lost without our particular body and brain.
So given this, I am pretty convinced that there is no "I" going anywhere and that when it comes to death this is not the end, as "I" only exists in the moment and I am just conditions arising which was not really born in the first place - that is the dharma - all that practice does is help me realise it.
What is going to be reborn in hell or heaven and how is not something that's been already solved by science. Science--quantum theory--is grappling with the question of the nature of consciousness as we speak. Consciousness is now believed to exist outside the body as well as within. There could well be something to the Tibetan belief that it's the "very very subtle mind", the seed consciousness, that leaves the body after death.
Actually consciousness is not believed to be outside the body, rather this is a complex argument which links our minds to evolution. Cockroaches which have few neurons act intelligently because they fit into a sort of evolutionarily shaped space in which they function. On this basis,it is argued that their intelligence lies outside their brain - in otherwords the co-arising of conditions inside and outside.
Quantum consciousness is a speculative idea with a few respected supporters, such as Penrose, but most cognitive scientists don't subscribe to it. And much of your local science channel contains videos which I am reliably informed are often gross misunderstandings about quantum theory. So lets not buy into what suits our chosen tradition. I don't buy this particular Tibetan view, and it is obvious that it is a core idea, which their institutions have too much at stake not to defend vigorously. Without going over this endlessly, there are logical problems such as that concentration camps were for people who were bad in past lifetimes - which is logical - if you accept the rebirth thesis. This is also Stephen Bachelor's critique - if you accept the Tibetan view there must be a transmission of mind to mind which is not far from a sort of soul and that is not Buddhist - at least as he sees it. I see the embodied argument as very strong, also see Lakoff and Johnstons Philosophy in the Flesh if you want convincing. When we need to stretch arguments to fit our beliefs it might be time to look at the theories that fit the evidence more comfortably.
Are they real places where we may end up after death if we're not careful, or are they states of mind we may experience during life? Or both? What did the Buddha teach? What do different traditions teach? What does the Pali Canon really say? Does it matter what the Pali says, or are the hell teachings an outside influence?
Pali Canon and various different traditions are skilful means from Buddha, and buddha is from mind. According to buddha, to know the all realms and the universe, seek from your mind. :aol:
I can talk from my own experience. Some of you already know me and I mentioned many times about my psyhic abilities. There are ways to project your consciousness into hell realms and observe it. In Buddhism, there are texts that talks about various types of hell realms. Some of them are very painful realms. I have no idea about them. From what I have recollected from my own past life experiences is that hell is just like this world. The only difference is the beings living there is scary and brutal. However, another insight I gain is that no matter where you born you born with skills and physical strength to be able to survive there. You are not going to born in hell with a peaceful mind and weak human flesh. Even if you do, you won't survive a day there. You will have all the necessary things you need. Yes, hell being are brutal but you will also be brutal. And hell is also a choice. Its your tendency to be in that kind of life makes you born in hell. You may ask what crazy person would choose hell? If you are watching violent movies, fighting sports, and horror movies etc., you already have the tendency to enjoy fear, anger, and hate. For some of us people who like boxing is crazy but for some it is an enjoyable sport. Your mind enjoys it and when you are in death bardo, your tendencies of hate and anger will manifest hundreds of time more intensely than you feel in your daily life. Without you even know it, you will choose your symbolic archetype which will put you in your next rebirth body.
I recently learned that a large percentage of children who are more or less forced to take ritalin become alchoholics.
In Buddhism an alchoholic would probably just go to hell.
see what im saying? I guess it's all karma but yeah.
0
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
The clear light nature of mind in TB is described as clear and knowing. It's compared to like a flashlight in that when it shines on an object one is able to see or in the case of conciousness cognize that object. The light itself doesn't change, so if it shines on a rose the light doesn't become beautiful or if it shines on garbage it doesn't become disgusting, it just shows what is there.
Concious experience , in Buddhism, is said to be dependently arisen from both the body and mind. Its not just the body or just the mind. So my interpretation is that the brain processes information and makes calculations but the mind is that which makes us aware of those processes, or shines a light on it. A more modern philosophical term is qualia.
So this aspect of our experience isn't produced by the brain. The argument used is that of substantive cause and cooperative cause. Like a gold amulet, the substantive cause is gold and the cooperative cause is the craftsman who forms it. You can't make a gold amulet out of wood, in the same way the mind can't be produced from something that is of a different makeup than mind (matter). I don't totally grasp this argument and I think that its hard to understand unless one has an actual experience of the clear light nature of mind so you can see for yourself what it actually is, because in general we don't see it.
In terms of the hell realm debate since mind isn't produced from matter it isn't destroyed when the brain dies and karmic imprints are carried forward. If someone has enough negativity then the mind is propelled into another life through that karma.
When it comes to dieing there is also something called throwing karma and completing karma. Throwing karma is the karma we generate from our mental state at the moment of death and has a very strong influence on the direction of our next rebirth. Completing karma is the type of karma that we live with everyday. So for example a person who lives a virtuous life but has a negative mental state at death may be born as a housepet for a well off family or born as a third world orphan but be adopted by a couple from the west. Or the opposite, a person is born into wealth but suffers from abuse or has an accident and loses much of their functioning. My point is that the circumstances of ones birth aren't a reward and punishment system but are a direct result of our mental habits.
The transmission of karma cannot be physical as @DharmaField says. How would someone in greece become reborn in turkey? (hmm I must be hungry hehe).. Anyhow my lama agrees with this but she says that what our minds are is not what we think.
Buddha said we were NOT the form skanda. So it is no surprise that rebirth operates differently than a brain transmigrating.
When did the buddha say that we were the form skanda? Could somebody point this out to me please?
Comments
It's not that you are banished to hell by someone telling you you did wrong; being reborn as an animal or hell-being or less-fortunate human is, in Buddhist terms, just the natural science of existence.
This is very different from the Abramic tradition of a punishing God.
If you put your finger in a candle, does God punish you by burning your finger, or is your pain just the result of natural laws?
Yes, Buddhist teachers bring up lower rebirths a lot, but that's because 1) they believe in the science they're teaching and 2) human life, and all the opportunities it gives you to affect your own and others' science, is short.
I really feel that one of the ways Buddhism will make more and more sense to Westerners is by continuing to refine translations of Eastern terminology and concepts until they make more sense to the Western mind, while not losing accuracy.
Are the Various Realms Real?
This question, although natural enough, is hopelessly naive. Before we can even begin to answer it we need to get some inkling of what exactly "reality" is anyway. And that is far from a straightforward question.
We could turn this question on its head and ask just how real is this familiar human realm we live in? It is a plain fact that everything we know and experience is a product of our sense organs. We never know the external world itself, but only our fabricated image of it, built up by the mind from incoming sense data. The ultimately real remains an elusive abstraction.
Some writers have tried to explain away the various realms as purely psychological states. There may be some truth to this, so long as we are consistent enough to include the present "reality" as well. It is certainly true that we can access heavenly and hellish mind-states while in the human form. But that does not at all preclude the possibility of arising after death into a more intense and inclusive form of those states.
To deny categorically the possibility of heaven and hell being, in some sense at least, real, is to be very narrow-minded. Who can say what possibilities exist within the universe? Why should the limit of the familiar be the limit of the real?
Finally, it should be noted that the Buddha himself was quite clear on this question.
Since there actually is another world, one who holds the view "there is another world" has right view. (Majjhima 60)
It is known to me to be the case, that there are gods. (Majjhima 100)
There can be no doubt of the sense in which the Buddha taught about karma, rebirth and the various realms.
So given this, I am pretty convinced that there is no "I" going anywhere and that when it comes to death this is not the end, as "I" only exists in the moment and I am just conditions arising which was not really born in the first place - that is the dharma - all that practice does is help me realise it.
Stay tuned to your local science channel.
Quantum consciousness is a speculative idea with a few respected supporters, such as Penrose, but most cognitive scientists don't subscribe to it. And much of your local science channel contains videos which I am reliably informed are often gross misunderstandings about quantum theory. So lets not buy into what suits our chosen tradition. I don't buy this particular Tibetan view, and it is obvious that it is a core idea, which their institutions have too much at stake not to defend vigorously. Without going over this endlessly, there are logical problems such as that concentration camps were for people who were bad in past lifetimes - which is logical - if you accept the rebirth thesis. This is also Stephen Bachelor's critique - if you accept the Tibetan view there must be a transmission of mind to mind which is not far from a sort of soul and that is not Buddhist - at least as he sees it. I see the embodied argument as very strong, also see Lakoff and Johnstons Philosophy in the Flesh if you want convincing. When we need to stretch arguments to fit our beliefs it might be time to look at the theories that fit the evidence more comfortably.
In Buddhism, there are texts that talks about various types of hell realms. Some of them are very painful realms. I have no idea about them.
From what I have recollected from my own past life experiences is that hell is just like this world. The only difference is the beings living there is scary and brutal.
However, another insight I gain is that no matter where you born you born with skills and physical strength to be able to survive there. You are not going to born in hell with a peaceful mind and weak human flesh. Even if you do, you won't survive a day there. You will have all the necessary things you need. Yes, hell being are brutal but you will also be brutal.
And hell is also a choice. Its your tendency to be in that kind of life makes you born in hell.
You may ask what crazy person would choose hell? If you are watching violent movies, fighting sports, and horror movies etc., you already have the tendency to enjoy fear, anger, and hate. For some of us people who like boxing is crazy but for some it is an enjoyable sport. Your mind enjoys it and when you are in death bardo, your tendencies of hate and anger will manifest hundreds of time more intensely than you feel in your daily life. Without you even know it, you will choose your symbolic archetype which will put you in your next rebirth body.
I recently learned that a large percentage of children who are more or less forced to take ritalin become alchoholics.
In Buddhism an alchoholic would probably just go to hell.
see what im saying? I guess it's all karma but yeah.
Concious experience , in Buddhism, is said to be dependently arisen from both the body and mind. Its not just the body or just the mind. So my interpretation is that the brain processes information and makes calculations but the mind is that which makes us aware of those processes, or shines a light on it. A more modern philosophical term is qualia.
So this aspect of our experience isn't produced by the brain. The argument used is that of substantive cause and cooperative cause. Like a gold amulet, the substantive cause is gold and the cooperative cause is the craftsman who forms it. You can't make a gold amulet out of wood, in the same way the mind can't be produced from something that is of a different makeup than mind (matter). I don't totally grasp this argument and I think that its hard to understand unless one has an actual experience of the clear light nature of mind so you can see for yourself what it actually is, because in general we don't see it.
In terms of the hell realm debate since mind isn't produced from matter it isn't destroyed when the brain dies and karmic imprints are carried forward. If someone has enough negativity then the mind is propelled into another life through that karma.
When it comes to dieing there is also something called throwing karma and completing karma. Throwing karma is the karma we generate from our mental state at the moment of death and has a very strong influence on the direction of our next rebirth. Completing karma is the type of karma that we live with everyday. So for example a person who lives a virtuous life but has a negative mental state at death may be born as a housepet for a well off family or born as a third world orphan but be adopted by a couple from the west. Or the opposite, a person is born into wealth but suffers from abuse or has an accident and loses much of their functioning. My point is that the circumstances of ones birth aren't a reward and punishment system but are a direct result of our mental habits.
Buddha said we were NOT the form skanda. So it is no surprise that rebirth operates differently than a brain transmigrating.
When did the buddha say that we were the form skanda? Could somebody point this out to me please?