Dalai Lama i Norge

[Romeren]

Det er ikke ofte sjansen byr seg å starte den første tråden i en flunkende ny gruppe. Så da gjelder det å slå til!

 

Gratulerer til alle forumvenner!

 

 

Til tema:

 

Dalai Lama kommer til Norge - i følge egne utsagn - som åndelig leder. Hvordan fungerer, eller utøves slikt lederskap innen buddhismen? Primært ved større og dypere innsikt, eller mer ved "læresetninger" og dogmer, om de finnes?

 

Jeg har en oppfatning av buddhister som relativt individuelle, som arbeider med sin egen "enlightment" - selv om det jo finnes klostre og at hele land og samfunn er preget av buddhistisk tenkning og tro.

 

Hva bringer en mann som Dalai Lama til buddhister i Norge?

Endret 7. mai 2014 av Romeren

[Gjest Bruker-95147]

Dalai Lama kommer til Norge - i følge egne utsagn - som åndelig leder. Hvordan fungerer, eller utøves slikt lederskap innen buddhismen? Primært ved større og dypere innsikt, eller mer ved "læresetninger" og dogmer, om de finnes?

 

Ja, er ikke det et godt spørsmål .. Jeg vet sannelig ikke, og det er mest fordi jeg selv har mest peiling på "teravada buddhismen", men ut fra de bøkene av Dalai Lama jeg har lest gjennom, så sier han selv at han kan ikke være en "ekte munk", fordi ansvaret for eget folk i eksil og i Tibet, gjør at han må veksle mellom å være en politiker og kombinere den oppgaven med også å være en troverdig åndelig leder for "Tibetansk Buddhisme"

 

Sånn som det fungerer innenfor teravada, så forholder de seg strengt til det Buddha forordnet, og han sa at etter sin bortgang skulle de ikke ha noen ledere, men at selve læren og de monastiske reglene skulle være overordnet sjef. Så du kan nok tro at det er relativt mye "sirkus" innenfor "sanghaen" (munkefelleskapet) når munker krangler så kjortlene flagrer ..

Teravada er en uavbrutt linje av "lærer/elev" som har holdt seg nå i over 2500 år, og det viser seg at det fungerer uten overhoder. Så, det er en genial lære og ett solid regelverk, etter min mening.

 

 

 

Jeg har en oppfatning av buddhister som relativt individuelle, som arbeider med sin egen "enlightment" - selv om det jo finnes klostre og at hele land og samfunn er preget av buddhistisk tenkning og tro.

 

Buddhister er like sprikende og uoversiktlige som de andre religionene, men opphavet er det samme, og "enlightenment" er "enlightenment", uansett hvordan de ytre omstendigheter er.

 

 

 

Hva bringer en mann som Dalai Lama til buddhister i Norge?

 

Antar at det er det samme som når eks. Paven reiser rundt å "piffer opp lammene sine" Altså, motivere og presisere.

 

btw: gratulerer med å ha tatt møydommen på denne nye forumunderdelen

 

btw2: fant en liten sak angående overstående, og deler

 

 

"Master Ananda, is there any one monk appointed by Master Gotama [with the words], 'He will be your arbitrator after I am gone,' to whom you now turn?"

"No, brahman. There isn't any one monk appointed by the Blessed One [with the words] 'He will be your arbitrator after I am gone,' to whom we now turn."

 

"Then is there any one monk authorized by the Sangha and appointed by a large body of elder monks [with the words], 'He will be our arbitrator after the Blessed One is gone,' to whom you now turn?"

 

"No, brahman. There isn't any one monk authorized by the Sangha and appointed by a large body of elder monks [with the words] 'He will be our arbitrator after the Blessed One is gone,' to whom we now turn."

 

"Being thus without an arbitrator, Master Ananda, what is the reason for your concord?"

 

"It's not the case, brahman, that we're without an arbitrator. We have an arbitrator. The Dhamma is our arbitrator."

 

"Brahman, there is a training rule laid down by the Blessed One a Patimokkha that has been codified. On the uposatha day, all of us who live dependent on a single township gather together in one place. Having gathered together, we invite the one to whom it falls [to recite the Patimokkha]. If, while he is reciting, a monk remembers an offense or transgression, we deal with him in accordance with the Dhamma, in accordance with what has been instructed. We're not the ones who deal with that venerable one. Rather, the Dhamma is what deals with us."

 

"Is there, Master Ananda, any one monk you now honor, respect, revere, & venerate, on whom — honoring & respecting — you live in dependence?"

 

"Yes, brahman, there is a monk we now honor, respect, revere, & venerate, on whom — honoring & respecting — we live in dependence."

 

"Brahman, there are ten inspiring qualities expounded by the Blessed One. In whoever among us those ten qualities are found, we now honor, respect, revere, & venerate him; honoring & respecting him, we live in dependence on him. Which ten?

 

• (1) A bhikkhu is virtuous. He dwells restrained in accordance with the Pātimokkha, consummate in his behaviour and sphere of activity. He trains himself, having undertaken the training rules, seeing danger in the slightest faults.

   

  (2) He has heard, retained, and stored much Dhammawhich are admirable in the beginning, middle, and end.

   

  (3) He is content with robes, food, lodgings, and medicinal requisites.

   

  (4) Attains four jhanas whenever he wants, without any difficulty.

   

  (5) Various supernormal powers.

   

  (6) Divine ear.

   

  (7) Knowledge of others' minds.

   

  (8) Knowledge of previous existences.

   

  (9) Knowledge of passing away and arising of beings.

   

  (10) Knowledge of the destruction of the mental taints (an arahant).”

When this was said, the brahman Vassakara, the Magadhan administrator, turned to General Upananda and said, "What do you think, general? Do these venerable ones honor what should be honored, respect what should be respected, revere what should be revered, venerate what should be venerated? Of course they honor what should be honored, respect what should be respected, revere what should be revered, venerate what should be venerated. For if they did not honor, respect, revere, or venerate a person like this, then what sort of person would they honor, respect, revere, & venerate; on what sort of person, honor & respecting, would they live in dependence?"

 

Amuse yourself with the Buddha's answer to Devadatta's request to lead the Sangha

 

“Bhikkhus, do not envy, Devadatta's gains, honours and fame bring about decline in skilled mental states, not growth, his own hurt and destruction. As a plantain bears fruit to its own hurt and destruction.”

 

The Ven. Devadatta said: “Let The Buddha hand over the Sangha to me. I will lead the Sangha.” The Buddha replied: “I would not

hand over the Sangha even to Sariputta and Moggallana. How then could I, to a miserable spittle eater like you?”

 

- The Book of Descipline V, p263-264 (Vinaya, Culavagga, 7. Sanghabhedaka Khandhaka)

Endret 8. mai 2014 av Bruker-95147

[Romeren]

Antar at det er det samme som når eks. Paven reiser rundt å "piffer opp lammene sine" Altså, motivere og presisere.

I papirugaven av dagens Vårt Land blir han spurt om Shugden gruppen som demonstrerte mot ham:

 

"På Nobelinstituttet onsdag fortalte Dalai Lama at han fra 1951 til ut på 1970-tallet tilbad denne ånden, til tross for at hans forgjenger som Dalai Lama hadde pålagt restriksjoner mot slik tilbedelse.

 

- Det var skammelig at jeg dyrket denne onde ånden, men gradvis merket jeg at dette var galt. Da gikk vi tilbake til de gamle dokumentene og så hvordan allerede den femte Dalai Lama på 1600-tallet anså denne ånden som ond og svært skadelig. Siden har mange tibetanske Lamaer lagt restriksjoner på tilbedelsen, forklarer Dalai Lama.

 

Han forklarer at han ikke har bannlyst eller forbudt noen å tilbe Shugden, men undetsreker at han ikke kan være læremester for folk som følger denne retningen."

 

Hvor sterkt kommer ånder - det må vel da være konkrete "størrelser" eller entiteter - inn i budhismen? Da er det jo fortsatt en form for gudsdyrkelse, og ikke en gudeløs religion?

 

Praktiserer dere i teravada også det?

 

btw2: fant en liten sak angående overstående, og deler

Ingen utpekte etterfølgere, men den som innehar en eller flere

av de 10 kvalitetene er en naturlig etterfølger?

Endret 9. mai 2014 av Romeren

[Gjest Bruker-95147]

 

Han forklarer at han ikke har bannlyst eller forbudt noen å tilbe Shugden, men undetsreker at han ikke kan være læremester for folk som følger denne retningen."

 

Hvor sterkt kommer ånder - det må vel da være konkrete "størrelser" eller entiteter - inn i budhismen? Da er det jo fortsatt en form for gudsdyrkelse, og ikke en gudeløs religion?

 

 

 

Her er en forklaring, hente fra en solid kilde. Litt lang, men godt forklarende, etter min oppfatning.

 

 

 

Buddhism and the God-idea

by

Nyanaponika Thera

© 2004. BuddhaNet edition © 1996.

Quite contradictory views have been expressed in Western literature on the attitude of Buddhism toward the concept of God and gods. From a study of the discourses of the Buddha preserved in the Pali canon, it will be seen that the idea of a personal deity, a creator god conceived to be eternal and omnipotent, is incompatible with the Buddha's teachings. On the other hand, conceptions of an impersonal godhead of any description, such as world-soul, etc., are excluded by the Buddha's teachings on Anatta, non-self or unsubstantiality.

 

In Buddhist literature, the belief in a creator god (issara-nimmana-vada) is frequently mentioned and rejected, along with other causes wrongly adduced to explain the origin of the world; as, for instance, world-soul, time, nature, etc. God-belief, however, is placed in the same category as those morally destructive wrong views which deny the kammic results of action, assume a fortuitous origin of man and nature, or teach absolute determinism. These views are said to be altogether pernicious, having definite bad results due to their effect on ethical conduct.

 

Theism, however, is regarded as a kind of kamma-teaching in so far as it upholds the moral efficacy of actions. Hence a theist who leads a moral life may, like anyone else doing so, expect a favorable rebirth. He may possibly even be reborn in a heavenly world that resembles his own conception of it, though it will not be of eternal duration as he may have expected. If, however, fanaticism induces him to persecute those who do not share his beliefs, this will have grave consequences for his future destiny. For fanatical attitudes, intolerance, and violence against others create unwholesome kamma leading to moral degeneration and to an unhappy rebirth.

 

Although belief in God does not exclude a favorable rebirth, it is a variety of eternalism, a false affirmation of permanence rooted in the craving for existence, and as such an obstacle to final deliverance.

 

Among the fetters (samyojana) that bind to existence, theism is particularly subject to those of personality-belief, attachment to rites and rituals, and desire for fine-material existence or for a "heaven of the sense sphere," as the case may be.

 

As an attempt at explaining the universe, its origin, and man's situation in his world, the God-idea was found entirely unconvincing by the Buddhist thinkers of old. Through the centuries, Buddhist philosophers have formulated detailed arguments refuting the doctrine of a creator god. It should be of interest to compare these with the ways in which Western philosophers have refuted the theological proofs of the existence of God.

 

But for an earnest believer, the God-idea is more than a mere device for explaining external facts like the origin of the world. For him it is an object of faith that can bestow a strong feeling of certainty, not only as to God's existence "somewhere out there," but as to God's consoling presence and closeness to himself. This feeling of certainty requires close scrutiny. Such scrutiny will reveal that in most cases the God-idea is only the devotee's projection of his ideal — generally a noble one — and of his fervent wish and deeply felt need to believe. These projections are largely conditioned by external influences, such as childhood impressions, education, tradition and social environment. Charged with a strong emotional emphasis, brought to life by man's powerful capacity for image-formation, visualization and the creation of myth, they then come to be identified with the images and concepts of whatever religion the devotee follows. In the case of many of the most sincere believers, a searching analysis would show that their "God-experience" has no more specific content than this.

 

Yet the range and significance of God-belief and God-experience are not fully exhausted by the preceding remarks. The lives and writings of the mystics of all great religions bear witness to religious experiences of great intensity, in which considerable changes are effected in the quality of consciousness. Profound absorption in prayer or meditation can bring about a deepening and widening, a brightening and intensifying of consciousness, accompanied by a transporting feeling of rapture and bliss. The contrast between these states and normal conscious awareness is so great that the mystic believes his experience to be manifestations of the divine; and given the contrast, this assumption is quite understandable. Mystical experiences are also characterized by a marked reduction or temporary exclusion of the multiplicity of sense-perceptions and restless thoughts, and this relative unification of mind is then interpreted as a union or communion with the One God. All these deeply moving impressions and the first spontaneous interpretations the mystic subsequently identifies with his particular theology. It is interesting to note, however, that the attempts of most great Western mystics to relate their mystical experiences to the official dogmas of their respective churches often resulted in teachings which were often looked upon askance by the orthodox, if not considered downright heretical.

 

The psychological facts underlying those religious experiences are accepted by the Buddhist and well-known to him; but he carefully distinguishes the experiences themselves from the theological interpretations imposed upon them. After rising from deep meditative absorption (jhana), the Buddhist meditator is advised to view the physical and mental factors constituting his experience in the light of the three characteristics of all conditioned existence: impermanency, liability to suffering, and absence of an abiding ego or eternal substance. This is done primarily in order to utilize the meditative purity and strength of consciousness for the highest purpose: liberating insight. But this procedure also has a very important side-effect which concerns us here: the meditator will not be overwhelmed by any uncontrolled emotions and thoughts evoked by his singular experience, and will thus be able to avoid interpretations of that experience not warranted by the facts.

 

Hence a Buddhist meditator, while benefiting by the refinement of consciousness he has achieved, will be able to see these meditative experiences for what they are; and he will further know that they are without any abiding substance that could be attributed to a deity manifesting itself to the mind. Therefore, the Buddhist's conclusion must be that the highest mystic states do not provide evidence for the existence of a personal God or an impersonal godhead.

 

Buddhism has sometimes been called an atheistic teaching, either in an approving sense by freethinkers and rationalists, or in a derogatory sense by people of theistic persuasion. Only in one way can Buddhism be described as atheistic, namely, in so far as it denies the existence of an eternal, omnipotent God or godhead who is the creator and ordainer of the world. The word "atheism," however, like the word "godless," frequently carries a number of disparaging overtones or implications, which in no way apply to the Buddha's teaching.

 

Those who use the word "atheism" often associate it with a materialistic doctrine that knows nothing higher than this world of the senses and the slight happiness it can bestow. Buddhism is nothing of that sort. In this respect it agrees with the teachings of other religions, that true lasting happiness cannot be found in this world; nor, the Buddha adds, can it be found on any higher plane of existence, conceived as a heavenly or divine world, since all planes of existence are impermanent and thus incapable of giving lasting bliss. The spiritual values advocated by Buddhism are directed, not towards a new life in some higher world, but towards a state utterly transcending the world, namely, Nibbana. In making this statement, however, we must point out that Buddhist spiritual values do not draw an absolute separation between the beyond and the here and now. They have firm roots in the world itself for they aim at the highest realization in this present existence. Along with such spiritual aspirations, Buddhism encourages earnest endeavor to make this world a better place to live in.

 

The materialistic philosophy of annihilationism (ucchedavada) is emphatically rejected by the Buddha as a false doctrine. The doctrine of kamma is sufficient to prove that Buddhism does not teach annihilation after death. It accepts survival, not of an eternal soul, but of a mental process subject to renewed becoming; thus it teaches rebirth without transmigration. Again, the Buddha's teaching is not a nihilism that gives suffering humanity no better hope than a final cold nothingness. On the contrary, it is a teaching of salvation (niyyanika-dhamma) or deliverance (vimutti) which attributes to man the faculty to realize by his own efforts the highest goal, Nibbana, the ultimate cessation of suffering and the final eradication of greed, hatred and delusion. Nibbana is far from being the blank zero of annihilation; yet it also cannot be identified with any form of God-idea, as it is neither the origin nor the immanent ground or essence of the world.

 

Buddhism is not an enemy of religion as atheism is believed to be. Buddhism, indeed, is the enemy of none. A Buddhist will recognize and appreciate whatever ethical, spiritual and cultural values have been created by God-belief in its long and checkered history. We cannot, however, close our eyes to the fact that the God-concept has served too often as a cloak for man's will to power, and the reckless and cruel use of that power, thus adding considerably to the ample measure of misery in this world supposed to be an all-loving God's creation. For centuries free thought, free research and the expression of dissident views were obstructed and stifled in the name of service to God. And alas, these and other negative consequences are not yet entirely things of the past.

 

The word "atheism" also carries the innuendo of an attitude countenancing moral laxity, or a belief that man-made ethics, having no divine sanction, rest on shaky foundations. For Buddhism, however, the basic moral law is inherent in life itself. It is a special case of the law of cause and effect, needing neither a divine law-giver nor depending upon the fluctuating human conceptions of socially conditioned minor moralities and conventions. For an increasing section of humanity, the belief in God is breaking down rapidly, as well as the accustomed motivations for moral conduct. This shows the risk of basing moral postulates on divine commandments, when their alleged source rapidly loses credence and authority. There is a need for an autonomous foundation for ethics, one that has deeper roots than a social contract and is capable of protecting the security of the individual and of human institutions. Buddhism offers such a foundation for ethics.

 

Buddhism does not deny that there are in the universe planes of existence and levels of consciousness which in some ways may be superior to our terrestrial world and to average human consciousness. To deny this would indeed be provincial in this age of space travel. Bertrand Russell rightly says: "It is improbable that the universe contains nothing better than ourselves."

 

Yet, according to Buddhist teachings, such higher planes of existence, like our familiar world, are subject to the law of impermanence and change. The inhabitants of such worlds may well be, in different degrees, more powerful than human beings, happier and longer-lived. Whether we call those superior beings gods, deities, devas or angels is of little importance, since it is improbable that they call themselves by any of those names. They are inhabitants of this universe, fellow-wanderers in this round of existence; and though more powerful, they need not be wiser than man. Further, it need not be denied that such worlds and such beings may have their lord and ruler. In all probability they do. But like any human ruler, a divine ruler too might be inclined to misjudge his own status and power, until a greater one comes along and points out to him his error, as our texts report of the Buddha.

 

These, however, are largely matters beyond the range and concern of average human experience. They have been mentioned here chiefly for the purpose of defining the Buddhist position, and not to serve as a topic of speculation and argument. Such involvement can only divert attention and effort from what ought to be our principal object: the overcoming of greed, hatred and delusion where they are found in the here and now.

 

An ancient verse ascribed to the Buddha in the Questions of King Milinda says:

 

Not far from here do you need to look!

Highest existence — what can it avail?

Here in this present aggregate,

In your own body overcome the world!

 

 

Men så må vi legge til at hver og en praktiserende buddhist, står fritt til å undersøke "åndeverden" (Jhana), og det er nok relativt mange som lar seg bedåre helt av "bliss" og dermed tror de har oppnådd "nibbana". Saken slik jeg har undersøkt den, er at det er lett å bli sittende fast i den forståelsen og rett og slett blir avhengig av "bliss", trekker seg helt unna konvensjonell verden, og blir sittende der ..

 

 

 

Praktiserer dere i teravada også det?

 

Jeg vet ikke, men antar at teravada følgerne er like utsatte for å lure seg selv som de andre "buddhistiske sektene" eller "retningene". Slik jeg har forstått det, og også følger, så klarer vi oss med: "the four noble truths", og "the noble eight fold path". Men man har kun seg selv å stole på, det nytter ikke å skylde på en lærer, eller på en spesiell retning.

 

 

 

Ingen utpekte etterfølgere, men den som innehar en eller flere

av de 10 kvalitetene er en naturlig etterfølger?

 

Kanskje .. Når du ser på den listen, så er det nok sånn at enkelte spesielle lærere også har tilegnet seg noen av de faktorene, men hvis det skulle dukke opp en som har alle, vel da betyr det vel at det har åpenbart seg en ny Buddha i denne tid . Selv følger jeg en "linage" av lærere og disipler, som brøt ut av den mer "skolerte delen av thai-teravada" for 150 år siden, og disse lærerne hadde visstnok endel av disse faktorene i seg, og har dermed blitt anerkjent også av oss her i vesten. Og flere hundre sanghaer og retreat-centers er opprettet i deres ånd, i ulike land på vår halvkule. Den siste jeg har hørt om er en norsk sangha, som planlegges lagt ett sted her på østlandet.

[Romeren]

 

Han forklarer at han ikke har bannlyst eller forbudt noen å tilbe Shugden, men understreker at han ikke kan være læremester for folk som følger denne retningen."

 

Hvor sterkt kommer ånder - det må vel da være konkrete "størrelser" eller entiteter - inn i budhismen? Da er det jo fortsatt en form for gudsdyrkelse, og ikke en gudeløs religion?

Her er en forklaring, hente fra en solid kilde. Litt lang, men godt forklarende, etter min oppfatning.

(..)

 

Om jeg forstår det rett sies det at det kan være flere lag av virkelighet, uten dermed å kalle det for himmel, eller tilsvarende. Men det finnes ingen Gud, eller skaper-gud, selv om man anerkjenner religiøs erfaring utenfor buddhismen?

Men hva er da denne Shugden, eller hva var det da Dalai Lama tilba den gang? Hva er en ånd, slik buddhistene forstår det?

Du sier:

 

Men så må vi legge til at hver og en praktiserende buddhist, står fritt til å undersøke "åndeverden" (Jhana), og det er nok relativt mange som lar seg bedåre helt av "bliss" og dermed tror de har oppnådd "nibbana". Saken slik jeg har undersøkt den, er at det er lett å bli sittende fast i den forståelsen og rett og slett blir avhengig av "bliss", trekker seg helt unna konvensjonell verden, og blir sittende der ..

Åndeverden eller "åndeverden"? Den finnes egentlig ikke?

Endret 11. mai 2014 av Romeren

[Gjest Bruker-95147]

 

Åndeverden eller "åndeverden"? Den finnes egentlig ikke?

 

 

Spør du meg. så må jeg si; vet ikke .. Fordi jeg befatter meg ikke direkte med, eller søker etter ånder ..

Man hører så klart mange erfaringer og beskrivelser, men det ligger på et annet plan enn det jeg konkret jobber med for tiden. Jeg følger anbefalinger fra erfarne munker, som kaller sånt for "big toys" eller "small toys" - på ingen måte skadelig eller "feil" om du vil, men rett og slett sånt som egentlig ikke betyr noe særlig for å nå målet, siden det ligger bakenfor "alt dette"

Dessuten er det sånn at man følger sin egen vei, og veien må gåes uten forventinger eller noen former for kontroll av det kondisjonerte sinnet, og det betyr at veien bestemmer når jeg får se, ikke jeg altså. "enlightenment" handler ikke om å oppnå noe personlig, fordi personen i seg selv er selve problemet, så da ligger oppnåelsen på ett langt mer sublimt psykisk/psykologisk plan

 

Her er forøvrig en liten innføring i disse sublime planene:

 

The Thirty-one Planes of Existence

© 2005

Scattered throughout the suttas are references to as many as thirty-one distinct "planes" or "realms" of existence into which beings can be reborn during their long wandering through samsara. These range from the extraordinarily grim and painful hell realms all the way up to the most exquisitely refined and blissful heaven realms. Existence in every realm is temporary; in Buddhist cosmology there is no eternal heaven or hell. Beings are born into a particular realm according to their past kamma. When they pass away, they take rebirth once again elsewhere according to the quality of their kamma: wholesome actions bring about a favorable rebirth, while unwholesome actions lead to an unfavorable one. And so the wearisome cycle continues.

The realms of existence are customarily divided into three distinct "worlds" (loka), listed here in descending order of refinement:

• The Immaterial World (arupa-loka). Consists of four realms that are accessible to those who pass away while meditating in the formless jhanas.
• The Fine-Material World (rupa-loka). Consists of sixteen realms whose inhabitants (thedevas) experience extremely refined degrees of mental pleasure. These realms are accessible to those who have attained at least some level of jhana and who have thereby managed to (temporarily) suppress hatred and ill-will. They are said to possess extremely refined bodies of pure light. The highest of these realms, the Pure Abodes, are accessible only to those who have attained to "non-returning," the third stage of Awakening. The Fine-Material World and the Immaterial World together constitute the "heavens" (sagga).
• The Sensuous World (kama-loka). Consists of eleven realms in which experience — both pleasurable and not — is dominated by the five senses. Seven of these realms are favorable destinations, and include our own human realm as well as several realms occupied by devas. The lowest realms are the four "bad" destinations, which include the animal and hell realms.

The information on this page was assembled from a variety of sources. In the interests of economizing space I have not attributed each fact to its respective source.

 

Og hva angår denne tibetanske "guden", så er jeg nok like blank som deg på det området.

Endret 11. mai 2014 av Bruker-95147

[Gjest Bruker-95147]

 

 

I. The Immaterial World (arupa-loka) Realm Comments Cause of rebirth here (31) Neither-perception-nor-non-perception(nevasaññanasaññayatanupaga deva) The inhabitants of these realms are possessed entirely of mind. Having no physical body, they are unable to hear Dhamma teachings. Fourth formless jhana (30) Nothingness(akiñcaññayatanupaga deva) Third formless jhana (29) Infinite Consciousness(viññanañcayatanupaga deva) Second formless jhana (28) Infinite Space(akasanañcayatanupaga deva) First formless jhana II. The Fine-Material World (rupa-loka) Realm Comments Cause of rebirth here (27) Peerless devas (akanittha deva) These are the five Pure Abodes(suddhavasa), which are accessible only to non-returners (anagami) andarahants. Beings who become non-returners in other planes are reborn here, where they attain arahantship.

Among its inhabitants is Brahma Sahampati, who begs the Buddha to teach Dhamma to the world (SN 6.1).

Fourth jhana. (See, e.g., AN 4.123.)

(26) Clear-sighted devas (sudassi deva) (25) Beautiful devas (sudassa deva) (24) Untroubled devas (atappa deva) (23) Devas not Falling Away (aviha deva) (22) Unconscious beings(asaññasatta) Only body is present; no mind. (21) Very Fruitful devas (vehapphala deva) Beings in these planes enjoy varying degrees of jhanic bliss. (20) Devas of Refulgent Glory(subhakinna deva)

Third jhana(highest degree). (See, e.g., AN 4.123.)

(19) Devas of Unbounded Glory(appamanasubha deva) Third jhana(medium degree) (18) Devas of Limited Glory(parittasubha deva) Third jhana (minor degree) (17) Devas of Streaming Radiance(abhassara deva)

Second jhana(highest degree). (See, e.g., AN 4.123.)

(16) Devas of Unbounded Radiance(appamanabha deva) Second jhana(medium degree) (15) Devas of Limited Radiance(parittabha deva) Second jhana(minor degree) (14) Great Brahmas (Maha brahma) One of this realm's most famous inhabitants is the Great Brahma, a deity whose delusion leads him to regard himself as the all-powerful, all-seeing creator of the universe (DN 11). First jhana(highest degree) (13) Ministers of Brahma (brahma-purohita deva) Beings in these planes enjoy varying degrees of jhanic bliss. First jhana(medium degree) (12) Retinue of Brahma (brahma-parisajja deva)

First jhana (minor degree). (See, e.g., AN 4.123.)

III. The Sensuous World (kama-loka) HAPPY DESTINATIONS (SUGATI) Realm Comments Cause of rebirth here (11) Devas Wielding Power over the Creation of Others (paranimmita-vasavatti deva) These devas enjoy sense pleasures created by others for them. Mara, the personification of delusion and desire, lives here. · Ten wholesome actions (MN 41)

· Generosity

· The development of virtue andwisdom (AN 10.177)

(10) Devas Delighting in Creation(nimmanarati deva) These devas delight in the sense objects of their own creation. (9) Contented devas (tusita deva) A realm of pure delight and gaiety. Bodhisattas abide here prior to their final human birth. This is where the bodhisatta Maitreya (Metteya), the next Buddha, is said to dwell. (8) Yama devas (yama deva) These devas live in the air, free of all difficulties. (7) The Thirty-three Gods (tavatimsa deva) Sakka, a devotee of the Buddha, presides over this realm. Many devas dwelling here live in mansions in the air. (6) Devas of the Four Great Kings(catumaharajika deva) Home of the gandhabbas, the celestial musicians, and the yakkhas, tree spirits of varying degrees of ethical purity. The latter are analogous to the goblins, trolls, and fairies of Western fairy tales. (5) Human beings (manussa loka)

You are here (for now).

Rebirth as a human being is extraordinarily rare (SN 56.48). It is also extraordinarily precious, as its unique balance of pleasure and pain (SN 35.135) facilitates the development of virtue and wisdom to the degree necessary to set one free from the entire cycle of rebirths.

· The development of virtue andwisdom (AN 10.177)

· The attainment of stream-entry(sotapatti)guarantees that all future rebirths will be in the human or higher realms.

STATES OF DEPRIVATION (APAYA) Realm Comments Cause of rebirth here (4) Asuras (asura) The demons — "titans" — that dwell here are engaged in relentless conflict with each other. · Ten unwholesome actions (MN 41) (3) Hungry Shades/Ghosts(peta loka) Ghosts and unhappy spirits wander hopelessly about this realm, searching in vain for sensual fulfillment.

Read Ajaan Lee's colorful description of this realm.

· Ten unwholesome actions (MN 41)

· Lack of virtue, holding to wrong views (AN 10.177)

(2) Animals(tiracchana yoni) This realm includes all the non-human forms of life that are visible to us under ordinary circumstances: animals, insects, fish, birds, worms, etc. · Ten unwholesome actions (MN 41)

· Lack of virtue, holding to wrong views. If one is generous to monks and nuns, however, one may be reborn as an "ornamented" animal (i.e., a bird with bright plumage; a horse with attractive markings, etc.;AN 10.177).

· Behaving like an animal (MN 57)

(1) Hell (niraya) These are realms of unimaginable suffering and anguish (described in graphic detail in MN 129 and MN 130). Should not be confused with theeternal hell found in other religious traditions, since one's time here is — as it is in every realm — temporary. · Ten unwholesome actions (MN 41)

· Lack of virtue, holding to wrong views (AN 10.177)

· Murdering your parents, murdering an arahant, injuring the Buddha, or creating a schism in the Sangha (AN 5.129)

· Being quarrelsome and annoying to others (Snp II.6)