<p>There are instances where painful mental states or experiances are called hell. [<a href="http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/2.25-Patala-S-s36.41.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Patala Sutta</a>] E.g. If I do something that might ripen in being born in hell you also get the hellish feeling here and now, [<a href="http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/6.9-Maha-Dukkhakkhandha-S-m013-piya.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Maha Dukkha-k,khandha Sutta</a>, <a href="http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/4.7-Cula-Dukkhakkhandha-S-m14-piya1.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Cūla Dukkha-k,khandha Sutta</a>] and in case you are born in the human world  similar pains will be experienced. [<a href="http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/4.16-Maha-Kamma-Vibhanga-S-m136-piya.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Maha Kamma,vibhaṅga Sutta</a>, <a href="http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/4.15-Cula-Kamma-Vibhanga-S-m135-piya.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Cūla Kamma Vibhaṅga Sutta</a>]</p>

<p>A more vivid description of hell is found in <a href="http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/2.22-Bala-Pandita-S-m129-piya.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Bala Pandita Sutta</a>, <a href="http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/48.10-Yama-Devaduta-S-a3.35-piya.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">(Yama) Deva,dūta Sutta</a> and <a href="http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/2.23_Devaduta_S_m130_piya_bk_REV1.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Deva,dūta Sutta</a>. <a href="http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/2.6b_Neyyattha_Nitattha_S_a2.3.5-6_piya.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Neyy’attha Nīt’attha Sutta</a> mentions that the Buddha uses direct and indirect languages. Though these destinations may exist some of the descriptions maybe parables so you can draw an analogy of what is there to a concept that you might be familiar with as <a href="http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/7.8-Arana-Vibhanga-S-m139-piya.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Arana Vibhanga Sutta</a> mentions that when teaching Dhamma you should use common and familiar language giving allowance to the audience or region they are from. This does not mean that the destination are only exist in the mind or they are parables to experiences in this world.</p>

<p>Also the Wikipedia articles seams mix and match from multiple schools. Also it would be an idea to keep these descriptions as per the wording of the Buddha and let the reader infer its meaning. </p>

<p>With regard to the descriptions in the Suttas many of the experiences in hell will not have a description in common language as language is developed to describe what we come across in this world. What is mentioned would most likely give the best idea of the suffering involved in these worlds.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-03-24T14:18:14.987Z
2016-03-24T15:35:34.300Z
2018-08-14T22:06:13.773Z
Suminda Sirinath S. Dharmasena
<h2>In the mind ...</h2>
<blockquote>
<p>Buddhist hell only exists in one's mind</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Here's an interesting story:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.ashidakim.com/zenkoans/57thegatesofparadise.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">The Gates of Paradise</a></p>
<p>To me that story implies that:</p>
<ul>
<li>Heaven and hell can be experienced (or seen) <strong>now</strong> (or just a moment away)</li>
<li>They exist as a <strong>consequence</strong> of (as result of) speech (by the monk) and action (by the soldier)</li>
<li>They <strong>manifest</strong> <em>in real life</em> (including &quot;physically&quot;) and not &quot;only in one's mind&quot;</li>
</ul>
<p>Some people do have a view that the world can seem like hell, depending on your state of mind.
If hell were defined as &quot;continuous suffering&quot;, according to that definition some people might see the current world as a state of woe.</p>
<hr />
<h2>... but not 'only' in the mind</h2>
<p>But even if &quot;hell&quot; does exist in (or is perceived or experienced by) one's present mind (as illustrated above), it might be a mistake to assume that it <em>only</em> exists in the mind.</p>
<p>The suttas do describe hell realms -- for example <a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.130.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Devaduta Sutta (MN 130)</a> was referenced in the Wikipedia article.
I see nothing in that text which shows that the Buddha must have been talking metaphorically.</p>
<p>Theoretically I see three possibilities:</p>
<ul>
<li>The Buddha was speaking metaphorically (e.g. to persuade people to behave well)</li>
<li>The Buddha was speaking literally (there is literally a realm like that)</li>
<li>Something else</li>
</ul>
<p>In any case, that sutta certainly appears to be referring to a state which may happen in the future, and is not just a state which is &quot;only in one's mind&quot; (in the present) -- it says,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I — by means of the divine eye, purified &amp; surpassing the human — see beings passing away &amp; re-appearing ...</p>
<p>... Or how these beings — who were endowed with bad conduct of body, speech &amp; mind, who reviled noble ones, held wrong views and undertook actions under the influence of wrong views — <strong>with the break-up of the body, after death</strong>, have re-appeared in a plane of deprivation, a bad destination, a lower realm, hell.'</p>
</blockquote>
<hr />
<h2>In summary</h2>
<p>In summary you might find it useful to think of &quot;hell&quot; as something which &quot;exists in one's mind&quot;, <strong>and</strong> which is taught to be a realm experienced &quot;with the break-up of the body, after death&quot;, or seen &quot;with the divine eye&quot;.</p>
<p>By analogy, if you see a photograph of something then it does &quot;exist in the photograph&quot;: but it would be odd to say that it exists <em>only</em> in the photograph (the thing photographed may also still exist in real life).</p>
<hr />
<h2>In Wikipedia</h2>
<p>FYI according to Wikipedia the Narakas are also <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naraka_(Hinduism)" rel="nofollow noreferrer">described in Hinduism</a>.</p>
<p>Within Buddhism (the article you referenced in the OP),</p>
<blockquote>
<p>There are several schemes for enumerating these Narakas and describing their torments. The <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhidharmako%C5%9Bak%C4%81rik%C4%81" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Abhidharma-kosa</a> (<em>Treasure House of Higher Knowledge</em>) is the root text that describes the most common scheme, the Eight Cold Narakas and Eight Hot Narakas.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>You're asking whether Wikipedia is wrong and why no-one changes it: but it doesn't seem to be &quot;wrong&quot; i.e. it is reporting or summarizing what's written in Buddhist literature.</p>
<p>The emphasis or people's interpretation of the Wikipedia article may be wrong, but so far as I know its content is more or less OK for an article that's titled &quot;Naraka (Buddhism)&quot;.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-03-24T14:41:16.800Z
2016-03-24T14:55:14.647Z
2020-06-17T09:56:10.877Z
ChrisW
<p>Thank you all for your kind answers to my questions. I feel that this community is really different from the others. If I asked the questions I made here in my country, I would be condemned heavily by now.</p>

<p>Back to the question, as Buddhist hell only exists in one's mind, therefore the information on wikipedia must be wrong.</p>

<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naraka_%28Buddhism%29" rel="nofollow">Naraka</a></p>

<p>Or is it correct? Why does no one change it?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-03-24T13:13:41.177Z
"Buddhist hell only exists in one's mind" - This is a false assertion
Sankha Kulathantille
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-03-24T13:21:30.343Z
Please help me clarify this.
Ook
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-03-24T14:19:34.517Z
Answered [here](http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/14557/111). It makes this question redundant unless if you are asking if wikipedia got the list right.
Sankha Kulathantille
<belief>
Is Buddhism hell falsely claimed on wikipedia?
# Is Buddhism hell falsely claimed on wikipedia?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2016-03-24)

Thank you all for your kind answers to my questions. I feel that this community is really different from the others. If I asked the questions I made here in my country, I would be condemned heavily by now.

Back to the question, as Buddhist hell only exists in one's mind, therefore the information on wikipedia must be wrong.

[Naraka](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naraka_%28Buddhism%29)

Or is it correct? Why does no one change it?

**Tags:** belief

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: "Buddhist hell only exists in one's mind" - This is a false assertion  
> **username_0**: Please help me clarify this.  
> **username_1**: Answered [here](http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/14557/111). It makes this question redundant unless if you are asking if wikipedia got the list right.  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2016-03-24. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

## In the mind ...

> Buddhist hell only exists in one's mind

Here's an interesting story:

[The Gates of Paradise](http://www.ashidakim.com/zenkoans/57thegatesofparadise.html)

To me that story implies that:

* Heaven and hell can be experienced (or seen) **now** (or just a moment away)
* They exist as a **consequence** of (as result of) speech (by the monk) and action (by the soldier)
* They **manifest** *in real life* (including "physically") and not "only in one's mind"

Some people do have a view that the world can seem like hell, depending on your state of mind.
If hell were defined as "continuous suffering", according to that definition some people might see the current world as a state of woe.

---

## ... but not 'only' in the mind

But even if "hell" does exist in (or is perceived or experienced by) one's present mind (as illustrated above), it might be a mistake to assume that it *only* exists in the mind.

The suttas do describe hell realms -- for example [Devaduta Sutta (MN 130)](http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.130.than.html) was referenced in the Wikipedia article.
I see nothing in that text which shows that the Buddha must have been talking metaphorically.

Theoretically I see three possibilities:

* The Buddha was speaking metaphorically (e.g. to persuade people to behave well)
* The Buddha was speaking literally (there is literally a realm like that)
* Something else

In any case, that sutta certainly appears to be referring to a state which may happen in the future, and is not just a state which is "only in one's mind" (in the present) -- it says,

> I — by means of the divine eye, purified & surpassing the human — see beings passing away & re-appearing ...
>
> ... Or how these beings — who were endowed with bad conduct of body, speech & mind, who reviled noble ones, held wrong views and undertook actions under the influence of wrong views — **with the break-up of the body, after death**, have re-appeared in a plane of deprivation, a bad destination, a lower realm, hell.'

---

## In summary

In summary you might find it useful to think of "hell" as something which "exists in one's mind", **and** which is taught to be a realm experienced "with the break-up of the body, after death", or seen "with the divine eye".

By analogy, if you see a photograph of something then it does "exist in the photograph": but it would be odd to say that it exists *only* in the photograph (the thing photographed may also still exist in real life).

---

## In Wikipedia

FYI according to Wikipedia the Narakas are also [described in Hinduism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naraka_(Hinduism)).

Within Buddhism (the article you referenced in the OP),

> There are several schemes for enumerating these Narakas and describing their torments. The [Abhidharma-kosa](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhidharmako%C5%9Bak%C4%81rik%C4%81) (*Treasure House of Higher Knowledge*) is the root text that describes the most common scheme, the Eight Cold Narakas and Eight Hot Narakas.

You're asking whether Wikipedia is wrong and why no-one changes it: but it doesn't seem to be "wrong" i.e. it is reporting or summarizing what's written in Buddhist literature.

The emphasis or people's interpretation of the Wikipedia article may be wrong, but so far as I know its content is more or less OK for an article that's titled "Naraka (Buddhism)".


---

### Answer by username_2 on 2016-03-24. Score: 2

There are instances where painful mental states or experiances are called hell. [[Patala Sutta](http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/2.25-Patala-S-s36.41.pdf)] E.g. If I do something that might ripen in being born in hell you also get the hellish feeling here and now, [[Maha Dukkha-k,khandha Sutta](http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/6.9-Maha-Dukkhakkhandha-S-m013-piya.pdf), [Cūla Dukkha-k,khandha Sutta](http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/4.7-Cula-Dukkhakkhandha-S-m14-piya1.pdf)] and in case you are born in the human world similar pains will be experienced. [[Maha Kamma,vibhaṅga Sutta](http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/4.16-Maha-Kamma-Vibhanga-S-m136-piya.pdf), [Cūla Kamma Vibhaṅga Sutta](http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/4.15-Cula-Kamma-Vibhanga-S-m135-piya.pdf)]

A more vivid description of hell is found in [Bala Pandita Sutta](http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/2.22-Bala-Pandita-S-m129-piya.pdf), [(Yama) Deva,dūta Sutta](http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/48.10-Yama-Devaduta-S-a3.35-piya.pdf) and [Deva,dūta Sutta](http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/2.23_Devaduta_S_m130_piya_bk_REV1.pdf). [Neyy’attha Nīt’attha Sutta](http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/2.6b_Neyyattha_Nitattha_S_a2.3.5-6_piya.pdf) mentions that the Buddha uses direct and indirect languages. Though these destinations may exist some of the descriptions maybe parables so you can draw an analogy of what is there to a concept that you might be familiar with as [Arana Vibhanga Sutta](http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/7.8-Arana-Vibhanga-S-m139-piya.pdf) mentions that when teaching Dhamma you should use common and familiar language giving allowance to the audience or region they are from. This does not mean that the destination are only exist in the mind or they are parables to experiences in this world.

Also the Wikipedia articles seams mix and match from multiple schools. Also it would be an idea to keep these descriptions as per the wording of the Buddha and let the reader infer its meaning.

With regard to the descriptions in the Suttas many of the experiences in hell will not have a description in common language as language is developed to describe what we come across in this world. What is mentioned would most likely give the best idea of the suffering involved in these worlds.


---

