Heaven or Hell: Here and now

Q:What is your vision of heaven? What images – from Scripture, tradition, culture or your personal experience – best describe … Continued

Q:What is your vision of heaven? What images – from Scripture, tradition, culture or your personal experience – best describe heaven for you?

Heaven or hell, a chimeric crutch to the atheist or agnostic, is the very meaning of life to so many of the faithful. For many others, heaven is a club with the most exclusive of membership–only if you worship their God, say their prayers and read their book. But as with any facet of faith, no one has returned from the heavenly abode with a video to post on YouTube–so any version must goes.

A Hindu view to heaven, as with much else with this pluralistic tradition, has a plurality of interpretations. Where there is unity is that reaching heaven is predicated in all Dharma traditions on karma. The balance of positive actions–those performed in devotion to God, without expectations of results and with the well-being of others as the cause–lead the seeker on the path to their heaven.

Then the diversity of views begin. There are those who invoke the existence of Vaikuntha, where souls freed from the cycle of birth and death live in perpetual bliss serving their God. And then there are those that believe that when one is free of all desires for the world and free of karmic obligations, moksha or nirvana is attained. This is the state of absolute bliss where individual existence ends, and the individual soul merges with the supersoul from whence it came.

But there is also swarga, a wonderous locus of floating nymphs singing melodious divine songs, harmony and joy prevailing and a cornucopia of divine food and drink. Not very different than the heaven of Abrahamic traditions, perhaps, but again, access is open to all creatures based on karma, and not membership in any particular faith. And naraka, a hell is also described–every bit the abomination it is in other traditions. But the difference for Hindus is that these heavenly and hellish abodes exist, but they are temporary way stations on the way to moksha.

Those are the views, but I subscribe to another school of Vedanta scholars that propound what I call heavenly immediacy. Heaven and hell exist right here and right now. Why contemplate the existence of an unknown and unvisited destination, when both states exist within our minds? Mental peace, contentment and joy transform one to a heavenly existence even as they live in the here and now, and a restless, tortured and depressed mind cannot but place one in a very personal hell.

No greater heaven could be conceived than the bliss of a content, healthy and secure family and no worse hell imaginable than mourning the loss of a child or bankruptcy and ruin.

We try to explain too often the otherwise unexplainable–why does an innocent child suffer and why do the most undeserving tyrants enjoy untold riches and seeming happiness? The answer to me is simply that karmas of this life and those of the past bring us to those moments. And just as all grief must pass, worldly happiness lives on only as reminiscences as well. We must endeavor to stop focusing on promises of an afterlife–a fixation that justifies insanity for terrorists in our midst–knowing that this life alone carries promises of the heaven we incessantly pursue.

So it is with heaven and hell–they are way stations where we dwell on the path to our ultimate destination–eternal bliss. And all hells and heavens are temporary. Eternal bliss exists, but it cannot exist in this earthly abode.

No murals needed to spur my imagination, and singing sirens and harps won’t welcome me into heaven. Live this life to the fullest, live my dharma and renounce worldly wants and desires, and I can live in heaven here and now. Not immediate, this is the recipe for eternal gratification.

Views expressed here are the personal views of Dr. Aseem Shukla, and do not necessarily represent those of the University of Minnesota or Hindu American Foundation.

More on: , ,
Written by

  • goethean

    Urologist Aseem Shukla has written that the opposition to distinguished scholar Wendy Doniger is comparable to the opposition to anti-Semite Kevin B. MacDonald and to the opposition to white supremacist David Shiman. The Washington Post insults all scholars and everyone who loves learning and civil discourse by giving this dishonest extremist a prominent weblog.

  • synektix

    Goethean — Dr. Shukla was simply establishing the precedent for similar protests. After all, it is only the victim of bigotry that knows its meaning, not the perpetrator. According to the perpetrator, they’re simply calling it as they see it!To turn around and accuse the injured party of “extremism” for articulating a grievance is nothing but “extreme” pugilism! Furthermore, by what standards does calling Dr. Shukla a “dishonest extremist” qualify as “civil discourse?” You’re the one doing the name-calling here! More substance and less sniping, please!