This is a question for persons who have done time in various lineages of Vajrayana

1) When you first got started in the pratice were you told the hell realms were for real or metaphorical?

2) If you were told at beginning the hell realms were merely states of mind, did you continue to be told this same thing after you began tantra practice?

I had a teacher in the New Jonang Tradition. Not sure if you would call it Vajrayana, but he taught the Kalachakra tantra and had been a student of the Dalai Lama before coming to New Jonang. We had been emailing back and forth for a year before I took the precepts from him in person. I had asked him about hell after I had taken the precepts, and as I remember it he said that they were real realms where you go if you have really bad karma. If he had not said that they were real, I would not have argued with him, and I can really argue. In his lessons he said to never argue but just accept what is written until you know if it is true later on. But I said that the hell realms were to frighten people, that they were only conditions on this earth plane, being that if you have bad karma you could be reborn into a bad life with a lot of suffering. I also said that Hell is within just as the kingdom of heaven is within. And so in his lesson that I am giving to you now, he makes mention of the kingdom of heaven and hell are within. I should have kept my emails, but I was so upset when I learned that he taught tantric sex that i threw everything out. But at least he admits in the lesson that they are real and not real, but he played it down by the time he gave me the lesson:

"Traditional Buddhist teachings speak extensively of the six realms or paths into which sentient beings are born (gods, demigods, humans, animals, ghosts, and hell beings), and one must be careful to both present the teachings and receive them in accordance with the intentions of the Buddhas.

Are these realms actual physical environments? Yes and no. Like all other external perceptions, the six realms are internal mental representations, made to arise by the accumulated karma (impressions, experiences, beliefs, and dispositions) of sentient beings. But just because they are internal mental representations, they are not absolutely unreal. As long as we lack realization of emptiness, our perceptions are experienced as reality.

The six realms are not truly established, substantial realities, in the sense that they are impermanent and dependent on causes and conditions. And yet, they appear in great detail to those that experience them.

Dreams (nightmares, in this case) are a good analogy. While having a nightmare, we have the distinct impression that whatever is happening is actually taking place. We may even experience physical reactions: racing pulse, sweating, thrashing about, screaming, etc. Some persons have been known to die of fright during a nightmare!

Within the nightmare, the experience is very real. And yet, when we awaken, we know that nothing truly happened —it was all a bad dream. It was an internal mental representation. We may have been dreaming of being pursued by a tiger, but there is no tiger in the bedroom; it was only an internal image of a tiger in our mind. We may have dreamt of drowning, but all the time we were lying on a dry bed. We may have been dreaming of being engulfed in flames, but our skin is not scorched when we awaken.

The six realms are similar, although their duration may seem quite a bit longer. They are mental states, but while we are experiencing them, we suffer immensely. Is it not our current experience that pain seems to last much longer than pleasure? “Time flies when you’re having fun.” The opposite is also true…

Now, while some persons are ready to understand that the six realms are ‘only’ mental states, others are not. For them, these realms are quite substantial. There are persons among us (we may diagnose them as insane in today’s society) that firmly believe that what they experience in dreams or altered states of consciousness is substantially real. And for them (in terms of their subjective experience) this is a fact, regardless of what others may understand.

When the Buddhas teach about the six realms, They allow us to understand Their teachings with whatever capacity we have at the time. If we have the tendency to ascribe absolute reality to our perceptions (this common, everyday one included), we will do likewise with the six realms. If we are able to understand that this experience is an internal mental representation, then we will also be able to understand the six realms in this light.

The hell realms are the farthest distance away from our Buddha Nature, in the direction of aversion, just as the god realms are farthest in the direction of attachment. The demigod realms move us away through envy, the human realm through desire, the animal realm through stupidity, and the ghost realm through greed.

They are all mental states, distortions of clear View, and nothing more. Of course, even if they are not ‘real’ in any objective way, sentient beings experience subjective suffering in them. And yet, they are not punishments. They are merely the natural consequences of our afflicted emotions. The teachings on karma just warn us that if we do not become free of these afflicted emotions now, we are bound to continue experiencing them over and over.

The cause of these afflicted emotions is ignorance, and therefore the Buddhas do not judge anyone as evil –not even Hitler, or Stalin, or more common mass murderers. They feel intense compassion for all sentient beings, and especially for those who suffer most.

The ‘kingdom of hell’ is within us. But when we are there, it is very difficult to escape. We start blaming others for our condition, and that leads to greater fear and anger. Sociopaths are an extreme example of that. Their suffering is extreme.

The Buddhist teachings do not condone judging others, nor do they express any concept of punishment. Karma is not punitive, but corrective. When we experience suffering as a consequence of treating others poorly, eventually we come to understand that we are all in the same situation, and compassion begins to manifest, for others and for ourselves."

Here is a fragment from teachings on Buddhist Cosmology on [www.berzinarchives.com] Do a search for "hell realms" on the site.

"...eight hot realms, and eight cold, joyless realms (hells), with each of the hot realms having 4 neighboring joyless realms on each of its sides. The hot joyless realms are located below Bodh Gaya, India, and the cold joyless realms are located below Tibet." There's more material on specific hells under "Following the Dharma and Recognizing Suffering", part of the Lam Rim teachings, on Berzin, described as places people might go when they die, with graphic descriptions.

I doubt the Buddha ever said anything about Tibet, about cold hells being located beneath Tibet. Berzin indicates that some of these teachings are not from the Buddha, but from a later commentator, Vasubhandu, upon whose elaborations of Buddhist teachings much of TB depends.

This at least answers the question of whether they're considered to be real, physical places in TB or not. The teachings that they were states of mind were probably later additions to the Pali Canon, if they're there at all. They may be derived from later commentators.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/06/2012 04:53AM by Misstyk.

P.S. Those hell realms as very real are taught in both beginning and advanced texts, the Lamrim (beginners') and the Kalachakra (advanced).

You leave Christianity due to the threats of hell just to come to Hinduism and Buddhism with the same threats, only the Hindus hide it better. The Jehovah's Witnesses at least did not believe in hell. Your punishment was being dead as a door nail forever. Not much better.

In addition to getting these Vajrayana teachers to tell the truth about whether the hell realms are literal and to tell this up front to beginners, we need to find out just what the Vajrayana people mean by devotion.

There was an interview in Tricycle Magazine in which a celebrated Lama described devotion as a state in which the hair on the back of ones neck stands up.

To me, I see that as terror.

Are the hell states meant to induce a terror that Vajrayana people label as 'devotion"?

------------------------
What is 'Devotion?'

We may be using the same word but coming at it from different cultural universes.

Going by a dialog quoted below, it seems possible that when Vajrayana Buddhists mention 'devotion' it may be an emotion/embodied response that is very different from
what most Westerners imagine when the word ‘devotion’ is mentioned.

The teacher quoted was an honored one, Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche, quoted by an admiring Western devotee.

It is from the Fall 2010 issue of Tricycle magazine an article entitled The Great Experiment. - an interview with Tim Olmsted who had studied first with Chogyam Trungpa and then studied with Tulku Urgyen, an honorable teacher whom Trungpa brought in to teach. Later, Olmsted went East and studied with Ugyen.

(This places Urgyen in the Kagyu lineage)

Urgyen taught this from a book, Rainbow Painting, as quoted from the article. It is considered his core teaching. (a small excerpt)

Urgyen Quote:
"To sum up, we need devotion* to enlightened beings and compassion to those who are not.

(Note to Keith—to me this hints at a dualistic distinction right there)

“Possessing these two, the main training is maintaining nondistraction.
'When we forget mind essence we get carried away. But with devotion and compassion, the practice of recognizing mind essence will automatically progress.

'Please keep this teaching at the very core of your heart; not at the edge or to one side of your heart, but at the very center. Please think, “That old Tibetan man said devotion and compassion are essential. I’ll keep that right in the center of my heart!”

'I have wanted to say this for a long time, but I feel that now people are more willing to listen. It’s because it’s extremely important that I felt it should be said.

'I am telling you the truth here. I am being honest with you. I am not lying. If you practice the way I have described here, then each month and year will yield progress. And in the end, no one will be able to pull you back from attaining enlightenment."

(I then wrote on the message board)

Now, this sounds nice, doesnt it. Lovely, eh?

Reader, I ask that you pay close attention to what came next in when the Tricycle interviewer discussed this with Olmsted.

Just after this quotation from Urgyen, Olmsted recalled a conversation he had with Urgyen Rinpoche whom he described as the kindest and gentlest of men.

The Tricycle interviewer had asked, "This was his core teaching?"

Olmsted responded. And read this closely.

"He referred everything to the nature of mind. He didnt talk much about paths and stages or deliberate training in compassion and devotion.

”For him the emphasis was on recognizing minds' nature from which the abiding qualities of compassion and devotion arise spontaneously.

One time, (Olmsted continues) I asked him,

'Rinpoche, why dont you teach about compassion and devotion in the same way other lamas do?"

And he said,

"These days, to have the experience of compassion where tears flow out of your eyes freely,* and to have devotion where the hair on the back of your neck stands up*--who has that anymore?"

Olmsted continues telling the Tricycle interviewer

"He didnt say that we didnt have compassion and devotion or that we should not train in it constantly, but I believe he was suggesting that we needed to train in a kindof natural, uncontrived compassion and devotion."

(Tricycle, Fall 2010 page 45 “The Great Experiment”)

Look at the various Western dictionary definitions of 'devotion'

devotion - definition of devotion by the Free Online Dictionary ...
de·vo·tion (d -v sh n). n. 1. Ardent, often selfless affection and dedication, as to a person or principle. See Synonyms at love. 2. Religious ardor or zeal; piety. 3. a. ...
devotional - definition of devotional by the Free Online Dictionary ...
de·vo·tion·al (d -v sh -n l). adj. Of, relating to, expressive of, or used in devotion, especially of a religious nature. n. A short religious service. ...
Devotion - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster ...
a : religious fervor : piety b : an act of prayer or private worship —usually used in plural c : a religious exercise or practice other than the regular corporate ...
Devotional - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster ...
Sep 30, 2011 ... of, relating to, or characterized by devotion <devotional literature>. — de·vo·tion·al·ly \-ç\ adverb. See devotional defined for English-language ...
Devotion | Define Devotion at Dictionary.com
an assignment or appropriation to any purpose, cause, etc.: the devotion of one's wealth and time to scientific advancement. 4. Often, devotions. Ecclesiastical. ...
None of these refers to “hair standing up”

My neighbor carried her ailing dog up and down the stairs, and several times a day, so her dog could have a pee or a poop outdoors.

To me, that behavior was what I recognized as devotion.

My neighbor did not behave as someone with hair standing on the back of her neck.

She and her dog had been through a shared lifetime together. The dog was now old and ill, and my neighbor was doing all she could to soothe and ease his final days. It could not have all been warm and fuzzy, because there’s pain in watching a dog you have had from puppyhood becoming old and ill. But..my neighbor hung in along with her grief and the labor of the home nursing and perservered, carrying her 35 pound dog up and down those 3 flights of steep stairs.

And unless I am mistaken, my hunch is that most of us Westerners would ID this behavior as devotion.

And that many would suggest that in devotion as understood in the West, there is a relational dimension, based on reciprocity.

Others might include a trust dimension, comfort and affection dimension in devotion.

And perhaps others would suggest that buried in the Western European/American concept of devotion, hints of the old feudal bond in which the Lord and follower made a pledge of mutual loyalty. The knight devoted himself to the baron, giving the baron military assistance at risk of his life and and in return, expected his liege lord to protect him and be his advocate.

In the West 'devotion' blended in with loyalty and was a mutual tie, even if the lord had more land and titles than the knight.

But.....no point did the Tricycle Magazine interviewer say, 'Wait--the experience of devotion as decribed by this high Lama-- "is to have the hair on the back of your neck stand up?"

Dear reader, this experience of hair standing up on the back of ones neck.....look back at the situations when you have felt those hairs stand up on YOUR neck.

Now...ponder the implication of this hair-standing-up-on-the-back-of-one's-neck-being labeled, as the desirable emotion of "devotion".

Then, examine the implications of it being considered desirable for you to feel this way in relation to an 'enlightened being'.

What I find troubling is that Olmsted didnt question this. Even worse, the interviewer in that Tricycle interview failed to notice this. And did not suggest there was a cultural chasm between the Tibetan teacher's description of 'devotion' and the Western dictionary definitions/description of 'devotion'.

Tricycle is not a cheap magazine. For the news stand price, I'd expect the interviewer to ask very much better questions when a statement like that is made.

I contend this is a very serious case of using the same word but are not speaking the same language.
-----------------

Futher investigation is warranted.

I want no part of a devotion that entails being turned into a mere terrified animal with hair standing on end.

Its also strange. We are told again and again that anger is an afflictive emotion.

But for devotion to be equated with 'hair standing on end" thats FEAR.

When we humans are in this state of fear, we are capable of doing all kinds of ghastly things.

Instilling fear (and calling it devotion??) and making anger seem bad--thats a dandy good way to make people controllable.

Controllable by a power elite that defines these terms.

Quote
corboy
Futher investigation is warranted.

I want no part of a devotion that entails being turned into a mere terrified animal with hair standing on end.

Its also strange. We are told again and again that anger is an afflictive emotion.

But for devotion to be equated with 'hair standing on end" thats FEAR.

When we humans are in this state of fear, we are capable of doing all kinds of ghastly things.

Instilling fear (and calling it devotion??) and making anger seem bad--thats a dandy good way to make people controllable.

Controllable by a power elite that defines these terms.

Well, I know practically nothing of the Vajrayana tradition that is the subject of this thread. I will, however, point out (from a different, but related tradition, I realize) that in Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 11 verse 14, Arjuna is shown Krsna's universal form, and he is so amazed and ecstatic that the hairs on his body stand on end. He then prostrates himself in surrender, and begs to become Krsna's devotee. The Gita never mentions that Arjuna was terrified or even afraid at all, but rather stuck with awe and adoration, in the way that one would adore the sun. Just sayin'...

I wrote to Stephen Batchelor on this subject and got this email from him:

Dear ---

Personally, I do not believe in the literal existence of hell, and consider all traditional descriptions of it as anthromorphic projections of extreme states of human suffering. Traditional Buddhism of all schools present the hells as real places, though many modern teachers (Asian and Western) interpret it in more psychological language. In the Pali Canon there are a few passages where the Buddha is presented as talking of hell – sometimes describing a specific hell -- as the result of committing negative actions, but the account of hell realms is not worked out in any detail. The concept of hell (narak) appears to have already been in existence in pre-Buddhist times, though again only in sketchy outline – as the bad place you go when you die as punishment for having done evil things.

Hope that’s helpful,

Warmly, Stephen

What gets me is how many religions teach hell as a place to go for punishment, and most Christians I have talked with, along with Buddhists fear this hell and do good because of it. I remember my atheist friend telling me that it is immoral to do good for fear of punishment, that you should do what is right because it is the right thing to do.

Even the Jehovah's Witnesses, who do not teach a literal hell, believe that the punishment is death. That is perhaps more horrible. Perhaps the fear of death is worse than the fear of hell.

For what it's worth...

Prabhupada's purport for BG 11:14 (italics added for emphasis):

Then, bewildered and astonished, his hair standing on end, Arjuna began to pray with folded hands, offering obeisances to the Supreme Lord.

PURPORT:

"Once the divine vision is revealed, the relationship between Krsna and Arjuna changes immediately. Before, Krsna and Arjuna had a relationship based on friendship, but here, after the revelation, Arjuna is offering obeisances with great respect, and with folded hands he is praying to Krsna. He is praising the universal form. Thus Arjuna's relationship becomes one of wonder rather than friendship. Great devotees see Krsna as the reservoir of all relationships. In the scriptures there are twelve basic kinds of relationships mentioned, and all of them are present in Krsna. It is said that He is the ocean of all the relationships exchanged between two living entities, between the gods, or between the Supreme Lord and His devotees.
It is said that Arjuna was inspired by the relationship of wonder, and in that wonder, although he was by nature very sober, calm and quiet, he became ecstatic, his hair stood up, and he began to offer his obeisances unto the Supreme Lord with folded hands. He was not, of course, afraid. He was affected by the wonders of the Supreme Lord. The immediate context is wonder; his natural loving friendship was overwhelmed by wonder, and thus he reacted in this way."



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/07/2012 08:06AM by zeuszor.

Yeah, and when Arjunas friendship with Krishna was replaced with wonder, he then abandoned his earlier grief and hesitation about slaughtering his friends, relatives and seeing the culture and rituals of their tribes come to an end.

Wonder and awe and enchantment are solvents that dissolve relatedness--unless that wonder, awe and enchantment are kept very, very carefully guarded by boundaries and ethics.