Bouddhism, Does hel_l And Heaven Exists Or Not?

[Brucenkhamen]

I see that somehow the OP got convinced that Pali canon contradicts core teachings of Buddha, thanks to members with "deeper insight" like Brucekamen and probably some others.

If that's the case then he's misinterpreted what we've been saying.

No, but a little modesty wouldn't hurt even such an advanced sage as you.

I think getting personal is unnecessary and doesn't add anything useful to the discussion.

[AmeriThai]

No, but a little modesty wouldn't hurt even such an advanced sage as you.

I think getting personal is unnecessary and doesn't add anything useful to the discussion.

Jai yen-yen. While it might not be useful to the discussion at hand, there's no need to internalize things on personal level either. We're all individuals and the points of view do vary from person to person. That doesn't make it right or wrong, nor does it make it of value or worthless. We all take in what we what we find to be most meaningful for our own individual lives.

[fabianfred]

The Buddha mentioned the existence of the different realms often in his teachings. And the Jataka stories of a few of his previous lives often mention other realms. So if we choose not to believe that the he// realms and realms of the Devas and Brahmas don't actually exist, then we are denying the truth of the Buddhas teachings.

Can we truly call ourselves followers of the buddha if we do not believe what he taught?

The Bible may have been written by ordinary people, but the Pali canon was not. It was written down from the memories of the followers of the buddha a few years after he passed on. And these were not ordinary monks, but Arahants. Even nowadays there are some people who have almost photgraphic memories, or Idetic memories. When a mind has been trained by the practise of meditation it is vastly superior to an untrained mind. Arahants, having reached the same state of perfection and enlightenment as the buddha, are in the state of Nirvana, the qualities of which it is impossible to know, until one has reached that state. So, I choose to believe that the Pali canon is a very good record of the Buddhas teachings.

Even now, there are monks in Thailand who are arahants. They would never lie, and they recount the experiences of others who have visited the he// and heaven realms, and people who are born with recall of a previous existence in hel_l.

[Brucenkhamen]

The Buddha mentioned the existence of the different realms often in his teachings. And the Jataka stories of a few of his previous lives often mention other realms. So if we choose not to believe that the he// realms and realms of the Devas and Brahmas don't actually exist, then we are denying the truth of the Buddhas teachings.

Can we truly call ourselves followers of the buddha if we do not believe what he taught?

The Bible may have been written by ordinary people, but the Pali canon was not. It was written down from the memories of the followers of the buddha a few years after he passed on. And these were not ordinary monks, but Arahants. Even nowadays there are some people who have almost photgraphic memories, or Idetic memories. When a mind has been trained by the practise of meditation it is vastly superior to an untrained mind. Arahants, having reached the same state of perfection and enlightenment as the buddha, are in the state of Nirvana, the qualities of which it is impossible to know, until one has reached that state. So, I choose to believe that the Pali canon is a very good record of the Buddhas teachings.

You'll no doubt be familiar with the Kalama Sutta then;

It is proper for you, Kalamas, to doubt, to be uncertain;uncertainty has arisen in you about what is doubtful. Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are bad; these things are blamable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill,' abandon them.

You seem to have created a Catch 22 for yourself, do you believe the part of scripture that tells not to go by what you read in scripture? or do you reject that part so you can blindly believe the rest?

Here's another interesting part of that Sutta not so often quoted that pertains to this thread specifically...

If there is a world after death, if there is the fruit of actions rightly & wrongly done, then this is the basis by which, with the break-up of the body, after death, I will reappear in a good destination, the heavenly world.' This is the first assurance he acquires.

But if there is no world after death, if there is no fruit of actions rightly & wrongly done, then here in the present life I look after myself with ease — free from hostility, free from ill will, free from trouble.' This is the second assurance he acquires.

I have no expertise in interpreting the writings of transcribed 2500 years ago after having been passed on by word of mouth for a few hundred years in a culture totally alien to us translated and possibly mistranslated goodness how many times. But it appears to saying if there is a world after death then your practice will have good reaults for you, if there is no world after death your practice will have good results for you, so either it doesn't matter either way or the Buddha was encouraging them to be agnostic on the topic.

[fabianfred]

You seem to have created a Catch 22 for yourself, do you believe the part of scripture that tells not to go by what you read in scripture? or do you reject that part so you can blindly believe the rest?

I have no expertise in interpreting the writings of transcribed 2500 years ago after having been passed on by word of mouth for a few hundred years in a culture totally alien to us translated and possibly mistranslated goodness how many times. But it appears to saying if there is a world after death then your practice will have good reaults for you, if there is no world after death your practice will have good results for you, so either it doesn't matter either way or the Buddha was encouraging them to be agnostic on the topic.

many people seem to interpret that Kalama sutta to say not to believe in anything we are told or read, nor any teacher.....this is nonsense.

He advised them to be careful before believing...not to be swayed by the popularity etc. of the teacher, bu to use wisdom. I both understand the meaning of the kalama sutta and I am completely sure that the Pali canon is an authentic record of the buddha's teachings.

The texts were put into written form a few years(less than ten) after the Buddha's Parinirvana.... and it was the pali language which has been retained to this time.....not 'been passed on by word of mouth for a few hundred years in a culture totally alien to us translated and possibly mistranslated goodness how many times'

He is saying that one should do good anyway...whether one believes in an afterlife or not....because the benefits apply in either case. He was not 'unsure' himself...and pondering the question as to whether there is an afterlife or not.......

To disbelieve the basics or karma and rebirth...and then call oneself a follower of the Buddha...is deluding oneself.

[Brucenkhamen]

many people seem to interpret that Kalama sutta to say not to believe in anything we are told or read, nor any teacher.....this is nonsense. He advised them to be careful before believing...not to be swayed by the popularity etc. of the teacher, bu to use wisdom. I both understand the meaning of the kalama sutta and I am completely sure that the Pali canon is an authentic record of the buddha's teachings.

Correct, and being careful means using the advice and techniques he taught to discover freedom from suffering, not entertaining blind beliefs in a hea\/ean and he// that you aven't seen and calculating ways to avoid one and go to the other, which is after all the two contrasting points of view we are talking about here

The texts were put into written form a few years(less than ten) after the Buddha's Parinirvana.... and it was the pali language which has been retained to this time.....not 'been passed on by word of mouth for a few hundred years in a culture totally alien to us translated and possibly mistranslated goodness how many times'

Not many of us are fluent in ancient Pali so must rely on translations.

I found this article which confirms a 200 year timeframe, rather than the 10 years you suggest. Now I don't believe it just because I saw it written down but it does confirm my recollection of what I've heard in dhamma talks and read in books...

http://www.olli-buddhism.com/pali-canon/

About a year after the Buddha’s death, the bhikkhu Mahakasyapa, one his most senior and most trusted followers, convened a council of 500 monks, all of whom had attained Enlightenment with the Buddha’s training. The avowed purpose of the council was to preserve the Buddha’s teachings. With that end in mind, the council organized itself into groups: one group, who were particularly good at the teachings pertaining to conduct in the world, took responsibility for remembering those teachings; another group took responsibility for remembering the teachings about the rules of the sangha; another, for the teachings about philosophy and the nature of things.

Each group agreed to meet regularly, to repeat the teachings and to help one another remember those teachings accurately. We have no record of those smaller group meetings; we do know that there two more large councils of Buddhist monks over the next 200 years, and that one of the outcomes of those councils was the emergence of a canon of texts, what is now known as the Pali Canon, because the texts were recorded in a variant of Sanskrit called Pali.

He is saying that one should do good anyway...whether one believes in an afterlife or not....because the benefits apply in either case. He was not 'unsure' himself...and pondering the question as to whether there is an afterlife or not.......

Yes, that's how understood it, the benefits apply whether you believe in the afterlife or not, so a belief in the afterlife is not necessary, of course you then contradict yourself with the next sentence.

To disbelieve the basics or karma and rebirth...and then call oneself a follower of the Buddha...is deluding oneself.

I'm not sure anyone here is saying they disbelive, rather they neither believe nor disbelieve.

I'd be inclined to think if someone judges whether someone is a follower of the Buddha on the basis of their beliefs or lack thereof is missing the main point of Buddhism, perhaps falling into fundamentalism. However everyone has to find their own way along the path so it's not for me to say.

[fabianfred]

Yes, that's how understood it, the benefits apply whether you believe in the afterlife or not, so a belief in the afterlife is not necessary, of course you then contradict yourself with the next sentence.

You are implying that a belief in the afterlife is not necessary.....the buddha never stated that. The basic tenets of buddhism revolve around karma and rebirth....how can you believe in the law of karma if you do not believe in an after life? That is denying the words of the buddha who definately taught such things.

for the OP .... yes...... heavens and hells do exist....and the quickest way to find out is to commit suicide which will undoubtably send you to a rebirth in one of the hel_l realms

[Brucenkhamen]

Yes, that's how understood it, the benefits apply whether you believe in the afterlife or not, so a belief in the afterlife is not necessary, of course you then contradict yourself with the next sentence.

You are implying that a belief in the afterlife is not necessary.....the buddha never stated that. The basic tenets of buddhism revolve around karma and rebirth....how can you believe in the law of karma if you do not believe in an after life? That is denying the words of the buddha who definately taught such things.

Yes I am, the law of Kamma is valid in this life, so whether or not there is an afterlife it doesn't matter because one can see Kamma operate in this life. This is what makes the Buddhas teaching so relevant that one can see it operating here and now rather than as you say have to kill yourself to prove it. Buddhist practice is about being fully awake to the present moment here and now, seeing the law of Kamma unfold here and now, rather wasting time on idle speculation of the impact of your Kamma on the afterlife.

And no, I don't consider Kamma and Rebirth are the basic tenets of Buddhism, these concepts existed in India before the time of the Buddha, they were probably pretty much the assumed in all religion at the time, they were the context in which he gave his teaching rather than the basic tenets.

The basic tenets in my opinion are the 4 Noble Truths, the 3 Characteristics, the Noble eightfold path, and the example of the Buddhas life. These are valid and important no matter what you believe about the other stuff, and if one puts these into practice one can come to understand the rest not from books but from direct observation.

[fabianfred]

OK ... rebirth and karma existed in India before the Buddha's time...as now with Hindu..... but they were incorrect understanding of them.

The Buddha taught rebirth rather than reincarnation by a permanent self..... and the incorrect view of karma was that it was like one's fate and unchangeable.

The whole teachings of the buddha are aimed at helping us to escape from the constant round of rebirth in the various realms of Samsara and achieve the deathless state, Nirvana...... I find this incompatible with a disbelief in the afterlife.

One of the things I find most inspiring about the life of the Buddha was not his last few lives when he completed his perfections, but that he decided to start to train and perfect himself, in order to become a future buddha, all those billions of aeons ago in the distant past. One who decides to become a future Buddha, must make that vow in the presence of a Buddha, and be in a position where they are almost about to cross over from puutuchon to ariyachon. So, giving up the chance of Nirvana they decide to continue the rounds of samsara over countless lives, for the sake of the chance to help other beings.

[Brucenkhamen]

OK ... rebirth and karma existed in India before the Buddha's time...as now with Hindu..... but they were incorrect understanding of them.

The Buddha taught rebirth rather than reincarnation by a permanent self..... and the incorrect view of karma was that it was like one's fate and unchangeable.

Yes, the Buddhas teaching on rebirth rather than reincarnation was different from the mainstream, I'm not sure if it unique though. As for Kamma I'd be surprised if any religious philosophy taught it as fate and unchangeable, (other than in terms of justifying the caste system or similar), it's a later corruption. Even Jesus taught along similar lines when he said to do to others as you'd have them do to you. It's just common sense, every action has reaction, you can't do bad and expect good to come of it.

The whole teachings of the buddha are aimed at helping us to escape from the constant round of rebirth in the various realms of Samsara and achieve the deathless state, Nirvana...... I find this incompatible with a disbelief in the afterlife.

Nobody is disbeliving the afterlife, and rebirth wasn't even mentioned in this thread until you brought it up. The topic is about whether there is a hea\/en and a he//, and I'd be among those who neither believe nor disbelieve in that. Please don't accuse people of disbelieving in the afterlife when the topic hasn't been discussed. Now if you want to talk about rebirth there was a recent thread where it was gone into detail, but if you have insights on whether the descriptions of hea\/ens and he//s in scripture are real or metaphorical that would be useful.

One of the things I find most inspiring about the life of the Buddha was not his last few lives when he completed his perfections, but that he decided to start to train and perfect himself, in order to become a future buddha, all those billions of aeons ago in the distant past. One who decides to become a future Buddha, must make that vow in the presence of a Buddha, and be in a position where they are almost about to cross over from puutuchon to ariyachon. So, giving up the chance of Nirvana they decide to continue the rounds of samsara over countless lives, for the sake of the chance to help other beings.

Well I don't see how you can be inspired by something you can't do, unless you're almost about to cross over and you've met a Buddha and taken a vow and you aren't telling us. The life of the Buddha we know about inspires me because what he did is something I can do in this lifetime, difficult sure, but inspiring yes.

[GENeIsUS]

I am a semi-practicing Buddhist. Been so for more than thirty years. I no longer go to the temple as I have been told by more than one Abbot that if I live a good life and try to follow Buddha's teachings, I don't have to go. Ah, Buddha's or Christ's teachings. Let me digress a moment. BTW I do believe in Hel+l and Heaven.

Have you ever played the childrens game where a group of kids, eight or more form a circle and the first child whispers five or six words in the ear of the first in line and he then whispers it into the next ear and so on? The results after the last child most often doesn't come close to the original. OK, now let's mulitply that by five or six generations of hand-me-down teachings of Christ or Buddha. The teachings as written down were treated thus for many years before being entered into a book or palm leaf. It is my belief that all such teachings should be regarded as guidelines only. NOT as dyed in the wool facts. It is also my belief that any religion is merely a method of making a better person of you.

Now, I am in a dilemma, and would like some help on the question of is there a heaven or a hel-l. I don't think I have done anything so bad to be sent to Hel-l or, have I done anything so good as to send me to Heaven. I guess I'll just have to stay here on this earth! Now, wouldn't that be Hel-l?? 55555

Have a nice day.

[AmeriThai]

Nobody is disbeliving the afterlife, and rebirth wasn't even mentioned in this thread until you brought it up.

I mentioned both "reborn" and "reincarnation" (rebirth) in post #57 (this page), although it was indirect and not really intended as a main point of the subject at hand.

[sabaijai]

Posts containing personal insults have been removed and a member warned. Keep it civil or we'll have to close this one.

[coalminer]

It is also my belief that any religion is merely a method of making a better person of you.

Only true if you change the sentence in:

"It is also my belief that any religion at the root is merely a method of making a better person of you."

I too I'm convinced that all religions are at the basic teaching to be a good person and to do good to other persons.

But the writings on which the religions are based now, are a fantasy of the writers in order to make a lot of money and power and contradict every meaning of that religion.

[Plus]

But the writings on which the religions are based now, are a fantasy of the writers in order to make a lot of money and power and contradict every meaning of that religion.

That's a big assumption. Give them a bit more credit, please.

Also, how would you, or anyone else, know true meaning of religion if not for those writers?

[Brucenkhamen]

Have you ever played the childrens game where a group of kids, eight or more form a circle and the first child whispers five or six words in the ear of the first in line and he then whispers it into the next ear and so on? The results after the last child most often doesn't come close to the original. OK, now let's mulitply that by five or six generations of hand-me-down teachings of Christ or Buddha. The teachings as written down were treated thus for many years before being entered into a book or palm leaf. It is my belief that all such teachings should be regarded as guidelines only. NOT as dyed in the wool facts. It is also my belief that any religion is merely a method of making a better person of you.

Yes, that's the reality of things. Fundamentalist religions like to compensate for that by claiming their scriptures are the infallible word of God, I don't think we have this luxury, nor should we want it.

Now, I am in a dilemma, and would like some help on the question of is there a heaven or a hel-l. I don't think I have done anything so bad to be sent to Hel-l or, have I done anything so good as to send me to Heaven. I guess I'll just have to stay here on this earth! Now, wouldn't that be Hel-l?? 55555

Relax, no matter what Buddhist Hel-l really is one things for sure it's impermanent, as is the case with all conditioned phenomena.

If you wind up in some situation that is He-ll like then you've got the opportunity to practice in that situation and learn from it. I think that's the most important Buddhist lesson on Heaven and He-ll.

[Brucenkhamen]

But the writings on which the religions are based now, are a fantasy of the writers in order to make a lot of money and power and contradict every meaning of that religion.

Don't you think that's overly negative? Sure I know we've all seen corrupt religious people, but there are also a lot of genuine people out there using religion to better their lives and the lives of others.

It's good to be skeptical but don't throw out the baby with the bath water.

[sabaijai]

Have you ever played the childrens game where a group of kids, eight or more form a circle and the first child whispers five or six words in the ear of the first in line and he then whispers it into the next ear and so on? The results after the last child most often doesn't come close to the original. OK, now let's mulitply that by five or six generations of hand-me-down teachings of Christ or Buddha. The teachings as written down were treated thus for many years before being entered into a book or palm leaf. It is my belief that all such teachings should be regarded as guidelines only. NOT as dyed in the wool facts. It is also my belief that any religion is merely a method of making a better person of you.

Yes, that's the reality of things. Fundamentalist religions like to compensate for that by claiming their scriptures are the infallible word of God, I don't think we have this luxury, nor should we want it.

Now, I am in a dilemma, and would like some help on the question of is there a heaven or a hel-l. I don't think I have done anything so bad to be sent to Hel-l or, have I done anything so good as to send me to Heaven. I guess I'll just have to stay here on this earth! Now, wouldn't that be Hel-l?? 55555

Relax, no matter what Buddhist Hel-l really is one things for sure it's impermanent, as is the case with all conditioned phenomena.

If you wind up in some situation that is He-ll like then you've got the opportunity to practice in that situation and learn from it. I think that's the most important Buddhist lesson on Heaven and He-ll.

Coalminer seems to be interested in these concepts only as they correspond with the Judaeo-Christian system. Why the fascination? Animal, human, he_ll or heaven, all states are impermanent, as has been pointed out several times in this thread

[Brucenkhamen]

Coalminer seems to be interested in these concepts only as they correspond with the Judaeo-Christian system. Why the fascination? Animal, human, he_ll or heaven, all states are impermanent, as has been pointed out several times in this thread

Which brings us back to the point IMA_FARANG made at the beginning.., It's not important.

[rockyysdt]

Which brings us back to the point IMA_FARANG made at the beginning.., It's not important.

As a very special teacher of mine once said to me, during my early days of meditation, "It's in the doing that counts".

Practising towards self experience is the way.

Having said that, most of us are still anchored to our egos.

Being ego oriented I'm still drawn towards intellectual understanding of Buddhist scripture.

After reading and contributing to many threads I'm more confused than ever about heaven, hel_l, reincarnation, khamma, nirvana & enlightenment.

It seems, until (if) I attain self experience, I get to pick my interpretation on these matters!

I'll walk with an open mind and not discount anything.

I also think my experience with the whiskey drinking, cigarette smoking monk was meant to be.

He taught me to remain sceptical.

[coalminer]

Coalminer seems to be interested in these concepts only as they correspond with the Judaeo-Christian system. Why the fascination?

Where did I give the assumption that I'm interested in these concepts only if they correspond with the Judaeo-Christian system?

Where did I give the impression that I'm fascinated by this?

I have asked if there exists a hel_l and heaven in Bouddhism or not AS I have seen many temples in Thailand using this theme to attract visitors, I have seen many expositions at The Mall with this theme, I have seen many superstitions in Thailand based on the existence of heaven and hel_l.

This has nothing to do with a Judaeo-Christian system.

Msybe, the best answer was from the poster who said that he gave up asking these kind of questions in this forum.

Animal, human, he_ll or heaven, all states are impermanent, as has been pointed out several times in this thread

Shall I only read, and held as the only valable answers] the answers from people who didn't gave an answer to my question but answerred that "the existence of heaven and hel_l is not important in Bouddhism and I should convert to Bouddhism in order to be enlighted by the mighty one?

Or should I read also the answers from people like Clausewitz and others who gave a proof of what they were saying and proved that heaven and hel_l exists indeed in Bouddhism and they are indeed an important part of the Bouddhist teachings.