I'm on the Highway to Hell...
(but which one?)

Dateline: October 28, 1999

Buddhist Hell

So let's move on to another religion...how about Buddhism? Buddhism is generally thought of as a rather spiritual and metaphysical religion, lacking in such almost superstitious beliefs like heavens and hells. Indeed, many Buddhist sects don't bother with these ideas at all, but some of them do. It was difficult to track down details on this, but a few of my older texts contained relevant references.

T'an-luan was a patriarch of the Pure Land school of Buddhist teachings and wrote in the early sixth century a short commentary on a Chinese translation of an essay purportedly by Vasubandhu. Vasubandhu was one of primary teachers of the Middle Doctrine, one of the two main branches of Mahayana Buddhism - so his ideas cannot be dismissed as marginal or spurious. In his commentary, T'an-luan describes what awaits those individuals who commit grave sins. Quoting T'an-luan quoting scriptures:

Those guilty of the Five Violations [parricide, matricide, murder of an arhant, introduction of disharmony into the monastic community, and striking a Buddha so as to cause him to bleed] descend into the midst of the Hell of Uninterrupted Suffering and there suffer fully one cosmic period of grave punishment. Those who malign the True Law [the teachings of the Buddha] descend into the midst of the Hell of Uninterrupted Suffering, and, when this period is exhausted, turn about and go into the midst of another Hell of Uninterrupted Suffering. In this way they go through hundreds and thousands of such hells.

Length of Suffering

T'an-luan then says himself:

The Buddha records no time at which they are able to leave, because the sin of maligning the True Law is extremely grave. Also, the "True Law" is the Law of Buddha. Once these foolish men have given expression to such calumny, how can they possibly pray for rebirth in Buddha's Land? Even if they were to pray for rebirth there out of a sole desire for the comforts and pleasures of that Land, it would still be like seeking waterless ice or smokeless fire. How would there be any way of obtaining it?

T'an-luan does not appear to be going out on a limb and creating new doctrines out of thin air. Indeed, as indicated before, he was an important part of the development of Buddhism throughout China. In referring to Buddhist scripture, he makes it evident that if you violate the Law of Buddha, you face an eternity of Hell. It's not clear just what this Hell entails, but it is clear that it involves Suffering, and uninterruptedly to boot. Since all of this is no later than the early sixth century and Christianity had little or no influence in either India or China at the time, then it is reasonable to conclude that these ideas of a Hell were arrived at independently of Christian doctrines.

Christianity vs. Buddhism

Now, is it possible to be both a good believing Christian and a good believing Buddhist? The choice is perhaps not as clear-cut as it was earlier between Christianity and Islam, but in the end the two are not strictly compatible. It is true that you can probably be a good Christian and not commit any of the Five Violations. However, the violation of "not disrupting a monastic community" may be difficult to avoid.

Most Christian denominations include the idea that members should proselytize to non-Christians. More obnoxious examples of this can be currently seen in the behavior of America's Southern Baptists as they have directed evangelical efforts towards both Jews and Hindus during some of the important holy days of those religions. Such lack of respect and tolerance for other faiths has attracted nothing but derision and anger from Jews and Hindus. Similar efforts are being prepared for Buddhists. In order to not commit the aforementioned Violation of not disrupting monastic communities and avoid a single period in Uninterrupted Hell, it would be necessary to avoid any sort of prosyletization which might affect a Buddhist monastic community. Some Protestants might manage to achieve this, but not all.

Avoiding any violations of the True Law may prove more difficult, however. Some of Buddha's teachings are compatible with Christianity, for example ideas on basic morality and altruism. Quite a few liberal Christians have noticed this and honestly attempted to integrate Buddhist insights into their own Christian lifestyle. Of course, these Christians do not typically have a traditional concept of Hell for all nonbelievers, either.

Other Buddhist teachings, however, are not nearly so compatible. In order to genuinely follow the Buddha, one must strive to escape the cycle of death and rebirth in order to finally reach Nirvana. In this process, individual effort is key, and gods are simply irrelevant. Buddha was decidedly agnostic in his position on gods and so considered them irrelevant when it comes to "salavation" from the problem of this world.

Anyone who takes this seriously and actually considers gods to be irrelevant cannot be a "good believing Christian" in any traditional sense of the phrase. At the same time, a good believing Christian cannot regard the Buddha as having had anything to relevant to say on the all-important issue of Jesus Christ coming to Earth, suffering, and eventually being sacrificed in order to pay the price demanded by a bloodthirsty God for the sins of fallible humanity. Thus it seems clear to me that in order to avoid the Buddhist Hell you have to do things and have beliefs which would put you on the fast lane towards the Christian Hell. Conversely, attempts to avoid this Christian Hell would make you a prime candidate for the Buddhist Hell described by T'an-luan.

So, it looks like there are at least three mutually exclusive Hells actively believed in by large numbers of people which should be avoided - at least if your are the type to adopt a religion simply in order to avoid the punishments which religions predict for disbelievers. You cannot avoid all of them at the same time - you have to pick one and stick with it, risking an eternity in one of the others. Sadly, there is no solid rational basis for choosing one over the others. They are all equally credible or in-credible, depending upon your perspective.

Thus, an important aspect of the primary critique of Pascal's Wager remains firm. There is not simply one Hell which we must avoid, but many. In addition to the Hells already described, there are an infinite number of theologically possible Hells which a human could believe in. Anytime we pick one to avoid, we risk an eternity in any of the others. For this reason, it is not rational or reasonable or logical to choose a religion based upon the prospect of avoiding its Hell and obtaining its Heaven. Pascal's Wager is therefore stripped of even the slightest validity.

Sources of Chinese Tradition. William T. De Bary et al, ed.
The Buddhist Tradition. William T. De Bary, ed.
The Koran. A. J. Arberry, translator.
Textual Sources for the Study of Islam. Andrew Rippin & Jan Knappert, ed.
Why I am Not a Muslim. Ibn Warraq.

Don't miss the other section:

Part 1: Islamic Hell