Budddhist cosmology and heirarchical structures

[Bundokji]

Friends,

In Buddhism, we lean of the 31 planes of existence of which the human realm is the fifth. The realms, when presented in structural way, imply a hierarchy where notions of higher and lower become applicable.

In the human realm, which is a subset of kama loka, hierarchical structures measure advantageous conditions relevant to the way the average human functions. It does not come as a surprise that beauty, money and fame rank high within this state of affairs. Kamma in previous lives is often used to explain why people are not equal, or why individuals find themselves at varying positions within this hierarchical structure.

When contemplating the way humans think in hierarchical terms, it raises questions about what the 31 realms of existence really present and how they should be understood.

Do they present similar hierarchical structures that are based on pleasure and time (i.e the higher the realm, the longer the life span and the more intense is the pleasure)? or do they present something else?

[SarathW]

To me, it is like the spectrum of light or color (infrared to ultraviolet etc)

[DNS]

In the human realm, which is a subset of kama loka, hierarchical structures measure advantageous conditions relevant to the way the average human functions. It does not come as a surprise that beauty, money and fame rank high within this state of affairs. Kamma in previous lives is often used to explain why people are not equal, or why individuals find themselves at varying positions within this hierarchical structure.

I guess the Dhamma is not very "woke."

[Nicholas Weeks]

Friends,

Do they present similar hierarchical structures that are based on pleasure and time (i.e the higher the realm, the longer the life span and the more intense is the pleasure)? or do they present something else?

In addition to the refinement of pleasures & loss of afflictions, since all are (only?) accessible thru meditation, that suggests these three realms are more subtle (or grosser) aspects of our mind. Evidently these mental states are not liberated and still in samsara, yet they must be mastered to be transcended.

[TRobinson465]

Do they present similar hierarchical structures that are based on pleasure and time (i.e the higher the realm, the longer the life span and the more intense is the pleasure)? or do they present something else?

How the hiearchy is presented is just level of pleasure (or i guess level of suffering, in reverse, to be more exact). Humans have short life spans but are "higher" in the hiearchy than hell beings. I think it was presented that way simply becuase it made the most sense to be presented that way.

[cappuccino]

or do they present something else?

degrees of purity (higher and higher) or defilement (lower)

[anagaarika]

I would say they also represent the spectrum of human experience in this very life. I´ll leave aside the notorious debate whether they are "real" states or not - in either case, they can provide a very didactic model for contextualizing your present experience. Even as a human you are theoretically able to go through all of these planes within one lifetime - admittedly, there won´t be too many people who could make it from hellish existence to the neither-perception-nor-non-perception realm. But the range of "rebirths" you can cover can be actually quite wide - there are many people whose psychological structure is very reminiscent of those of petas, for instance. But some of them are workable and can rise to human state by learning about life. Some may even gain big momentum and transcend to a deva-like existence by perfecting their conduct and understanding. Some may take up meditation and make it even to jhanas etc.

In my opinion, people are quite often naive to think of these realms as either being absolutely "real" or being "just fairy tales". To me it seems that Buddhism (and Indian thought in general) doesn´t really care about external, objective reality. These schools of thought acknowledge that all experience is primarily subjective and I believe people from those times would not even bring up such questions since there was no notion of "objective existence" apart from consciousness (as people raised in the physicalist paradigm are taught to believe). It is only now, in the 21st century among Western converts that debates about the reality of 31 planes of existence take place.

That was not probably exactly what you asked, but I wanted to provide this perspective anyways

[Red Belly]

A superb post. Thank you!

[Bundokji]

I would say they also represent the spectrum of human experience in this very life. I´ll leave aside the notorious debate whether they are "real" states or not - in either case, they can provide a very didactic model for contextualizing your present experience. Even as a human you are theoretically able to go through all of these planes within one lifetime - admittedly, there won´t be too many people who could make it from hellish existence to the neither-perception-nor-non-perception realm. But the range of "rebirths" you can cover can be actually quite wide - there are many people whose psychological structure is very reminiscent of those of petas, for instance. But some of them are workable and can rise to human state by learning about life. Some may even gain big momentum and transcend to a deva-like existence by perfecting their conduct and understanding. Some may take up meditation and make it even to jhanas etc.

In my opinion, people are quite often naive to think of these realms as either being absolutely "real" or being "just fairy tales". To me it seems that Buddhism (and Indian thought in general) doesn´t really care about external, objective reality. These schools of thought acknowledge that all experience is primarily subjective and I believe people from those times would not even bring up such questions since there was no notion of "objective existence" apart from consciousness (as people raised in the physicalist paradigm are taught to believe). It is only now, in the 21st century among Western converts that debates about the reality of 31 planes of existence take place.

That was not probably exactly what you asked, but I wanted to provide this perspective anyways

Thank you for the interesting perspective

Typology is useful in conveying ideas. The human realm belongs to the category of kama loka or the sensual realm where the senses or the aggregates seem to be the main reference. Some Buddhist scholars do not define the noble sangha as humans (Ven. Buddhadasa comes to mind). The Jhanas are extra-sensory knowledge in human terms in the sense that they transcend the limitations of the ordinary person or "the all" as per Sabba sutta. As the Jhanas were known before the Buddha, then knowledge of them is not exclusive to Buddhists but they are accessible to advanced practitioners and certainly to the noble sangha.

Studying of the planes of existence seems to be more useful to the contemplation of what kamma is than knowing what is the dhamma. Having the planes of existence accessible through meditation seems to be relevant to dhamma knowledge as the teachings of the lord Buddha cannot be categorized through any of those planes of existence. At the top of kama loka lies Mara, who can still communicate with higher realms (at least first Jhana) but have less control over them from the perspective of how hierarchy works in the human realm. Alternatively, Mara can be a mind-state that is advanced in human terms and draws pleasure from seeing people engaging in sensuality even if this is against their long term self interest.

[anagaarika]

Typology is useful in conveying ideas.

Exactly. Ancient civilisations used this as the privileged mode of communicating ideas and universal truths. I believe all people by default understood it that way and were interested to learn from these myths rather than to question how "real" they actually were. What difference does it make if all this is made-up if it inspires you to refine your conscioussness and transcend unwholsome states? Even if 0 % of that was "real", it can still prompt you to make the best of your existence here and now.

The human realm belongs to the category of kama loka or the sensual realm where the senses or the aggregates seem to be the main reference. Some Buddhist scholars do not define the noble sangha as humans (Ven. Buddhadasa comes to mind).

Yes, this is the same reasoning - from the biological point of view, an ariya is still classified as human. But that´s not the point - it´s the state of their conscioussness that counts and elevates them above "humans" in the religious sense. Whether they have human body is secondary.

Studying of the planes of existence seems to be more useful to the contemplation of what kamma is than knowing what is the dhamma. Having the planes of existence accessible through meditation seems to be relevant to dhamma knowledge as the teachings of the lord Buddha cannot be categorized through any of those planes of existence. At the top of kama loka lies Mara, who can still communicate with higher realms (at least first Jhana) but have less control over them from the perspective of how hierarchy works in the human realm. Alternatively, Mara can be a mind-state that is advanced in human terms and draws pleasure from seeing people engaging in sensuality even if this is against their long term self interest.

I agree this scheme is useful mainly for mapping out the routes of samsara. It shows that however subtle and pleasurable samsara may be, it requires regular effort to reach such a state. And it´s a risky business since ignorance, which is present in all planes, can always sprout out and drive you into less pleasurable and less subtle states. I recall concluding words by Ajahn Punnadhammo from his book on Buddhist cosmology (https://www.arrowriver.ca/book/bookDown.php?format=pdf):

Beyond all these states of attainment and of existence there remains the ineffable state of the unconditioned, nibbāna. All the panoply of saṃsāra with all its wonderful and terrifying manifestations is, when all is said and done, nothing more than a shadow
play, “a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing,” when contrasted with nibbāna. When contemplating the cosmos, it is essential to remember that the purpose of understanding it is to transcend it.

The last sentence is the only feasible conclusion one can reach after having studied the Buddhist cosmological model in sufficient depth.

[Dhammanando]

Do they present similar hierarchical structures that are based on pleasure and time (i.e the higher the realm, the longer the life span and the more intense is the pleasure)? or do they present something else?

I think my signature hints at the answer: it's a hierarchy of peacefulness, rarifiedness, ethereality.

Cappuccino's proposal of a hierarchy of purity is tempting, but doesn't seem to quite cut it. It breaks down when we get up to the higher echelons of the Brahmā world, for the five Pure Abodes, inhabited solely by anāgāmins and arahants, are ranked lower than the four formless realms, in which many of the beings are worldlings and therefore less pure than the inhabitants of the world beneath them.

[Bundokji]

I think my signature hints at the answer: it's a hierarchy of peacefulness, rarifiedness, ethereality.

Cappuccino's proposal of a hierarchy of purity is tempting, but doesn't seem to quite cut it. It breaks down when we get up to the higher echelons of the Brahmā world, for the five Pure Abodes, inhabited solely by anāgāmins and arahants, are ranked lower than the four formless realms, in which many of the beings are worldlings and therefore less pure than the inhabitants of the world beneath them.

Thanks Bhante

I thought of ethereality and its relationship to the earth element. Maybe the lower the realm, the more dominant is the earth element considering that inhabitants of the arupa loka is too eatherial to hear the dhamma. My conjecture that it has to do with the elements is based on the fact that the rupa loka seems to be a middle between arupa loka and lower realms. Maybe the main difference between the noble sangha and other inhabitants of rupa loka is that the elements has no footings amongst them as per DN11, but the balance of the elements maybe conducive to dhamma knowledge hence they reside there.

[justindesilva]

I would say they also represent the spectrum of human experience in this very life. I´ll leave aside the notorious debate whether they are "real" states or not - in either case, they can provide a very didactic model for contextualizing your present experience. Even as a human you are theoretically able to go through all of these planes within one lifetime - admittedly, there won´t be too many people who could make it from hellish existence to the neither-perception-nor-non-perception realm. But the range of "rebirths" you can cover can be actually quite wide - there are many people whose psychological structure is very reminiscent of those of petas, for instance. But some of them are workable and can rise to human state by learning about life. Some may even gain big momentum and transcend to a deva-like existence by perfecting their conduct and understanding. Some may take up meditation and make it even to jhanas etc.

In my opinion, people are quite often naive to think of these realms as either being absolutely "real" or being "just fairy tales". To me it seems that Buddhism (and Indian thought in general) doesn´t really care about external, objective reality. These schools of thought acknowledge that all experience is primarily subjective and I believe people from those times would not even bring up such questions since there was no notion of "objective existence" apart from consciousness (as people raised in the physicalist paradigm are taught to believe). It is only now, in the 21st century among Western converts that debates about the reality of 31 planes of existence take place.

That was not probably exactly what you asked, but I wanted to provide this perspective anyways

Lord budda when asked about the end of cosmos by Deva Rohitassa answered that the world or the cosmos exisits within ones own fathom long body. It too explains that kama loka , rupa loka , and arupa loka exists within ones own mind depending on wholesomeness or unwholesomeness of an individual mind. Hence the 31 realms do not exist beyond the individual mind.
Today starting from galileo to laplace we are bound to believe of various categories of energy from earth to milky way and beyond. They are all concepts which are suggestions of vingnana but not abodes for devas or brahmas to rest. Taking the theory of whole to part, we are a part on a journey to perfection. Each individual mind has to convert from kama loka to arupa loka and beyond to join the balanced cosmos , which may take eons or many periods of oncoming budda who would come to perfection.
We are now speaking from concepts studied through present day cosmologists who does not understand the science of budda darma.

[Cause_and_Effect]

Do they present similar hierarchical structures that are based on pleasure and time (i.e the higher the realm, the longer the life span and the more intense is the pleasure)? or do they present something else?

I think my signature hints at the answer: it's a hierarchy of peacefulness, rarifiedness, ethereality.

Cappuccino's proposal of a hierarchy of purity is tempting, but doesn't seem to quite cut it. It breaks down when we get up to the higher echelons of the Brahmā world, for the five Pure Abodes, inhabited solely by anāgāmins and arahants, are ranked lower than the four formless realms, in which many of the beings are worldlings and therefore less pure than the inhabitants of the world beneath them.

I have wondered about this placing of the pure abodes, and would generally agree on the heirarchy of purity.
To me the pure abodes are the highest Deva realms as they are not within the cycle of samsara. They are realms of non-return and one way directly doorways to Nibbana.

The Buddha himself said that he had experienced almost every plane within samsara so could speak from experience, but had never been to the pure abodes as he would then have never returned.

I would agree therefore with an alternate rendering of the 31 planes with the Pure Abodes placed at the top. Do we know where the ordering comes from placing them 'below' the formless planes? That could also make sense in terms of formless jhanas being beyond the standard jhanas and the sufferings less and lifespan being longer in the formerless planes than the standard jhana planes. The Buddha had said that the base of neither perception nor non perception was highest sphere within samsara. But the pure abodes, being basically outside of samsara would appear to not be included here.

[Dhammanando]

I have wondered about this placing of the pure abodes, and would generally agree on the heirarchy of purity.
To me the pure abodes are the highest Deva realms as they are not within the cycle of samsara.

It seems to me that the Suddhāvāsas are part of samsāra. For example, the fifth type of anāgāmin, the uddhamsota-akanitthagāmī, starts off being born in the lowest of the Pure Abodes and then is born four more times, each time ascending to a higher Abode until he attains arahatta in the Akanittha realm. But even if this type didn't exist and all anāgāmins were to attain arahatta in whichever Abode they first arose, the Abodes would still count as samsāric, inasmuch as they are places within which one arises and from which one passes away.