No, i think the yogcara idea is a good one.Mr. G wrote:Is there higher view which you prefer?Namdrol wrote:
Anyway, it is a Yogacara idea.
Hell in Tibetan Buddhism
Re: Hell in Tibetan Buddhism
Re: Hell in Tibetan Buddhism
Namdrol wrote:No, i think the yogcara idea is a good one.Mr. G wrote:Is there higher view which you prefer?Namdrol wrote:
Anyway, it is a Yogacara idea.
- How foolish you are,
grasping the letter of the text and ignoring its intention!
- Vasubandhu
Re: Hell in Tibetan Buddhism
I'm curious as to what the Pali Canon says with regard to the OP. This may be a matter of interpretation, there may not be a clear answer. This opens the door to interpretations by later commentators, and which then leads to the Dharma evolving into Vasubandhu-ism, and so on.
Bhikku Bodhi says, in an email: "There is no doubt that the texts intend hell to be understood as a separate realm of existence distinct from the human realm, and as real to its inhabitants as our world is to us. Note that they describe rebirth into the other realms as occurring 'with the dissolution of the body, after death'. There is no evidence at all in the texts that they intend the hell realms to be just metaphors for extremely painful experiences here in the human word."
Stephen Batchelor gives his take, saying the Buddha does in a couple of passages give a concrete description of hell. But he notes that there was a belief in hell in India prior to and during the Buddha's life, so he feels any statements of the Buddha regarding hell as a plane of existence after death is a later influence on the Canon. Classic Batchelorism.
But the OP is about what Tibetan Buddhism teaches, not what the Pali says. Vasubandhu has been referenced on this thread separately as teaching the hells aren't "real", and, in Berzin, that they are. So it would be good to be able to take a look at what he actually said. According to Berzin, Vasubandhu presents the Buddhist Cosmology in the Abhidarmakosha, "Treasure House of Special Topics of Knowledge", and it's intended to be understood to be as real as our current existence.
http://www.berzinarchives.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Buddhist Cosmology: a Comparison of the Abhidharma and Kalachakra Explanations
Bhikku Bodhi says, in an email: "There is no doubt that the texts intend hell to be understood as a separate realm of existence distinct from the human realm, and as real to its inhabitants as our world is to us. Note that they describe rebirth into the other realms as occurring 'with the dissolution of the body, after death'. There is no evidence at all in the texts that they intend the hell realms to be just metaphors for extremely painful experiences here in the human word."
Stephen Batchelor gives his take, saying the Buddha does in a couple of passages give a concrete description of hell. But he notes that there was a belief in hell in India prior to and during the Buddha's life, so he feels any statements of the Buddha regarding hell as a plane of existence after death is a later influence on the Canon. Classic Batchelorism.
But the OP is about what Tibetan Buddhism teaches, not what the Pali says. Vasubandhu has been referenced on this thread separately as teaching the hells aren't "real", and, in Berzin, that they are. So it would be good to be able to take a look at what he actually said. According to Berzin, Vasubandhu presents the Buddhist Cosmology in the Abhidarmakosha, "Treasure House of Special Topics of Knowledge", and it's intended to be understood to be as real as our current existence.
http://www.berzinarchives.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Buddhist Cosmology: a Comparison of the Abhidharma and Kalachakra Explanations
- ronnewmexico
- Posts: 1601
- Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 10:17 pm
Re: Hell in Tibetan Buddhism
I look at it this way....and don't think a strictly approach of scholorship with this thing works.
We have in tibetan buddhism a play such as in association with liberation through hearing, stateing hell as a real concrete place.
This play being performed for the general tibetan public, at group gathers to celebrate things...perhaps at a local town square equilivent at religious holiday is where you may see this thing performed. To ordinary peoples for the most part.
WE have other notions of not so concrete a place in scholorship.
I would venture one tendency or understanding would preclude one from the other.
Generally with some spiritual understanding hell becomes a not real place of tendency only...self regulated
At a great level of understanding of course there is not a possibility of this thing, there is not a hell at all.
With little to no understanding it becomes a real actual place.
So we have differing scholorship on this. Either one is lying to the other or there are different gradiants to this thing as described.
I tend to think there is not lying going on, and it is not just translational error.
Conflicting things generally in buddhism....we go with the applicable circumstance.Peoples circumstances and understandings differ in this thing of hell.
What happens what really exists....it is in the circumstance of presentation and not actually a solid thing. As are all things. But perhaps particularly with this thing...situational.
We have in tibetan buddhism a play such as in association with liberation through hearing, stateing hell as a real concrete place.
This play being performed for the general tibetan public, at group gathers to celebrate things...perhaps at a local town square equilivent at religious holiday is where you may see this thing performed. To ordinary peoples for the most part.
WE have other notions of not so concrete a place in scholorship.
I would venture one tendency or understanding would preclude one from the other.
Generally with some spiritual understanding hell becomes a not real place of tendency only...self regulated
At a great level of understanding of course there is not a possibility of this thing, there is not a hell at all.
With little to no understanding it becomes a real actual place.
So we have differing scholorship on this. Either one is lying to the other or there are different gradiants to this thing as described.
I tend to think there is not lying going on, and it is not just translational error.
Conflicting things generally in buddhism....we go with the applicable circumstance.Peoples circumstances and understandings differ in this thing of hell.
What happens what really exists....it is in the circumstance of presentation and not actually a solid thing. As are all things. But perhaps particularly with this thing...situational.
"This order considers that progress can be achieved more rapidly during a single month of self-transformation through terrifying conditions in rough terrain and in "the abode of harmful forces" than through meditating for a period of three years in towns and monasteries"....Takpo Tashi Namgyal.
Re: Hell in Tibetan Buddhism
Yes, Berzin is correct, as far as the Kosha goes. However, in Vasubandhu's text, 20 verses as well as its commentary, the realms of ghosts and hell beings do not have the same level of conventional existence as animals on up.Tenzin1 wrote:According to Berzin, Vasubandhu presents the Buddhist Cosmology in the Abhidarmakosha, "Treasure House of Special Topics of Knowledge", and it's intended to be understood to be as real as our current existence.
- Thomas Amundsen
- Posts: 2034
- Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 2:50 am
- Location: Helena, MT
- Contact:
Re: Hell in Tibetan Buddhism
Thank you for the distinction. I don't really know anything about emanation yet.Caz wrote:There are stories of several Bodhisattvas whom wished to be reborn in lower realms to aid those there but they where unable to take rebirth there because they didnt create the causes to be reborn there, Its an unfulfilable wish by any standard coming from the POV of cause and effect Liberated beings cannot be born into lower Samsaric states but they can eminate there.tomamundsen wrote:Well, from 8th bhumi on up (could even be lower, I'm not certain) they can choose their place of rebirth, so yes.swampflower wrote:Could a Bodhisattva be reborn in hell to alleviate the suffering of others?
- Jangchup Donden
- Posts: 419
- Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 5:44 am
Re: Hell in Tibetan Buddhism
How can something be conventionally more or less real than something else? It would seem like something is either conventionally real or not. I find it hard to fathom something being 25% conventionally real.Namdrol wrote:Yes, Berzin is correct, as far as the Kosha goes. However, in Vasubandhu's text, 20 verses as well as its commentary, the realms of ghosts and hell beings do not have the same level of conventional existence as animals on up.Tenzin1 wrote:According to Berzin, Vasubandhu presents the Buddhist Cosmology in the Abhidarmakosha, "Treasure House of Special Topics of Knowledge", and it's intended to be understood to be as real as our current existence.
Re: Hell in Tibetan Buddhism
It means that while animals, humans, gods, and asuras all share the same conventional universe; hell beings and ghosts do not. It means that experience of hell beings and ghosts is an unshared deluded vision.Jangchup Donden wrote:How can something be conventionally more or less real than something else? It would seem like something is either conventionally real or not. I find it hard to fathom something being 25% conventionally real.Namdrol wrote:Yes, Berzin is correct, as far as the Kosha goes. However, in Vasubandhu's text, 20 verses as well as its commentary, the realms of ghosts and hell beings do not have the same level of conventional existence as animals on up.Tenzin1 wrote:According to Berzin, Vasubandhu presents the Buddhist Cosmology in the Abhidarmakosha, "Treasure House of Special Topics of Knowledge", and it's intended to be understood to be as real as our current existence.
Our deluded vision however is shared with animals, gods, and asuras.
N
- Jangchup Donden
- Posts: 419
- Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 5:44 am
Re: Hell in Tibetan Buddhism
That's interesting. So each hell being's delusional experience is unique to that hell being?Namdrol wrote:It means that while animals, humans, gods, and asuras all share the same conventional universe; hell beings and ghosts do not. It means that experience of hell beings and ghosts is an unshared deluded vision.Jangchup Donden wrote:How can something be conventionally more or less real than something else? It would seem like something is either conventionally real or not. I find it hard to fathom something being 25% conventionally real.Namdrol wrote:Yes, Berzin is correct, as far as the Kosha goes. However, in Vasubandhu's text, 20 verses as well as its commentary, the realms of ghosts and hell beings do not have the same level of conventional existence as animals on up.
Our deluded vision however is shared with animals, gods, and asuras.
N
Re: Hell in Tibetan Buddhism
So it seems.Jangchup Donden wrote:
That's interesting. So each hell being's delusional experience is unique to that hell being?