Samatha to See Gods.

[Son]

Son asks questions but doesn't really want answers. If I'm being honest I think he has some difficulty in accepting a world view that is somewhat more mundane than his current creation. The point is that he enjoys seeing what he sees and feels a little bit special. So why not indulge him? It's better to make him feel ok then to offer him genuine advise.

Everyone is special. And we should all feel that way. Even you.

Your answer should be: thank you.

Thank you.

[meiji1]

I'm intrigued by this. What do they look like? I hope to never have an experience like what you're describing. I've sometimes felt a sensation that I took to be the presence of something, when meditating, enough to make the hairs on my arm stand on end. That's always creeped me out, almost enough to dissuade me from meditating entirely.

[Nemo]

To see the Gods you must do great deeds. Meditative absorption, generosity, profond devotion, etc. Getting high is not on the list.

Saints can see the Gods, but Sages understand the universe.

[nirmal]

"I would love to have a conversation with a God, Dakini or deva or Mahasiddha.

"

I was advised by my Guru never to start a conversation with them or even with a Buddha.I was asked to wait patiently for them to start it.
Just sharing.

[Son]

To see the Gods you must do great deeds. Meditative absorption, generosity, profond devotion, etc. Getting high is not on the list.

Saints can see the Gods, but Sages understand the universe.

[Jesse]

I was advised by my Guru never to start a conversation with them or even with a Buddha.I was asked to wait patiently for them to start it.
Just sharing.

I wouldn't advise starting at all, unless you want to end up with a mind full of voices.

[y1010]

Son asks questions but doesn't really want answers. If I'm being honest I think he has some difficulty in accepting a world view that is somewhat more mundane than his current creation. The point is that he enjoys seeing what he sees and feels a little bit special. So why not indulge him? It's better to make him feel ok then to offer him genuine advise.

Everyone is special. And we should all feel that way. Even you.

Your answer should be: thank you.

Thank you.

I'm sorry. I was surprised. You don't have to thank me.

Good luck!

[Ikkyu]

I personally have a difficult time believing any of this. Considering that there's no empirical evidence to prove the existence of devas and other supernatural beings, and the fact that they have more to do with Vedic and ancient Hindu superstitions than Buddhism... To me, all the talk about pretas and devas was written because that was the prevailing culture of the time. It was the way the Buddha either meant people to understand his fundamental message about compassion for all and the understanding that even beings greater than ourselves can be subject to suffering, or that whoever actually penned the suttas injected the superstitions into Buddhist parlance. Seeing devas has nothing to do with attaining enlightenment, in my opinion. But then again I haven't studied as much about Buddhism as other s on this site. I've done a fair amount of reading of the suttas and Mahayana sutras however. This is just my opinion.

[Ikkyu]

To see the Gods you must do great deeds. Meditative absorption, generosity, profond devotion, etc. Getting high is not on the list.

Saints can see the Gods, but Sages understand the universe.

it makes for an interesting and often beautiful experience, but intoxication has never lead me to contact any Gods. Leave that to the DMT users.

[Son]

I personally have a difficult time believing any of this. Considering that there's no empirical evidence to prove the existence of devas and other supernatural beings, and the fact that they have more to do with Vedic and ancient Hindu superstitions than Buddhism... To me, all the talk about pretas and devas was written because that was the prevailing culture of the time.

OKAY.

It was the way the Buddha either meant people to understand his fundamental message about compassion for all and the understanding that even beings greater than ourselves can be subject to suffering, or that whoever actually penned the suttas injected the superstitions into Buddhist parlance. Seeing devas has nothing to do with attaining enlightenment, in my opinion. But then again I haven't studied as much about Buddhism as other s on this site. I've done a fair amount of reading of the suttas and Mahayana sutras however. This is just my opinion.

The Mahayana sutras and the Buddha's suttas are very different in some ways.

it makes for an interesting and often beautiful experience, but intoxication has never lead me to contact any Gods. Leave that to the DMT users.

Intoxication just isn't a substitute for the special eyes. It's that simple.

[CrawfordHollow]

Special eyes? Is this something that you were born with, or did you develop this through meditation as the topic implies? If this is so, isn't it better not to talk about our attainments, much less spray about them all over an internet forum. Sorry if I'm being rude, but this whole thing is not just doubtful to me, but it also seems to lack some humility. You obviously posses powers that most of us would never dream about, but do you really need to parade them around all over this forum? There, I'm done. Sorry, Son I had to get that off my chest. No offense.

[CrawfordHollow]

I really don't mean any harm by this Son. You talk about these powers so nonchalantly that it seems like you are boasting or flaunting them. You probably don't intend this but this is how it comes off. Maybe I'm the only one who sees it that way. I am not accusing you of being a liar or anything, I am just being honest, OK?

Peace,
Troy

[Indrajala]

I personally have a difficult time believing any of this. Considering that there's no empirical evidence to prove the existence of devas and other supernatural beings, and the fact that they have more to do with Vedic and ancient Hindu superstitions than Buddhism... To me, all the talk about pretas and devas was written because that was the prevailing culture of the time.

You can call them devas or spirits, kami, shen, gui or what have you ... around the world almost all cultures have had such ideas. Plenty of sane intelligent people have "ghost experiences", too, and this is not a recent development.

There is plenty of evidence for more or less immaterial beings, though the present mainstream cosmology of materialism claims this is impossible from a perspective of theory and hence they say such things cannot exist. Nevertheless, people still have experiences of interacting with or encountering supernormal beings. That doesn't mean every single person who has claimed to have seen a ghost really has, but nevertheless the evidence is there, albeit impossible to reproduce under laboratory conditions.

If you want to read a more sympathetic study of monsters read Greer's book:

http://books.google.com.tw/books?id=YMx ... &q&f=false

One pertinent quote from Greer:

It may come as a surprise to learn that the Scientific Revolution's rejection of magic, alchemy, and the like was based on rhetoric, not experiment. In all arguments over the reality of these things, no one on the scientific side of the debate claimed to have done experiments proving that magic, alchemy, and other kinds of 'rejected knowledge' were false. (This point can be looked up quite readily in contemporary sources, or in the very large modern historical literature on the period.) The early scientists assumed that these things were false because they didn't fit the new scientific and materialist image of the universe, not because anyone disproved them.

In the same way, the lore of monsters was tossed out with the trash, not because people didn't keep seeing monsters - they did - or because monster sightings all proved to have simple, straightforward, scientifically acceptable explanations - they didn't - but because the scientific model of the universe had no room for monsters. Monsters couldn't exist - this is how the logic went - and therefore they didn't exist.

See page 13 onward for his review of the research on the "Old Hag" phenomenon.

[Andrew108]

Seeing beings that are not there can also be a sign of schizophrenia. Seriously. This is why the discussion is problematic.

[Indrajala]

Seeing beings that are not there can also be a sign of schizophrenia. Seriously. This is why the discussion is problematic.

Not everyone who sees ghosts or devas are mentally ill.

[Jesse]

Seeing beings that are not there can also be a sign of schizophrenia. Seriously. This is why the discussion is problematic.

Seeing beings that are not there can also be a sign of schizophrenia. Seriously. This is why the discussion is problematic.

Not everyone who sees ghosts or devas are mentally ill.

I think there is definitely some overlap, and those with unstable minds should avoid these phenomena imo.

[Son]

Special eyes? Is this something that you were born with, or did you develop this through meditation as the topic implies? If this is so, isn't it better not to talk about our attainments, much less spray about them all over an internet forum. Sorry if I'm being rude, but this whole thing is not just doubtful to me, but it also seems to lack some humility. You obviously posses powers that most of us would never dream about, but do you really need to parade them around all over this forum? There, I'm done. Sorry, Son I had to get that off my chest. No offense.

I simply don't take an internet forum as seriously as--for example--the Bible or the passing of national legislation. If someone considers me to be boastful, it really doesn't matter. Am I parading my ability? Was the Buddha and his monks parading their ability simply by sharing it and discussing it with anyone? I mean, what harm exactly am I bringing? If it bothers you I give you my blessing to ignore everything I say.

Seeing beings that are not there can also be a sign of schizophrenia. Seriously. This is why the discussion is problematic.

Do you plan on performing a diagnosis over the internet...? Rest assured this is always brought up under any circumstances where perceiving otherworldly beings is discussed. For some reason, it's okay for buddhas, gurus, lamas, shamans, and forest monks to see devas without the threat of mental illness. But if an American happens to share this ability, they are labeled schizophrenic. It must be schizophrenia or some other illness.

Seeing beings that are not there can also be a sign of schizophrenia. Seriously. This is why the discussion is problematic.

I encourage you to say what you have to say, but do you really want to ruin all possibility of benefit from this forum just because of a personal view against divine seeing?

Seeing beings that are not there can also be a sign of schizophrenia. Seriously. This is why the discussion is problematic.

Not everyone who sees ghosts or devas are mentally ill.

I think there is definitely some overlap, and those with unstable minds should avoid these phenomena imo.

It's important to keep in mind that mental illness is not like a germ, or a virus, that is present in your body. It is a psychological mechanism. What is, an "unstable mind?" Everyone hallucinates in their dreams. If you don't sleep for days you will hallucinate, does this mean your mind is "unstable?" If you hallucinate on LSD, is your mind considered unstable? If you have attention deficit hyper disorder, hence an unstable mind, then you shouldn't recognize your own vision of gods? What about obsessive compulsive disorder?

Don't you think a person with divine vision and suffers from schizophrenia obviously has the ability to recognize a real deva? Hallucinating is not seeing. The divine eye is not a normal eye that is susceptible to hallucination.

[Indrajala]

Do you plan on performing a diagnosis over the internet...? Rest assured this is always brought up under any circumstances where perceiving otherworldly beings is discussed. For some reason, it's okay for buddhas, gurus, lamas, shamans, and forest monks to see devas without the threat of mental illness. But if an American happens to share this ability, they are labeled schizophrenic. It must be schizophrenia or some other illness.

Mental illness is so prevalent in the industrialized modern world now that people are very quick to jump to such conclusions at the drop of a hat.

In any case, in the Buddhist world around Asia if you get to know people you'll hear about these things. Even Ajahn Brahm likes to talk about ghosts and devas (he is quite clear and he insists they exist). I once attended a lecture by him in Hong Kong and he spent a few hours telling real life Buddhist ghost stories at the science and technology university in Kowloon (a very strategical approach no doubt).

In India I met another eminent monk when I stayed at his temple who told me about his experiences with devas up in the mountains.

This kind of thing is actually a core part of Buddhism as it is practised in Asia (perhaps excluding Japan) -- think chod, preta offerings, dharma guardians, protection rites, precepts conferred unto the deceased, etc...

[Son]

Do you plan on performing a diagnosis over the internet...? Rest assured this is always brought up under any circumstances where perceiving otherworldly beings is discussed. For some reason, it's okay for buddhas, gurus, lamas, shamans, and forest monks to see devas without the threat of mental illness. But if an American happens to share this ability, they are labeled schizophrenic. It must be schizophrenia or some other illness.

Mental illness is so prevalent in the industrialized modern world now that people are very quick to jump to such conclusions at the drop of a hat.

In any case, in the Buddhist world around Asia if you get to know people you'll hear about these things. Even Ajahn Brahm likes to talk about ghosts and devas (he is quite clear and he insists they exist). I once attended a lecture by him in Hong Kong and he spent a few hours telling real life Buddhist ghost stories at the science and technology university in Kowloon (a very strategical approach no doubt).

In India I met another eminent monk when I stayed at his temple who told me about his experiences with devas up in the mountains.

This kind of thing is actually a core part of Buddhism as it is practised in Asia (perhaps excluding Japan) -- think chod, preta offerings, dharma guardians, protection rites, precepts conferred unto the deceased, etc...

Exactly. It's always been a core part of Buddhism. And yet now Westerners are trying to say, "it was all just a teaching tool the whole time."

[Indrajala]

Exactly. It's always been a core part of Buddhism. And yet now Westerners are trying to say, "it was all just a teaching tool the whole time."

Oh that's just orientalist revisionism.

I've come to think that there is the "actual Buddhist world" and then the armchair intellectual speculation groups self-identifying as Buddhist that largely exist on the internet. The latter don't really know much more than their selective readings and have minimal experience with actual advanced practitioners. Granted, where Buddhism is part of an ethnicity most people don't know that much either and just defer to the monks or lamas, but in any case they don't go around spouting revisionist nonsense.

Like I said in the real Buddhist world pretas, devas and all kinds of other immaterial beings have their place and even today you'll meet plenty of practitioners who attest to said reality.

I mean do you think the Nechung oracle just does what he does for entertainment value? No, his community takes his experience very seriously and make policy based on what the deity announces.