Vajra Hell

[fragrant herbs]

Can not this be applied to the teaching of the hell realm?

diamond sutta 31

Subhuti replied, "No, blessed lord. That person would not have understood the meaning of your teachings. For when you refer to those things, you are not referring to their actual existence, you only use the words as figures of speech, as symbols. Only in that sense can words be used, for conceptions, ideas, limited truths, and spiritual truths have no more reality than have matter or phenomena."

[Dechen Norbu]

It can be applied to the teaching of the human realm too. It's not more or less real than any other realm. We just make the mistake of thinking so, believing that there is an independent world out there/ inside here that has intrinsic existence, thus having problems accepting the same ontological status of the other realms. We, or what we know of us like the body and sense organs (sometimes forgetting mind, highly dependent of this body) are "made of the stuff that makes our realm" due to our karma and identifying ourselves with a fiction about the existence of an independent observer we think we observe a reality out there with true existence.
For instance, in an exercise of wild imagination, suppose you were an electromagnetic wave or some kind of energy wave (cosmic radiation, you name it, as long as it is one of those that go through matter as if there was nothing there). This universe wouldn't have matter that could block your path as walls block it at this moment. Your body wouldn't be made of atoms and you wouldn't feel atoms. In fact, atoms weren't part of your reality, so this whole universe you see now wouldn't be real to you, although it was real to those made of atoms. I don't want to stretch the analogy too far (and my knowledge in Physics is very limited), but do you more or less get the feeling of what I'm saying? I wonder if beings from other realms ask themselves if the human realm is only a metaphor...

[ngodrup]

I think we can see an analogy in how Orthodox Jews
relate to commandments like the Kosher laws.
To break them cuts one off from one's "soul" or
undoes one's Jewishness so's to speak.

God or Buddha doesn't punish so much as
the person undoes themselves. One Khenpo
I know says that if your vows and samayas
are broken, you are spiritually bankrupt.
It frustrates your success and disappoints
your teacher. You're no longer trustworthy
to yourself or others. That's hell.

[pael]

Alexander Berzin says it's temporal.

For the Vajra Flame Joyless Realm, the lifespan is until the world sphere gathers in.

http://www.berzinarchives.com/web/en/ar ... abhid.html

For me that was relief.

[gregkavarnos]

You know how long it takes for the world sphere to gather in? It makes forever look like the bat of an eyelid!!! Ready for it?

It takes somewhere between 4.1 and 8.2 billion years (depending on who you ask).

[pael]

I meant that it isn't eternal. According Kalacakra.

[gregkavarnos]

Right now, at this point in time of my development, I fail to see the difference between eternity and 8.2 billion years (of the most intense suffering possible). I imagine that if you asked a being in the vajra hell realm how long they have been there, they will probably say: "It feels like forever".

[pael]

At least it is temporal. If, going there is certain.

[Karma Dondrup Tashi]

How long does it take to forget a thing?

Anyway, if we are looking for a special kind of "experience" that feels good and never ends, perhaps we should sign up for one of Patanjali's courses.

[Karma Dorje]

L'enfer, c'est les autres.

[Salomon]

L'enfer, c'est les autres.

Agree.

Others are in my experience the greatest obstacle to go further. That's true that our own thoughts/emotions and experiences are really challenging, but others have the power to make you feel worse in your conditions if you haven't the luck to be well-surrounded. And to be well-surrounded is so rare because this well-kind of people who will be of benefit to you in all levels are extremely rare. People like that needs to have a so deep connection/realization with their being.

But, fortunately, there is also a way to learn from others, to know more about your being from others. The result of such learning brings protection from others without being harmful and to bring harmony to whoever you are with. I have used the harmful behavior from others in London like Oxford Circus or Canary Wharf, and I think some knows how crazy people are in these areas, in order to see how my being react to such suffering and learn how I can realize the emptiness of such and such suffering I am feeling and how I can somehow heal the wound that people seemed to reach in my being, mentally and physically. This is subtle stuff, difficult to communicate it clearly.

[gregkavarnos]

Even when dealing with others you are essentially dealing with your self: your perception, your thoughts, your judgements...

Reality is, after all, what you project upon it.

[Salomon]

Yes, others are related to me.
I don't know if you are aware of an aspect of others and that is especially what I talk about when I said that they can be really harmful to you or to me.

I am talking about a silent energy interaction that can either bring harmony or be source of destruction in any relationship. I know that some Master like Yeshe Namkhai is aware of this, you are able to reach this sensitivity when you are enough deeply connected with your being allowing yourself to be aware of more aspect of yourself and so of others too.

There is more and more clarity, less obscurations and so more ability to see what's really going on.
There is a lot, a lot, a lot going on silently. And this is really scary initially.

[gregkavarnos]

Which "self"? What "others"? Show me the "self" and then show me the "others".

At the relative level there is the illusion of distinct boundaries and entities/phenomena, but upon examination what is essentially there?

[Salomon]

Are you talking from experience here or from knowledge you get somewhere?

I have never understood people not allowing "others" to experience what should be experienced until they will experience what should be experience, depending of all kind of degree of realizations.
My experience/realization now is that I am talking to someone called Greg and he is not me for sure. I can still call myself "I" even if it is not really obvious in my experience, yet there is this sense of personnal being.

This "I" may now more refer to the Mind with its stable nature.

[gregkavarnos]

I have never understood people not allowing "others" to experience what should be experienced until they will experience what should be experience, depending of all kind of degree of realizations.

Rather clumsily stated, to the point that I have no idea what you are saying.

My experience/realization now is that I am talking to someone called Greg and he is not me for sure. I can still call myself "I" even if it is not really obvious in my experience, yet there is this sense of personnal being.

That's right, your experience is just that... your experience. That's right, there is a sense of something there, but what actually is there?

This "I" may now more refer to the Mind with its stable nature.

And which "stable nature" exactly do you wish to project this "I" onto?

[Salomon]

That's funny that you didn't answered my question, why would I bother answering yours.
If you are not talking from experience, you wouldn't be able to understand where I am and so being of help like you pretend to be here, but I see a different picture.(this refers to the second question)

You didn't understand what I said after my question, it is just allowing others to experience their path to what people think as a conclusion like "no self" or "no others".
Which I don't consider true nor false until I experience it directly.

To your last question, the Mind experiencing its stable nature.
It's all about mind for me.

[gregkavarnos]

That's funny that you didn't answered my question, why would I bother answering yours.
If you are not talking from experience, you wouldn't be able to understand where I am and so being of help like you pretend to be here, but I see a different picture.(this refers to the second question)

Realising the selfless nature of phenomena is not so difficult. Look at your feelings, perceptions, thoughts, body, emotions, etc... Where is their essence? What is left of the self when you take them all away? Where are you and where am I?

Oh, and lay off the passive-agressive tone, we are having a discussion here, if you don't like it then don't have it.

You didn't understand what I said after my question, it is just allowing others to experience their path to what people think as a conclusion like "no self" or "no others".

The Buddhist path is not "my" path.

To your last question, the Mind experiencing its stable nature.
It's all about mind for me.

So what is mind and what is its stable nature?

[muni]

It all starts by mistaken perception and its grasping. It is said that a content-happy being will never harm.
Teaching shows love is the medicine. I am not saying hug-kiss whole day long, but such poor state is already strongly suffering, therefore genuine concern for suffering/help can only be by our own insight.
Maybe a reason to practice in Theravada, Mahayana, Vajrayana.

two babbling cents.

[muni]

Show me the "self" and then show me the "others".

Nice contemplation. Thanks!