[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Angkor Wat: Temple relief Heaven & Hell
Jochen Bink (binkj000@goofy.zdv.uni-mainz.de)wrote
>Thanks to Mr. Gangopadhyay and Mr. Chakravarti who answered my
>question about heaven and hell.
>It seems that the karma one accumulates is not only rewarded /
>punished by higher / lower rebirths, but also by stays in the
>respective heavens / hells.
>Is this an AND or an OR option?
Namaste Mr. Bink
The heavens or hells according to the Devotional Vedanta schools
are NOT the divine abode. They are merely different planes of existence.
The heavens are superior planes of existence relative to earth while the
hells are inferior planes of existence. Thus earth will be hell-like to
a person in Brahmalok, the highest heaven. The law of Karma applies
to all the planes of existence except for the divine abode. Thus a person can
fall down from Brahmalok also. Thus depending on good karma or bad, a person
will take an appropriate birth at an appropriate level.
You may wonder why the law of Karma does not operate in the divine
abode. You have to understand what liberation means to understand that. The
liberated soul is incapable of doing any bad thing. That is why he can enter
the divine abode. So even if the law of Karma applied there, no one would be
affected. In the divine abode there is only good and no bad. Sri Ramakrishna
defines a liberated soul as someone whose mouth and thought are alike. That is,
a liberated person will not only be good in conduct, but he will also be
incapable of even thinking about bad things. So the law of Karma will not
apply to him.
>The relief I mentioned shows no less than 37 heavens and 32 hells (so
>written in a book about them)! I suppose the Khmer inscriptions the
>author counted rather refer to the good deeds / sins that lead to
>these respective worlds. My interpretation only.
I do not know. It could also be that those inscriptions are there
to inspire people to turn towards God. Probably, it is not correct to
interpret them literally.
>And yes, the word "oblivion" was badly chosen as a description of
>samadhi. What I meant to say is that the soul in attaining samadhi
>must be in a state where it is beyond pain (hell) and pleasure
>(heaven), so these are of no importance to the soul anymore. Am I
>right?
What you have stated here is a description of the liberated soul.
It is not what samadhi means. In all schools of Vedanta an aspirant tries to
fix his mind on God. This method is known as Yoga. An aspirant following the
devotional Vedanta schools (Personal God Theology) tries to fix his mind on
a particular form of Personal God. When his concentration deepens he may have
a vision of that form of Personal God. That experience is called savikapla
samadhi. Sri Ramakrishna compares this experience to seeing a light with a
sheet of glass in between. This sheet of glass is the ego of the aspirant.
Then if the aspirant tries to fix his mind on the formless Impersonal
Reality of the Advaita school then that sheet of glass dissolves and nothing
more can be said about this experience. Then the aspirant is said to have
experienced the nirvikalpa samadhi. In nirvikalpa samadhi the aspirant's ego
merged with the Infinite spirit and the aspirant's "I" vanishes. So the
aspirant can not describe this experience. A simple analogy to describe
savikalpa samadhi and nirvikalpa samadhi is as follows: In savikalpa
samadhi the aspirant looks at the Truth while in nirvikalpa samadhi the
aspirant looks out of the Truth.
You may well wonder if there is any truth in these experiences or
whether they are products of theologian's imagination. I suggest that you
should read the lives of famous saints and sages who have actually experienced
these states. One such book is "The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna".
Regards
PG
