If a Buddhist Monk went to hell, would he even care?

Question

Apparently, there have been several Buddhist monks that have actually set themselves on fire as protest against various forms of government injustice. They were able to just sit there and meditate while on fire! (They died eventually, of course, but it didn't seem to phase them at all).

Since Buddhist monks seem to want to spend most of their time meditating, and they can meditate just fine while on fire, it seems likely they could pretty much just shrug off hell and get along fine there.

Did Jehovah not realize that some humans would be pretty much immune to his "big punishment"? Could the monks ability to ignore being on fire be a sign that they've latched onto something better than and beyond Jehovah?

Answer 1

They'll care when they find themselves getting sodomized by demons with ten-foot tallywackers!

Haha. Christian hell is, by definition, painful. So if they dont' mind fire, maybe it'll be scorpions. More seriously, some theologians interpret hell as separation from God. Others say that nothing can be separated from God, so "hell" is what happens to you if you wish you could be separated from God, but can't. (The Orthodox say that the fire of hell represents the same uncreated energies as the light of God.)

Buddhist tradition sees hell as temporary. Even Buddha was in hell once (but got out because he helped another devil carry his coal). If you're not yet enlightened, you don't want to go there (or anywhere else) because the human realm is the best place to study Buddhism. But once you're enlightened, hell won't hurt anymore--you'll see it as a Buddha field, a paradise, while you go there to help the suffering sentient beings who are in it.

Answer 2

I have been a practicing Buddhist for many years and I have to say that I admire the amount of effort that you put into this, as well as the intelligent answers you have placed here. Normally when my faith is criticized, it is by uneducated people who just want to attack for the purpose of attacking so I appreciate your approach. In addition to that, I can say that I agree with a lot of your points - however, this does not rattle my faith at all. I could write for hours on how I agree with your points and add my own faith into that but I will try to keep it simple for the purpose of this posting. Although, I would certainly not disagree to a future conversation about this if you are interested. Buddha said: "Believe nothing, whether you hear it from Me or anyone else unless you know it to be true." My perception of this statement is what keeps my faith in spite of all the difficulties and human error that have encircled the faith. I know that a lot of things contradict each other and the reason is obvious - If you take a faith and spread it around to different cultures it will develop into something that closely resembles the culture that has taken it. Even I am guilty of this but I feel that it is necessary for my basic understanding. You can't change what we are and what we are is human. Human's seem to have an innate need for a "god" figure and even though it is against the Buddha's ideals, he has become a "god" in a sense. Still, I refute this belief as an educated person does the best they can to do what is right and that is the basic principal of faith in general. If we split straws on what people have done, the good in Buddha's words may never inspire people. Inspiration is the key but still human error has warped a lot of things. This is true in every faith, Judaism, Taoism, Hindu, Christianity and Islam. I think the great Messiah's, Profits, and "gods" are more interested in making our hearts pure and being good but I understand the difficulties of blind faith and thoughts of Nihilism. So, I will end my debate with a quote from the Dali Lama, he said that the faith is good but it is not for everyone. You should be true to you and if that means being other than Buddhism, please do that because the point is to find your happiness.

Answer 3

The Bible hell is a condition in which there is no wisdom, no thought, no doing, no planning. It is an oblivious condition of non-sentiency. (Ecclesiastes 9:5,10) It is not a place of eternal suffering as many have depicted it. All in the Bible hell who have not accepted Jesus will be brought back to life for individual enlightenment and judgment in the "last day". -- John 12:47,48; Revelation 20:12,13; Isaiah 2:2-4.

Answer 4

Thats true they did sit through it, one of the most thought provoking pictures I have ever seen is a Monk on fire with the flames licking up the side of his face and he is calm and emotionless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Burningmonk.jpg

Answer 5

I'm not Buddhist, but I admire their ability to ignore pain and suffering and denying the existence of Evil.

If Evil does not exist, then it cannot affect you. The goal of religious Bouddhism is to stop the cycle of reincarnations, to stop existing.

So, they probably would stop existing before they made it down there. Even if they did, then -no- they wouldn't be affected...

Answer 6

the thing is, because the monk is not identified with his experience, he would not suffer.
definitively, hell is suffering; thus, the premise of the question is categorically impossible.

Answer 7

i am also immune to it as an athiest, because hell doesnt exist. and yes buddhist dont care if they go to hell because there isnt one.

Answer 8

I don't think Buddhism has a hell -- just a long series of reincarnations until you reach Nirvana.

Answer 9

If a tree fell on a monk in a forest, would he make a sound?

Answer 10

fire isn't necessarily literal. it was to symbolize pain.

it's probably a grave and separation from God, which is torture.



lost
.
eu/21618