[oranowdenda]

I have taken a post written by FBM on a Richard Dawkins thread written 6 months ago, and rlp7786's recent response to that particular post, to form a new discussion topic.

...don't look to a 2,500-yr-old practical philosophy about how best to liberate one's mind - however brilliant and still relevant in its own scope - for a cosmology. Look to science for cosmology. Science doesn't claim to have the answer to liberation; Buddhists shouldn't makes claims on the structure and origins of the universe.

I only mention this because of a few Buddhist "leaders", whom I won't name, who have made statements on cosmology based on their readings of the Pali canon. Doing so only sets one up for the same criticism that theists are now experiencing. I don't see any benefit from credulity.

and the response:

Perhaps you could clarify what you are talking about in regards to Buddhist cosmology? Are some taking it to be literal? It was always my understanding that most of it was meant to be as symbolic of mental states beings can find themselves in both in physical life and beyond

Comments anyone?

[rXpX]

As I understand it, briefly:

The point of the cosmology in the Nikayas is to show how the extant Vedic cosmology is affected by the reworking of the term "kamma". The heavily ritualized atmosphere of brahmin sacrifice was built on an understanding of ritual action (karma) within a particular cosmological environment. More importantly, a particular soteriological environment was thoroughly integrated into this cosmology such that a change in the definition of kamma was a blow to the entire structure.

Therefore, in any discourse where a cosmology is being discussed, it is being directed at that structure of the audience's view in order to ethicize it. I think it's very likely that this worldview, and the ritualized aspects of its soteriology in particular, are at least part of what is referred to by "the fetter of clinging to rites and rituals".

I think making a case for an ethic which is inherent in the world is the point, but when 'the world' is understood from the perspective of the Suttas there is no need to rework any particular cosmology in order to account for kamma = intention. If the Buddha's peers had understood another sort of cosmology, for example Norse, I feel he would still have taught intention as the foundation of ethics (per the Dhamma) yet draw on altogether different contextual examples.

Thus, that intention matters in the grand scheme of things is the point, rather than any particular view about the details of one or another grand scheme.

[Misebeita]

hi

my opinion is rlp7786's choice of explanation as 'mental states' is a sufficient & appropriate explanation

one of the titles of the Buddha, chanted everyday by millions of Buddhists, is 'lokavidhu', namely, 'knower of the worlds'

the 'worlds' (hell, hungry ghost, animal, heavenly, human, etc) represent the results of karma and are thus indispensable teachings

such teachings are essentially practical

they have been taught by most Buddhist teachers, regardless of the explanation (here-&-now vs post-mortem) of those teachers

Pali Chanting has existed for obviously a long time and is designed to offer essential understanding for the serious student

Pali Chanting does not contain superfluous content

the definition of the Buddha, below, is a stock phrase in the Nikayas and, without contention, a basis of faith in Buddhism

kind regards




Such fame had spread about that good Gotama. That Blessed One is perfect, rightfully enlightened, endowed with knowledge and conduct, well gone, knows the worlds, is the incomparable tamer of those to be tamed, Teacher of gods and men, enlightened and blessed. He declares to this world of gods and men, together with its Màras, Brahmàs, recluses and Brahmins, a Teaching by himself known and realized. It is good at the beginning, in the middle and the end and it states the complete and pure holy life. It is good to see such perfect ones.

MN 91
(LEADER):

Handa mayaṃ buddhābhithutiṃ karoma se:

Now let us give high praise to the Awakened One:

(ALL):

[Yo so tathāgato] arahaṃ sammā-sambuddho,

He who has attained the Truth, the Worthy One, Rightly Self-awakened,

Vijjā-caraṇa-sampanno sugato lokavidū,

consummate in knowledge & conduct, one who has gone the good way, knower of the worlds,

Anuttaro purisa-damma-sārathi satthā deva-manussānaṃ buddho bhagavā;

unexcelled trainer of those who can be taught, teacher of human & divine beings; awakened; blessed;

Yo imaṃ lokaṃ sadevakaṃ samārakaṃ sabrahmakaṃ,
Sassamaṇa-brāhmaṇiṃ pajaṃ sadeva-manussaṃ sayaṃ abhiññā sacchikatvā pavedesi.

who made known — having realized it through direct knowledge — this world with its devas, māras & brahmas, its generations with their contemplatives & priests, their rulers & common people;

Yo dhammaṃ desesi ādi-kalyāṇaṃ majjhe-kalyāṇaṃ pariyosāna-kalyāṇaṃ;

who explained the Dhamma fine in the beginning, fine in the middle, fine in the end;

Sātthaṃ sabyañjanaṃ kevala-paripuṇṇaṃ parisuddhaṃ brahma-cariyaṃ pakāsesi.

who expounded the holy life both in its particulars & in its essence, entirely complete, surpassingly pure:

Tam-ahaṃ bhagavantaṃ abhipūjayāmi,
Tam-ahaṃ bhagavantaṃ sirasā namāmi.

I worship most highly that Blessed One,
To that Blessed One I bow my head down.

(BOW DOWN)



Pali Chanting

[K0aM7urg]

Hey Aloka, thanks for taking the time to turn this into a thread for me. I guess like I said before I always thought the Buddhist cosmology only applied to mental states here and now and to possible afterlife states (not literal but figurative) after ones physical body has died.

[drugimpotence]

many Buddhists regard the 'worlds' as literal. thus the meaning is subject to personal interpretation

but to hold they do not exist goes against (blind) faith, on one hand, and also goes against actual experience, on the other hand

regards

[leijggigf]

Hi, rlp7786.

I think I was referring to the fact that some schools or teachers teach that places like the deva realms, the Buddhist heavens and hells, a Pure Land, land of the nagas, etc, are real places somewhere out in the universe, or perhaps another dimension.

I think most Western-educated Buddhists take them metaphorically, as you seem to, but there are a lot of people here in Asia, at least, who take that sort of thing literally. Some traditions base the authenticity of the Mahayana sutras on the claim that there is a place called "the realm of the nagas" in another dimension (nagas are supernatural beings).

Beliefs of Mahāyāna Buddhists

Some traditional accounts of the transmission of the Mahāyāna sutras claims that many parts were actually written down at the time of the Buddha and stored for five hundred years in the realm of the nāgas (serpent-like supernatural beings who dwell in another plane of being). The reason given for the late disclosure of the Mahāyāna teachings is that most people were initially unable to understand the Mahāyāna sutras at the time of the Buddha (500 BCE) and suitable recipients for these teachings had still to arise amongst humankind.[19] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahayana_sutras

Anyway, some purists and/or literalists discuss stories like this seriously, to the point of saying that one can't really be a Buddhist if one doesn't believe in all that stuff. I disagree, of course.

[ZZtop]

Oh, I believe the different realms might be real. Ive read alot about near death experiences and even though they tend to be viewed through a persons personal belief system, I see the different realms in them, and I choose to believe what these people are seeing is real, not just a hallucination of a dieing brain, but I digress on that last point as it is off topic. What I dont take as literal is the cosmology of how these realms are situated in our universe, as the way it is described, if taken literally, is in direct conflict with our current scientific knowledge. I also take the kalpa year-numbers as figuratively relating long periods of time rather than exact time periods.

My opinion as to the realms is that in life, ones state of mind eventually comes to dominate one state of being more than another. When one dies, the afterlife and rebirth experience one has fits with the state of being one has made for oneself in life. And beings collect in realms according to their type/state. A birds of a feather flock together type thing.

[Caluabdum]

You may find this work of interest, rlp7786 - " Teacher of the Devas " by Susan Elbaum Jootla, able to be read here
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/a.../wheel414.html
... it concludes ... " What the Buddha taught deities, he taught people; what he taught people, he taught devas and brahmas: just the universal fact of suffering, and the way to the cessation of suffering — morality, concentration, and wisdom. "

[Kimeoffessyr]

Interpreting Buddhist 'Cosmology' as a representation of mental states is fine as far as I'm concerned - and has been affirmed as such by a couple of teachers I've spoken to about it offline.

In general thinking about different 'realms' as real places somewhere I might go to in the future or have been in the past, is speculative - and irrelevant to my life in the here and now.

Buddha said :

"Let one not trace back the past
Or yearn for the future-yet-to-come.
That which is past is left behind
Unattained is the "yet-to-come."

(MN 131)

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipit....131.nana.html

[Dwnijzhd]

Interpreting Buddhist 'Cosmology' as a representation of mental states is fine as far as I'm concerned - and has been affirmed as such by a couple of teachers I've spoken to about it offline.

In general thinking about different 'realms' as real places somewhere I might go to in the future or have been in the past, is speculative - and irrelevant to my life in the here and now.

Yes. To imagine those literal places as real is about the deep need -human nature- to endure. Not to lose the bonds to what could be a better future instead of a peaceful mind abiding in the here and now.

It is all about this sort of existential angst against the finite nature of mankind.

When mind is serene, quiet, still, such ideas fade away as the mist after the dawn.

[gusunsuth]

Yes, we know what we know ... and we live here and now

[seicslybearee]

Not really realting to Buddhist cosmolgy but RLP's mention of near death experience made me think that perhaps an experience in my life might be relevant. Not going into the full whys and wherefores I had a self inflicted overdose of very powerful tranquilisers, I know from someone who was in the ambulance with me that the paramedics had to get my heart going again a couple of times on the way to accident and emergency.

I spent a good five or six hours under the resucitation team in A+E and have been told I died a couple of times while I was in there, spent the next 24 hours in an ICU and about two days longer in a general medical ward as I was showing signs of brain damage (can't remember the medical term for it but in head I was speaking clearly what I wanted to say but it was just coming out as a nonsensical word salad - this passed after a few hours).

I should point out that for a good portion of my life I was very interested in Pagan mysticism and Shamanic practice (I took a fair amount of hallucinogenic mushrooms and had a lot of classic Shamanic experiences - though I speculate that this may have been heavily influenced by a lot of the literature I was reading).

Anyway this is the only memory I have from while I was out of it - I found myself on a stone staircase that free standing in space, I began to climb upwards and when I reached the top I found myself on a plain with a large stone circle made of dolmen arches, inside the circle were figures from Celtic myth - Gods and Heroes waiting to welcome me). I think they shocked my heart then as I seemed to suddenly drop back. After that everything was black.

This kind of relates to RLP's statement that these things are seen through the lens of ones spiritual tradition, I spoke to an acquaintance who had flatlined after a serious car accident who had no spiritual beliefs, he told me all he could remember was that he felt a profound sense of peace.

One thing however I do not discount is that this was some kind of trick my dying brain played on me to reassure me.

I did however feel a very profound sense of calm and tranquility for several days after I came out of hospital. I wondered if it was an effect of the tranquilisers but taking a look at the plasma half life of the drug it would have been metabolised fully a long time before that.

But as several others have said this seems irrelevant to me now. In meditation however briefly to feel a respite from the turmoil of the monkey mind is a wonderful experience. All that matters to me these days is to try and wake up to the here and now.

Right back to your scheduled programme.

Edit: I should point out that I am in no way advocating the use of drugs in my post I've known many people who have been damaged seriously mentally and physically by drugs (including permanent psychosis beyond psychiatric treatment and death). As I said on another Buddhist board I have no need for devas, ascended masters or mushroom spirits to change my conciousness - I have a human life and have been fortunate enough to encounter the skilfull means of the Buddha - that is all I need.

[jarsbars]

I have no need for devas, ascended masters or mushroom spirits to change my conciousness - I have a human life and have been fortunate enough to encounter the skilfull means of the Buddha - that is all I need.

Well said !


I found some comments about Buddhist cosmology in an article from a few years ago by Ajahn Amaro. Here's a small excerpt:



"Buddhist cosmology and the stories of the suttas always have a historical, a mythical and a psychological element to them.

When we talk about the Buddha under the bodhi tree, we sometimes wonder, "Was it actually that tree? Are we sure that he really sat beside the river Nerañjara near Bodhgaya? How can anyone know it was actually there?" The story goes that perhaps the Buddha did sit under a tree, or a Nepalese prince sat under a tree, and something happened (or stopped happening) somewhere in India a couple of thousand years or so ago.

In other words, there are both historical and mythological aspects to the story.

But the most crucial element is how this maps onto our own psychology.

How does this symbolize our experience?"

http://archive.thebuddhadharma.com/i...jahnamaro.html

.

[qd0vhq4f]

Well said !

Yes.

I found some comments about Buddhist cosmology in an article from a few years ago by Ajahn Amaro. Here's a small excerpt: Thanks Aloka,

The article is full of insight about meditation skills.

From it, this quote can adress the issue pretty well:

[...] shortly before his enlightenment, Anuruddha came to Sariputta and said, "With the divine eye purified and perfected I can see the entire 10,000-fold universal system. My meditation is firmly established; my mindfulness is steady as a rock. I have unremitting energy, and the body is totally relaxed and calm. And yet still my heart is not free from the outflows and confusions.

What am I getting wrong?"

Sariputta replied, "Friend, your ability to see into the 10,000-fold universal system is connected to your conceit.

Your persistent energy, your sharp mindfulness, your physical calm and your one-pointedness of mind have to do with your restlessness.

And the fact that you still have not released the heart from the outflows and defilements is tied up with your anxiety.

[Pinkman]

Just dipping into the waters on this topic with my superstition Mahayana view. I am reminded of something Gendun Chophel (the infamous "mad monk" who was active in the early to mid 20th century in Tibet) said regarding superstition.

He said (and I paraphrase here liberally as I don't have and can't find the quote) "If the Buddha were Tibetan you can be sure that he would always be depicted in heavy boots and coat and with heavy turqoise and silver jewelry and instead of auspicious cows in need of no milking there would be wish fulfilling yaks".

The fact that when we close our eyes and imagine "Buddha" we generate this exotic looking Indian/Nepalese dude with funny hair is purely a cultural artifact.

This can easily be generalized to cosmology, and, of course it was ALSO the same Genden Chophel who told a very high lama on his way to China, who believed that the earth was flat that "not even a dog will receive you if you hold to such views".

So, it's no stretch at all to say that, were the Buddha born in, say, New Jersey 35 years ago and teaching now he'd certainly not be spending (wasting) time describing the arrangement of realms, heavens, nor would he be discussing the various realms in the same terms, nor would nagas be found slithering on a stash of liberative teachings. His presentation would be relevant to people living in New Jersey in 2011; it would address their concerns, their anxieties, their needs, the possiblity of ultimate happiness for them.

[Shipsyspeepay]

It's no stretch at all to say that, were the Buddha born in, say, New Jersey 35 years ago and teaching now he'd certainly not be spending (wasting) time describing the arrangement of realms, heavens, nor would he be discussing the various realms in the same terms, nor would nagas be found slithering on a stash of liberative teachings. His presentation would be relevant to people living in New Jersey in 2011; it would address their concerns, their anxieties, their needs, the possiblity of ultimate happiness for them.

Well said!

[pokerbonuscod]

Tijampel,

If I have understand your last post let me issue this question. If not, let me know it.

Isn't that a kind of needed "cultural dressing" in terms of mundane human nature?

Personally I do not have a contemporary or any other kind of imagine of Buddha. When I read a sutta the only thing is that Buddha is speaking that sutta and that is all. No need to go further.

I have not found any problem at following and practicing the early teachings in this "post modern" civilization context.

Furthermore, they are devoid of any cultural dressing that should be "modernized" or updated.

That has happend with the traditions endless struggle of the "such is this" and "such is that".

You can ignore that and go to the source.

So, I haven't found that problem. I haven't found the need to bring "into context" his deliberative instructions.

As an example, in Mexico, there are at least a thousand different Christs from dark skinned ones in areas of high historical African immigration to some very European "look" in some places where we can find communities with an Italian and French descent backgrounds.

All them are nothing more than just needed cultural superstitious artifacts. The real doctrine of Christ is not known. What makes this different "Christs" fascinating and charming is all the superstition and supernatural believes around them.

The real meaning of Christ is completely lost for the masses.

Then, isn't the removal of such custom given to the image of Buddha, in dependence of the superstitious believes of many cultures along historical time, a core aspect, so to get at the root of the deliberative early teachings?

The Dhamma spoken by the historical Buddha is timeless. It was not a by product of culture but a penetration of the true nature of things, including "human nature" which precisely as its highest defilement, there are found those cultural atavisms.

But anyway, at the very end of this discussion, everybody is in its own right to hold the believe that best comforts the mind.

[ordercigsnick]

You can ignore that and go to the source.

But Kaarine my friend, the cosmological stuff is found in the source.

[TamreuddyRada]

At the source? Where? In the Khandha doctrine? At the Simsapa Sutta? At the Four Noble Truths? The Eightfold Noble Path?

At the Right View? At the Anapanasati Sutta?

Remember I am still new at the early teachings... so maybe I am missing something occult.

[mirvokrug]

Well, in MN 130 for instance... Or DN 27, the Aggañña Sutta...