Also, how would arupa loka reconcile with all the teachings that namarupa is together, and with teaching of Dependent origination? What happened to rupa as link in DO in arupa loka?
And the whole arupa loka thing seems to be very far fetched. How to distinguish one "being" from another considering that there is no spatial location and that mental states are very similar? How can we know that these beings even exist?Thus, Ananda, from name-and-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness. From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-and-form. From name-and-form as a requisite condition comes contact...
This is the extent to which there is birth, aging, death, passing away, and re-arising. This is the extent to which there are means of designation, expression, and delineation. This is the extent to which the sphere of discernment extends, the extent to which the cycle revolves for the manifesting (discernibility) of this world — i.e., name-and-form together with consciousness. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
Of course one can say "meditate and see for yourself". But how do we know that meditative experience is not some sort of misunderstanding? After all, a person who meditates and reaches arupajhana-s still has a body with which one meditates and percieves arupajhanas. So it is not like there is direct experience, there isn't direct experience of arupa lokas.
If one thinks that one has telepathic powers, then how can you distinguish your thoughts from thoughts of another being - especially if that being is formless?
As for "can mind exist without matter", I'll believe it when one can take too much alcohol, mind altering drugs, damage the brain - all without effect on consciousness and mental function.