I'm actually not directing anything at you specifically, but rather generally aiming at people that wish to rewrite the Buddhas teaching to fit their own view, if the shoe fits wear it.
Ever thought that might be what your doing?
Just a thought
I'm actually not directing anything at you specifically, but rather generally aiming at people that wish to rewrite the Buddhas teaching to fit their own view, if the shoe fits wear it.
Analogous to, certainly, but that's not the same as saying they are the same thing. I still don't see any evidence that the realms were intended as psychological states in the suttas. IMO it's like arguing that Hell is a metaphor, based on what the Bible says - it's possible to argue this case but it seems very tenuous and speculative.Jason wrote: The passage I posted above is one example where I think the psychological and cosmological aspects of becoming and rebirth are directly compared, illustrating their relationship, i.e., where rearising in an 'injurious world' is analogous to the experience of painful feelings (an aspect of mind) like beings in hell, suggesting to me that hell itself can also refer to an unpleasant mental state as much as it can a literal place one rearises:
It seems to me that in the suttas the cosmological and psychological are 2 sides of the same coin, and IMO attempting to divorce one from the other leads to misunderstanding - in any case I don't see the evidence for a purely psychological interpretation.Jason wrote: While I wasn't so convinced of this at first, other suttas and the opinions of other translators/commentators have since convinced me that the psychological aspects aren't necessarily as divorced from the cosmological as many assume. One of the things that really got me seeing things this way is the fact that the term loka (world/realm) itself is often used as a metaphor for the five aggregates, the six sense spheres, and/or the internal world of fabricated experience .
I think we agree more than we disagree then. I think if you step back and read what I've said this entire thread, it's eminently clear that I'm not trying to divorce one from the other or proposing a purely psychological interpretation, but that I'm trying to show how they're both relevant, especially in places like AN 4.235.Spiny Norman wrote:It seems to me that in the suttas the cosmological and psychological are 2 sides of the same coin, and IMO attempting to divorce one from the other leads to misunderstanding - in any case I don't see the evidence for a purely psychological interpretation.Jason wrote: While I wasn't so convinced of this at first, other suttas and the opinions of other translators/commentators have since convinced me that the psychological aspects aren't necessarily as divorced from the cosmological as many assume. One of the things that really got me seeing things this way is the fact that the term loka (world/realm) itself is often used as a metaphor for the five aggregates, the six sense spheres, and/or the internal world of fabricated experience .
The use of "loka" is interesting, though in context it looks to me like a figure of speech meaning "my world" or "our world" - I think it can be viewed as descriptive of the human realm.
lyndon taylor wrote:Because to believe the Buddha was talking figuratively, not literally when he talked at length, over and over about rebirth, other realms, conversation with devas etc etc, you would really have to be twisting around his words from what they plainly say, The Buddha wasn't a secular Buddhist, quite the opposite, why can't you just man up to you disagree with the Buddha, instead of trying to put your modern ideas in his mouth.......and try and make your ideas fit with his.
But not as purely psychological. Not in the suttas anyway.clw_uk wrote:... "rebirth" is put across as both psychological in nature as well as being real ontologically.
Spiny Norman wrote:But not as purely psychological. Not in the suttas anyway.clw_uk wrote:... "rebirth" is put across as both psychological in nature as well as being real ontologically.
daverupa wrote:This is an individual effort that isn't assisted by comparing and contrasting metaphysical speculations.
Absolutely.daverupa wrote:This is an individual effort that isn't assisted by comparing and contrasting metaphysical speculations.
Show me a sutta which describes the realms as purely psychological states.clw_uk wrote:Spiny Norman wrote:But not as purely psychological. Not in the suttas anyway.clw_uk wrote:... "rebirth" is put across as both psychological in nature as well as being real ontologically.
There is both in the suttas
Sure, but also without aversion to what the suttas seem to be describing.daverupa wrote:Could be that these are two ways of understanding life processes amongst dependent consequences; in any event the point seems to me to be coming to grips with idapaccayata sans ritualism, self-aggrandizement, and so forth.
Show me a sutta which describes the realms as purely psychological states.
Spiny Norman wrote:Sure, but also without aversion to what the suttas seem to be describing.daverupa wrote:Could be that these are two ways of understanding life processes amongst dependent consequences; in any event the point seems to me to be coming to grips with idapaccayata sans ritualism, self-aggrandizement, and so forth.