Something to believe in?

[greg]

Hi Paige,

I too feel the hells are more psychological than geographical, and so I also believe that we are the architects and constructors of these hells.

I think 'hell' is like 'home'. 'Home' has very little to do with sticks of wood, paint, shingles, location, and the like. It's a 'feeling', something that we create through emotion, memory, ideas, eye of newt, wing of bat, this and that. Which is why what 'feels like home' to one person, may or may not feel like home to another- it's not the location, it's the mind. Of course this doesn't make 'home' any less 'homey', any more than the definition or explanation of the hell's make them any less sinister or horrifying, especially when you find yourself IN the pit...

Hell's a nice place to visit (because it gives you motivation to find a way out!), but I wouldn't want to call it home...

And getting in trouble for questioning? They don't sound like Buddhists to me- are we not encouraged by the Buddhas to question and find the truth for ourselves?

My 2cents,
Greg

[Hans]

Hello Paige!

Funny that you should mention the "hell question" at this particular time. During the sesshin I participated in last weekend, exactly the same question came up as part of a conversation. I really liked your Tom and Jerry reference. No part of my personal experience (so far) indicates that there is an actual physical place like the Avici hell,...I mean do all those hell minions and ghoulies work 9to5 shifts or what? Is there some kind of union for professional imps and ghoulies? Yet one could argue that our own plane of being is not 100% solid real in the conventional sense either, so who knows.

To me it's more than a coincidence that those hell descriptions fit in perfectly well within the cultural and general mythological context of the time and place when/where the sutras and/or shastras in question were written, but don't fit in nearly as well into other cultural contexts. However, I strongly believe that there is a great truth at the bottom of most of these descriptions. Maybe a Tom and Jerry description comes closest to what these states really are like. If they are something to be experienced, then does it matter whether they exist in a physical form (in the same way that the statue of liberty exists)?

Let's not forget that psychology itself is just another framework that enables us to interpret the different reality states in a particular way. We can call a lot of stuff archetypes, or psychological states, but as long as these things have any kind of profound truth and reality-state at their core (even if it is "just" metaphorical) , they are not "just" psychological states, or "just" an archetype, or "just" a God(s).

I personally think that interpreting the Buddhist scriptures is a balancing act between blind faith (e.g. in a Christian sense), and an arrogant attachment to scientific materialism. I trust and have faith in the three jewels, the four noble truths, the eightfold path and a lot of other things that I can personally verify. If the Buddha actually did speak of certain supernatural things, he probably had a very good reason for doing so.

Yet again a lot of questions remain: Did the Buddha actually say these things, or did some of his students add to his teachings during the process of writing his sayings down? To whom did the Buddha say these things? Do we have any real reasons other than our scepticism to believe that most of the supernatural stuff was just Upaya (skillful means) in action?

There is no easy way out of this. We have to take full responsibility for our own actions and opinions. All I think I know is that I wouldn't have been able to come up with the eightfold path and Zazen all by myself. My powers of reason do have limits, and I am glad to trust a 2500 year old tradition, that managed again and again to verify the truth its own core teachings. A tradition that is greater than my own individual capacities alone. If I can trust Shakyamuni Buddha with regards to the three jewels, four noble truths etc. etc. I can trust him with some odd stuff as well, though that odd stuff may not necessarily seem particularly important.

As to the question who is and who isn't a real buddhist...well...we all have our own individual perspectives on that. I've never seen an -ism walk through the door or water the flowers, but once ina while it does seem to make sense to distinguish one approach from another. I am one fo those people who are e.g. pretty anti Christian-Zen for various reasons. Aum Shinrikyo isn't Buddhism to me, and I feel pretty confident saying this. then I look at movements like Soka Gakkai and Shinnyo-En and think...well...not really what I'd personally call Buddhism, but who am I to say??? Who am I to judge others? Once in a while I feel like I have to to...at other times I should better keep my mouth shut...a balancing act.


Gassho,

Hans

[Jundo]

Hi Will,

And what Jundo said. Hehe.

Gassho Will

But I wasn't kidding, Will.

Gassho, Jundo

[will]

If you want to know what I beliave in Page...

I am starting to believe in the possiblity for a life with joy and happiness involved. Doesn't mean I've reached it, but I'm catching glimpses now and then. I might be wrong, but in the end I think it's really up to you. Right now I try to live it a day or moment at a time, but that's me

And what Jundo said. Hehe.

Gassho Will

[Jundo]

Hi Paige,

Oh, I believe in the Buddhist hells and such. But, whether they exist within or outside of us, that much I cannot tell you. Anyway, what is 'inside' or 'outside' in the end?? If they exist within you, then they exist within this universe after all!

You can take them as poetic descriptions of a real state, or as a real place (I am squarely in the former camp) ... but how much difference is there between a real state of mind and a real place? ( ... and to mention in passing, there is also that whole mind/Mind way of looking at things ... )

You know, you may be surprised to hear old 'down to earth' Jundo say this, but I also look at many of the 'Manifestations of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas' floating around Buddhism in much the same way. Are they 'real' entities, or just symbols of real aspirations for human beings and real aspects of our human psychology? Here, I lean strongly toward the latter 'aspirations and psychology' but ... but ... real in that way is still real.

Gassho, Jundo

PS - I still believe in Santa Claus too. I sincerely mean that.

[will]

Read my signature

Gassho Will

[paige]

Hi all,

I'm by nature a bit of a skeptic and a rationalist. I kind of feel that I fit in well enough here on the Treeleaf forum - with Jundo "Just-sit-zazen" Cohen. :wink:

But a while ago, I visited another popular Buddhist web forum, where questioning the supernatural got me in quite a bit of trouble. I believe that I said something about having difficulty with the descriptions of the 31 planes of existence. For starters, the term "tongue-stretching hell" (I think that's where the liars go!) gives me a very Tom & Jerry mental image. I also have a hard time with the heavenly palaces of lapis lazuli.

I wasn't universally condemned, but some of the people there did say that anyone who doubted the doctrine of these planes isn't a proper Buddhist. And I was called a "scientific materialist," but I don't know what that is.

So... what do - or what should - Buddhists believe in anyway? I mean proper Buddhists, not yours truly!