I tried to write this to you in PM but there is apparently a 420 character limit:
To be honest, what this makes me suspect is that Buddhism's distinction between "mindstream" and the ego/illusory "self" is actually a forgotten and twisted remnant of the understanding of dual-soul theory. In other words, I suspect the "mindstream" or "buddhanature" is a degenerated understanding of the conscious spirit and the ego/skandhas/whatever are actually the sub/unconscious being talked about in that paper. That may also be the "storehouse consciousness" some branches of Buddhism speak of.
Remember that Buddhism is rooted in Hinduism, which itself has roots in ancient Persia--note the usage of Asura and Daeva, swapped in meaning essentially (daevas were Persia's evil-gods and asuras the good ones). All these religions trace back to the ancient near east. And the ubiquitous belief, still held by many peoples today, is more or less dual-soul theory.
I am honestly not entirely sure what to make of this. It would explain the different stages of the bardo, the Chonyid being the conscious spirit's PoV and the other two being the unconscious. It would also account for why it's so damn difficult for the people reading the Bardo Thodol to get through to the dead person the longer he or she is dead, and explains also why said dead people see worse and worse and worse things as time goes on; their two souls are splitting, and the unconscious one is getting pulled deeper and deeper into itself and away from any force of rationality.
Judgement (and torture...) by Yama and his flunkies is how a Buddhist or Hindu would rationalize the effects of his/her unconscious playing back the evil it did to others in life; it is a literal self-judgment, but because they've been told to expect Yama and external judgment, that's what they are basically dreaming is happening to them. This is also why the BT exhorts people to keep in mind that everything they see is just a product of their own minds, and gives them things to fixate on like a host of different Buddhas and deities; it prevents the subconscious from taking over and wrestling control from the conscious while the two are still somewhat in contact after death.
If anything, what bodhisattvas are doing is acting as integrated beings (i.e., both spirits/souls somehow stayed together) and journeying down into the "hell realm" (which isn't hellish except to the beings in it; it's just grey and dull) to be a sort of surrogate rational-soul to the pure-unconscious-soul beings trapped in the contents of their own minds.
You have stated that karma is not fair, that it just is, but I don't think you bargained for it being like this: it sounds to me like people with naturally self-critical tendencies or those who were unlucky enough to suffer abuse or trauma enter death with a subconscious full of suffering and "go to hell," while someone privileged--or worse, a sociopath who is by nature incapable of feeling remorse--would have had it good not only in life but in death since his/her subconscious is full of good memories.
There is more to it than what we're seeing here, I would suspect. In particular, Buddhism and Hinduism teach that karma exhausts itself naturally over time, else anyone who ended up in a hell realm would be stuck there forever. Not much is ever talked about here as to how that happens, which is one thing that really bothers me about these religions. What this means in the context of dual-soul theory is also a mystery to me, as it sounds like the unconscious shouldn't have any power of rationality at all and should be stuck forever endlessly spiraling deeper and deeper into its own contents. Maybe there is a kind of "half life" concept for the unconscious; maybe eventually they "wind down" and simply don't have the energy to continue tormenting themselves. We can but hope.
If I have to catch the bus soon, and every day it's looking more and more likely, I'm going to try and become one of the beings that helps others. I'd never arrogate the title "bodhisattva" to myself; I'd just want to help how I could.
Quote from a website on mindstream continuum
Question: What is the nature of the mindstream that reincarnates from lifetime to lifetime?
Dalai Lama: ...If one understands the term "soul" as a continuum of individuality from moment to moment, from lifetime to lifetime, then one can say that Buddhism also accepts a concept of soul; there is a kind of continuum of consciousness. From that point of view, the debate on whether or not there is a soul becomes strictly semantic. However, in the Buddhist doctrine of selflessness, or "no soul" theory, the understanding is that there is no eternal, unchanging, abiding, permanent self called "soul." That is what is being denied in Buddhism.
Buddhism does not deny the continuum of consciousness. Because of this, we find some Tibetan scholars, such as the Sakya master Rendawa, who accept that there is such a thing as self or soul, the "kangsak ki dak" (Tib. gang zag gi bdag). However, the same word, the "kangsak ki dak," the self, or person, or personal self, or identity, is at the same time denied by many other scholars.
We find diverse opinions, even among Buddhist scholars, as to what exactly the nature of self is, what exactly that thing or entity is that continues from one moment to the next moment, from one lifetime to the next lifetime. Some try to locate it within the aggregates, the composite of body and mind. Some explain it in terms of a designation based on the body and mind composite, and so on.... One of the divisions of [the "Mind-Only"] school maintains there is a special continuum of consciousness called alayavijnana which is the fundamental consciousness.
Healing Anger: The Power of Patience from a Buddhist Perspective
Buddhanature is a our primordial ego-less divine compassionate enlightened nature that becomes known and apparent when our mental obsurations are purifed.
Although Buddha did grow up in a hindu society and trained with hindu yogi's and wisemen, he discovered his own path. The hindu yogi's were absorbed in bliss by abiding in the 4th jhana of concentration. Buddha saw that this was just attachment to mental bliss and not freedom from Samsara. He obtained freedom from samara when he discovered there was not ego.
I don't really know much about Yama and his crew. As buddhist I believe everything is more or less an illusion created by our minds. Thus all these entities might have the forms of the religious tradition we have a karmic connection. Christians might experiencee Jesus in bardo as their spiritual guide and Tibetans might experience Yama judging him by his karma or whatever.
I don't think sociopaths experience positive bardo experiences. The pain they have inflicted in others will at some point be inflicted on them also. I can imaging sociopaths would be terrifyed of the idea of karma and afterlife.
But it's true that it feels very unfair that someone who might have been abusied and traumatised might end up with negative mindstates which might be transfered to the bardo which may lead to a negative rebirth.
That's why it's difficult to be liberated from samsara and why buddha's and bodhisattvas consider walking the path of liberation to be the most meaningfull thing you can do with your life.
Karma exhausts in self in many apparant ways. When we die we've exhausted our karmic fortune of being human fx.
