Top 10 South Park moments of 2025

(Mojo) Top 10 shocking South Park moments of 2025

(Pod Save America) South Park finale is absolutely brutal for Trump, Vance, and MAGA

(TYT Sports) MAGA has no idea comedian Shane Gillis is mocking them

The Buddha: Origin of belief in creator God

The Buddha in a heaven talking to Sakka (Indra) and Maha Brahma (right) (mesosyn.com)

Origin of the Belief in a Creator God

 

Buddhism and the God-Idea

[The Buddha explained:] Now, there comes a time, meditators, when, sooner or later, after the lapse of a long period [of devolving], this world-system passes away.

When this happens, beings have mostly been reborn in the World of Radiance, and there they dwell made of mind, feeding on joy, radiating light from themselves, traversing the air, continuing in glory; thus, they remain for a long period of time.

Now, there comes a time, meditators, when, sooner or later, this world-system begins to evolve again. When this happens the Palace of Brahmā appears, but it is empty. And some being or other, either because its span of years has passed or its merit has become exhausted, falls from the World of Radiance, and comes to life [is reborn] in the Palace of Brahmā.

There also this being lives made of mind, feeding on joy, radiating light from itself, traversing the air, continuing in glory; thus, does it remain for a long, long period of time. Now there arises, from dwelling there so long alone, a dissatisfaction and a longing:

By merely wishing, I am the Creator!

“O, would that other beings might come and join me in this place!” And, just then, either because their span of years had passed [in that other world] or their merit [to carry on there] became exhausted, other beings fall from the World of Radiance and appear in the Palace of Brahmā as companions, in all respects like Brahmā [other than their later arrival].

On this, meditators, the one who was first reborn thinks: “I am Brahmā [Supreme], the Great (Maha) Brahmā, the Supreme One, the Mighty, the All-Seeing, the Ruler, the Lord of All, the Maker, the Creator, the Chief of all [the Alpha and Omega, the I am that I am], appointing to each its place, the Ancient of Days, the Parent of all that are and are to be. These other beings are of my creation. Why is this so? A while ago I thought, 'Would that they might come!’ And on my mental aspiration, behold the beings came!”

I am who/that/what I am [of which they speak] and I am everlasting!

No goddesses allowed.

“And those beings themselves, too, think thus: 'This must be Brahmā, the Supreme, the Mighty, the All-Seeing, the Ruler, the Lord of All, the Maker, the Creator, the Chief of All, appointing to each a place, the Ancient of Days, the Parent  of all that are and are to be. And we must have been created by that being. Why? It is because, as we see, it was that being who was here first, and we came after that.”

On this, meditators, the one who first came into existence there is of longer life and more glorious and more powerful than those who appeared afterward. And it might well be, meditators, that some being on falling from that state, should come hither [to be reborn].

Well, they're allowed, just don't call them goddesses like Sophia, Mother Mary, wife Asherah

.

And having come hither [to the human plane] that being might go forth from the household life into the homeless state [of a monastic]. And having thus become a recluse that person, by reason of ardor, of exertion, of application, of earnestness, of careful thought, reaches such rapture of heart that, rapt in heart [jhana], he calls to mind his last dwelling-place but not the previous ones.

He says to himself: “That illustrious Brahmā [Supremo], the Great Brahmā, the Supreme One, the Mighty, the All-Seeing, the Ruler, the Lord of All, the Maker, the Creator, the Chief of All, appointing to each its place, the Ancient of Days, the Father of All that are and are to be, that being by whom we were created is steadfast, immutable, eternal, of a nature that knows no change and will remain so forever and ever. But we who were created have come hither as being impermanent, mutable, limited in duration of life.”

(Cleo Abram) Huge new discovery about Universe

This, meditators, is the first state of things on account of which, starting out from which, some recluses and Brahmins (shramanas and brahmanas), being eternalists as to some things and non-eternalists as to others, maintain that the soul and the world are partly eternal and partly not eternal. More

Misconstrued as the "creator" deity

We're not allowed to question in Christianity

Buddhism is a nontheistic (not atheistic) religion. It does not include the belief in an ultimate creator deity or any eternal being, divine or otherwise [4][5][6].

The universe (multiverse) comes into being due to causes and condition, but the Buddha did not declare an ultimate first beginning to it. It is cyclical and all beginnings, like all endings, repeat. There a "laws" that govern this impersonal process but not an ultimate creator God.

This may be hard to understand because there are gods, many of them, and they of different kinds and orders: devas, brahmas, asuras, maras, nagas, and so on. They abide on different planes, of which there are at least 31; however, these general planes contain countless worlds. All of these worlds are divided into three spheres: sensual, fine material, and immaterial.

• Among these "gods" or deities are powerful beings who wield the power of creation and other, higher order beings who enjoy the creation of others. These, however, are not ultimate creations; that is to say, they are not really making new "things" such as a new soul (atta) or a new ultimate materiality or mentality. To give an example, say there were a pile of tiny bricks and a bucket of mortar and one were to release bricklayers to have at it. How many structures could they create? How many fabulous Lego-toy like "creations" could they put together?  Presumably, they could fashion together a countless number of "things," but -- in an ultimate sense -- what is there but the same old building blocks? What is there but just ultimate materiality (form) arranged in an immaterial way (name) that looks new but is only really bricks, mortar, and arrangement?

Countless worlds in 31 Planes in three spheres

Buddhist texts posit that deities (brahmas, which are a subset of devas or "shining ones") such as Maha Brahma ("Great Supremo") are misconstrued as a creator [7].

During the vivarta kalpa (some previous aeon), a deity from Abhassara (radiant) plane was reborn on the lower Maha Brahma plane. As many living beings forget about their past life as soon as they are reborn, this also happened with Maha Brahma. No longer being aware of the higher planes of existence, this being felt alone in the universe (or world-system, cakkavala).

This being longed for the presence of others. After some time, other deities (devas) from higher planes were also reborn on those brahma planes as ministers and companions, an entire retinue [8].

Seeing this happen and having wished for it, this being falsely believed, "I am their creator." This belief, according to Buddhist texts (like the Brahmajala Sutta), was then shared by those other deities.

Eventually, however, one of those deities passed away from that world and was reborn on the human plane. Through meditation, that person gained the power to remember past lives [7].

That person went on to teach what was remembered from that previous life in that glorious (but relatively low) heaven, namely, that Maha Brahma was the creator of this universe.

• There are countless world-systems ("universes"?) in 10,000 directions, each with its own Maha Brahma and Mara and Sakka, all of which are really stations (positions, seats, thrones, chairs, offices held by living beings).

The teaching of this person led to the widespread human belief in a creator god, according to the Pali canon [7], which refers to the Buddha's words and other teachings preserved in the Buddha's language (Pali or the lingua franca of Magadhi). More

• Creator in Buddhism?
• Mahayana Buddhism has a different Brahmajāla Sūtra
• From Dīgha Nikāya ("Collection of Long Discourses") No. 1: Brahmajāla Sutta ("The Supreme or All-Embracing Net of Views Discourse") translated by Prof. Rhys Davids)
• Buddhism and the God-Idea: Selected Texts (Wheel #47) edited and introduced by Ven. Nyanaponika Thera, Buddhist Publication Society, 1st ed. 1962, 2nd ed. 1970, 3rd printing 1981; edited by Dhr. Seven and Amber Larson, Wisdom Quarterly with Wiki edit

Science discovers the meaning of life

All life comes down to matter, says Materialism

A Mystery as Old as Humanity: For centuries, we’ve asked the same impossible question: What is life—and what gives it meaning? Now, scientists think they’re closer than ever to answering it. But their explanation isn’t philosophical or spiritual—it’s something far more concrete, hidden deep within the structure of matter itself.

• What if Buddhism's fundamental unit of materiality in this universe, the rupa kalapa, or "form particle," explains the "meaning of life"? What if all we are is just material, arising in the cosmos, turning, and passing away into nothingness, having emerged from there in the first place?
• Preposterous. The Buddha rejected this wrong view (miccha-ditthi) in very strong terms. It leads to a very pernicious view that denies a great deal about our lives. There are two extreme views the Buddha rejected and avoided; they are the annihilationist view on the one hand and the eternalist view on the other. Instead, he taught Dependent Origination as an explanation for all things.
• The idea that we (the self, soul, ego, personality, living being) are only material in nature is flawed and leads to the annihilationist wrong view that says that when we die, everything stops. There is no further becoming. Karma has no force to produce further becoming, rebirth, rearising in another state, manifesting the results of previous deeds.
• There is a similar extreme on the other end, that of the eternalists who proclaim that the self/soul (atta or atman) continues in essence unchanged forever, individuated, fated to receive the result of all previous deeds (karma). This, too, is a wrong view.
• How could they both be wrong? Wouldn't one being wrong necessitate the other being right? No. Both views are at odds with reality, and enlightenment (bodhi) is knowing-and-seeing things as they truly are thereby being liberated from the endless Round of Rebirth (samsara).
• What does the Middle Way say is the case? One must first understand that "middle" does not mean a compromise between both views, a mean or average of the two. Indeed, what we are or at least what we identify with, has a material component, but there is also a psychological component. This is nama-rupa, "name and form." This can be said of all things, not just us.
• More importantly, what is "us"? What are "we"? What is the self or soul or the being? The Buddha said when people speak of self, they are referring to the Five Aggregates clung to as self. These are form; feelings, perceptions, mental formations, and consciousness(es).
• What, ultimately speaking, is "form" (rupa)? Science does not know, but well-instructed mystics (noble ones, knowers, seers, those endowed with the divine eye or dibba cakkhu) know. They do not know it by rote. Anyone can come to know that. They know it by direct perception. They are well instructed not to memorize a list but rather to engage in a practice (Satipatthana) to directly see, penetrate, and understand what is there in material form. Unfortunately, what is there is described in ancient and archaic terms. When modern people hear these words, they -- thinking they know what they mean -- dismiss them out of hand.
• Those who listen, who give ear and attention to comprehend what the Buddha meant by these ancient terms is then instruction on the PRACTICE to be able to see them directly. See what? The Four Elements. We "know" there aren't four elements. There are many more. This is not what "elements" (dhatu) means in Buddhism. The elements are not, roughly speaking, material. They are qualities, characteristics, descriptions of matter. Those many descriptions are put into four categories, and these categories are the "elements."
• The PRACTICE of Four Elements Meditation is the way to know-and-see them. This is not science to SHOW others. This is Buddhist psychology (Abhidhamma) to see for oneself. For it is only by knowing-and-seeing for ourselves that we can become free. No one has ever gained freedom, enlightenment, spiritual liberation simply by reading -- just as no one has ever learned physics by flipping to the back pages of a text for the answers to equations. The answers are back there so that, after doing the PRACTICE of calculating, we can see if our results comport and accord with what others have confirmed are the answers. It is essential to come see for oneself. That is the Path of Freedom (Vimuttimagga), the Path of Purification (Vissudhimagga).

Source: Scientists think they’ve finally found the meaning of life (MSN)

Time is an illusion: Power of Now (video)

• Removing 95% of unhappiness, here's how | Eckhart Tolle

Time is an illusion, according to Einstein

Does time really exist? Buddhism’s view on the nature of time

The Time Paradox (social psychology)

(Buddhism Podcast) Buddhism Explained. Time: illusion or reality? This examination of "time" from a Buddhist perspective reveals intriguing parallels with modern science.

From Albert Einstein's pronouncements to the Buddha's wisdom in the Dhammapada [a collection of sayings], the concept of time as a construct is explored.

Dhammapada for Awakening

Quantum physics, with its baffling phenomena like entanglement and the observer effect, challenges [our consensus reality and] conventional understandings of time, mirroring ancient Buddhist insights on the subjective nature of reality.

The neuroscience of time perception is considered, exploring how our brains [thoughts] construct our experience of time's flow.

Buddhist practices like mindfulness meditation are investigated as potential pathways to experiencing the present moment more fully, even transcending the limitations of time.

• 00:00 - Intro
• 00:12 - The Mystery of Time: Where Science meets the Buddha's wisdom
• 05:15 - The Grand Illusion
• 11:17 - Time is mind-made
• 17:05 - Quantum Buddhism
• 23:02 - Our Mind: Time's Creator
• 29:02 - Breaking free from time's prison
• 34:44 - Beyond time: The Power of Timeless Presence and the limits of science

Quantum Buddhism: Dancing in Emptiness (Smetham)

The Power of Now: A Guide...

The profound implications of time's illusory nature are considered, ranging from the science of neuroplasticity and memory reconstruction to the Buddhist concept of emptiness (sunyata) [the impersonal nature of all phenomena, particularly the Five Precepts clung to as self].

The intricate relationship between consciousness and time is examined, and practical methods for cultivating timeless awareness [flow states, jhanas or meditative absorptions, singleminded focus that purifies the mind] are offered.

Singleminded focus leads to flow and absorption

This inquiry aims to bridge scientific understanding and spiritual wisdom, offering a fresh perspective on the power of the present moment [like Eckhart Tolle's famous book, The Power of Now] and the potential for liberation from a time-bound existence.

• #time #BuddhismPodcast #Buddhism #Buddhist
• The Time Paradox: The New Psychology of Time That Will Change Your Life (Audible): Philip Zimbardo, John Boyd, Matthew Josdal, Tantor Audio
• Quantum Buddhism: Dancing in Emptiness: Reality Revealed in the Interface of Quantum Theory and Buddhist Metaphysics (Graham Smetham)
• Buddhism Podcast, Jan. 13, 2025; Dhr. Seven, Pat Macpherson, Amber Larson (eds.), Wisdom Quarterly

SUTRA: That time I met God (DN 1)

CIA Agent Stan Marsh can be a bit of a control freak. Here, he puts a gun to God's head to get his way. And God laughs...then shoots Stan in the head because that's just the kind of god he is, all vengeful and full of love (American Dad, "Rapture's Delight").

Before Genesis

(Bible Wisdom Chronicles) Before the Book of Genesis: The Untold Story of Creation (Gnostic)

The origin of the belief in a Creator God

I am the Great Supremo, Almighty creator, Brahma

THE BUDDHA: Now, there comes a time, meditators, when, sooner or later, after the lapse of a [cosmologically] long period, this world-system [devolves and] passes away.

When this happens, beings have mostly been reborn [due to their previous skillful karma, their wholesome deeds] in the World of Radiance (ābhassara deva loka), and there they dwell made of mind and feeding on joy, emitting light from themselves, traversing the air, continuing in glory (streaming radiance). They remain this way for a long period of time.

Now, there comes a time, meditators, when, sooner or later, this world-system begins to re-evolve. When this happens the Palace of the Supreme (Brahmā-loka) appears, but it is empty. And some [high-born] being or other, either because its* span of years has passed or its merit [the store of karma that allowed it to live there] is exhausted, falls from the World of Radiance and reappears [is reborn, comes to life] in the Palace of the Supreme.

• [*Brahmas do not undergo sexual dimorphism and therefore are neither male nor female, as is true of all beings above the level of brahmas, but may be said to be androgynous, encompassing or capable of encompassing characteristics of either gender.]

So this God is the be-all end-all?

And there also that being lives made of mind and feeding on joy, emitting light from itself, traversing the air, continuing in streaming glory, and thus remains for a long, long period of time.

Now there arises in this being, from dwelling alone there so long, a dissatisfaction and a longing: "O, would that other beings might come to join me in this place!”

• [NOTE: Buddhism is not atheistic but ultimately nontheistic, with many polytheistic overtones. There is not just one God but many gods (brahmas and devas), none of whom are the actual ultimate creator or first cause. Because time and universes happen in cycles, evolving and devolving, there could be an alpha and omega of sorts, but it isn't real or ultimate because there are higher-born beings than that. A brahma sees to the extent of its plane of existence and not hire, where it cannot access. So it is not omniscient nor omnipotent and either is not aware of the other "Gods" or is willfully ignorant so as to not have to ponder how they came to be there.]

And, just then, either because their span of years had passed or their merit was exhausted, other beings fall from the World of Radiance and appear in the Palace of the Supreme as companions, who in all respects are like it.

• There are many heavenly worlds (sagga, deva-lokas) and many Gods (brahmas) and gods (devas) among the general 31 Planes of Existence. There are countless individual worlds categorized into these general planes. See Buddhist cosmology.

On this happening, meditators, the one who was first reborn there thinks to itself:

“I am Brahmā [the Supreme], the Great Brahmā, the Supreme One, the Mighty, the All-Seeing, the Ruler, the Lord of All [the Universe], the Maker, the Creator, the Chief of All, appointing to each its place, the Ancient of Days, the Father of All who are and are ever to be. These other beings are of my creation. Why is that so? A while ago I thought, 'Would that they might come!’ And on my mental aspiration, behold the beings came!”

A.I. almost gets it right, missing sight of what the

Buddha really was: a human who rose above Gods.

The Gods are not awakened/enlightened. He was.

Moreover, those beings themselves also think: “This must be Brahmā, the Supreme, the Mighty, the All-Seeing, the Ruler, the Lord of All, the Maker, the Creator, the Chief of All, appointing to each its place, the Ancient of Days, the Father of All who are and ever are to be. And we must have been created by this being. Why? It is because, as we see, it was this being who was here first, and we came after.”

On this, meditators, the one who first came into existence [on that plane] is of longer life and more glorious [brighter, streaming more radiance], and more powerful than those who appeared afterward.

And it might well be, meditators, that some being on falling from that state, should come here. And having come here, he might go forth from the household life into the left-home life. And having become a wandering ascetic he, by reason of ardor, persistent exertion, consistent application, earnestness, and careful thought [balanced effort] reaches such rapture of heart [piti born of meditative absorption called jhana] that, rapt in heart, he calls to mind his past life (his last dwelling-place) but not the ones prior to that.

God didn't really create the world out of nothing?

Buddhism and the God-Idea

He says to himself, “That illustrious Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Supreme One, the Mighty, the All-Seeing, the Ruler, the Lord of All, the Maker, the Creator, the Chief of All, appointing to each its place, the Ancient of Days, the Father of All who are and ever are to be, the One by whom we were created, that One is steadfast, immutable, eternal, of a nature that knows no change and will remain so for ever and ever, whereas we who were created by that being have come here as beings who are impermanent, mutable, limited in duration of life.”

This, meditators, is the first state of things on account of which, starting out from which, some wandering ascetics and Brahmin priests, being Eternalists as to some things and Non-Eternalists as to others, maintain that the soul [self, atta, atman] and the world are partly eternal and partly not.

• Seth MacFarlane, American Dad; Long Discourses of the Buddha (DN 1), "The All-Embracing Net of Views," Dīgha Nikāya 1, Brahmajāla Sutta, translated by Prof. Rhys Davids and edited by Dhr. Seven (Dec. 2024), from Ven. Nyanaponika (formerly Mr. Siegmund Feniger) Wheel #47: Buddhism and the God-Idea: Selected Texts, 1962 (Buddhist Publication Society, Kandy, Sri Lanka) for Wisdom Quarterly

How to know if you're enlightened

.

Think about it. An enlightened* person not knowing she's enlightened is not that bad, but an unenlightened person thinking he is, that's not good. That's wrong view that could lead to trouble.

• *Enlightened: Aryan, the Noble Ones, those along any of the any of the stages of awakening, meaning the various kinds of stream enterers, once returners, non-returners, and the fully enlightened arhats, which some could argue are the only real "enlightened" (bodhi) ones.

By practice, an ordinary human can reach it.

There is a strange characteristic feature of enlightened persons. Look within and check for it: They don't compare themselves to others. This is odd because, are they better or worse than others? They don't know in the sense that it does not occur to them to think it, ponder it, ask, or make comparison. (They're better, of course, from our point of view but not from theirs).

Do they have an inferiority complex, a superiority complex, or do they see themselves as EQUAL to others? Go back to the key sentence. They don't compare themselves to others and, therefore, they are neither nor the other. This was mind-blowing to see because, well surely from their point of view, the "nice" thing would be to think themselves equal to us, the lowly uninstructed (and therefore ignorant) worldlings.

• "Ignorant" sounds bad, but it just means we don't know yet, so it includes everyone. Even God (Brahma, Jehovah/YHWH/Yahweh, Allah, Asherah, Astarte, El, Elohim, Demiurge, Flying Spaghetti Monster, etc.) is not omniscient, but there are two kinds of buddhas who may be, the samma-sam-buddha and the pacceka-buddha, the "supremely enlightened" and the "silent (nonteaching) enlightened." The Buddha was the first kind, and it is said that he could lay claim to being omniscient not in the sense that he knew everything all the but in the sense that he could know anything he put his mind to. (Things are not fixed, so did he really know what was going to happen or only what was most likely to happen?)

And this brings us to the next point, which is equally view-shattering: Do regular fully enlightened arhats know everything? I mean, it says "fully" right in their title, and if they have no ignorance, they must have full knowledge. No, they do not, far from it.

Not only can arhats likely not explain Buddhism, they may not know much of anything else (academic subjects, life lessons, trivia). They just happen to know the most important things, that which the Buddha was wise enough to winnow out and focus on. All the other things might be nice, but they are not essential for waking up.

What will I wear when I awaken, white linen with a Nehru collar? (arenasport.com)

• In Goenka's book, there's a wonderful parable called "Swimology." It goes something like this: One day, as the ship is about to leave safe harbor for the open seas, the young captain on his maiden voyage takes on an older able-bodied sailor who looks like he's been at sea all his life. The ship soon runs into trouble and gets lost. The captain consults the old sailor for help reading the map. But that salty seadog snaps back: "I don't know mapology!" The captain says, "You travel the sea but can't read a map? You wasted a quarter of your life!" In the hot sun, the men run out of water and start complaining. The captain asks the old sailor to fix the cistern, but he snaps back: "I don't know hydrology." The captain says, "You live on a ship depending on water, but you never learned plumbing? You wasted two quarters of your life!" Before long, they're completely lost, going in circles, running out of supplies. The captain orders him to grab a sextant to help navigate by the stars. The old sailor snaps back: "I don't know astrology!" The captain says, "You live under starry skies, and you can't read them for guidance? You wasted three quarters of your life!" At daybreak they spot land, but the captain being in a rush hits the rocks. The ship is wrecked and taking on water. The old sailor runs to the wheel to ask the captain, "Did you study swimology?" "What's that?" asks the captain. The old sailor yells for everyone to jump overboard and abandon ship. The ignorant old sailor, who never had an academic education, did study one thing and knew enough to save himself. He snapped back at the captain: "This ship is going down! Everyone who can swim can make it safely to shore. Those who can't are going to drown. You learned all those fancy ologies but skipped the most crucial lesson for a life at sea -- to be able to make to safety! You wasted your whole life!"
• So here we are, lost in Samsara (the Ocean of Life and Death), bobbing up and down about to drown, wasting our time swirling in confusion, asking so many questions about this, that, and the other, but never focusing on the most essential, the Dhamma (what the Buddha taught concerning the Seven Requisites of Enlightenment for salvation, for utter liberation or moksha). Like the captain, we're Smart Alecs with degrees in all kinds of ologies except the most valuable kind: Dharma Studies.
• [By the way, WHO can become enlightened? Any human or deva of average intelligence, no special quality necessary excepts, perhaps, having the karmic good fortune of coming into contact with the Buddha's Doctrine and Discipline (Dhamma-Vinaya). Sincerity is essential, and my teacher speculates that paramis (kusala-karma) are important, which he defines as "anything good done in the past with the idea of reaching enlightenment (bodhi) or nirvana (nibbana)."]

Arr eu shur? Ai'm thee gretest g'nius.

I always imagined that when I became enlightened, I would go over to the university, convene a meeting of professors, researchers, scholars, and academics and solve their biggest problems for them.

• Yes, Einstein?
• Yez, vell, vee kno thut E=mc2...
• Ugh, actually, Albie, you left out ether (e) which accounts for your imprecision. So I want you to get back to the drawing board, confer to Nikola Tesla (he's in Dimension 7, Quadrant 5) and you should be able to see the error of your ways and get back to Earth to clean up the mess.
• Yes, Hawking?
• I-am-the-longest-lived-survivor-of-ALS-and...
• That's not what you had, Steve, and your idea that...
• Yes, Witten, why are you interrupting? Your view of string theory is all in knots, but here's how to resolve the equations...

I guess it's a silly thought, and it's completely wrong. What an enlightened person comes to know, overcoming all ignorance on these four things, can be summarized in the Four Enlightened (Noble) Truths:

1. what disappointment is,
2. its cause,
3. its full resolution, and
4. the path to that end.

Though such beings have glimpsed these things directly, that is not to say they can in any way articulate it for others. They might be able to. It would certainly be good to hear them, but they may not be inclined to speak about it at all.

For example, many monks in the Thai Forest Tradition are said to have gained realization, but are they able to explain it or effectively teach it to others to the point that that person experiences the liberating truth? That's very rare.

Ajahn Chah was able to, but are his accomplished students? Maybe Ajahn Brahm or Ajahn Sumedho. Why aren't they all famous with large retinues of noble disciples. The great Ajahn Jumnien personally knows more than most beings, but can he communicate it effectively?

The great Pa Auk Sayadaw, the Burmese meditation master, is rare among all Buddhist monastics in that he is both a scholar and an adept practitioner. He can teach it.

He is nevertheless limited by his students' limitations. He cannot impart it, nor can he read minds or flex the magical iddhi powers that might help him teach. He can advise, guide, reproach, encourage but he is without the iddhi powers to do more.

The Buddha had iddhi powers at his disposal. And using them he could not, as it were, get a horse to drink water though it had been led right to the refreshing stream.

• In the simplest terms, since we have defined "enlightened" (bodhi) to mean "having reached any of the stages of enlightenment, one need only concern oneself with the first stage: get there, and everything will be all right within seven lives. Of course, reaching it, there's no reason to stop. Keep striving, or start striving now that you are 100% sure what the Buddha taught is real and works.
• For simplicity let's say there are four such stages, though the Path of Freedom (Vimuttimagga) lists the other kinds of stream enterers -- and an additional two kinds of preenlightened folks, the saddhānusārī and dhammānusārī (confidence-devotee rooted in faith and Dharma-devotee rooted in wisdom). What are the characteristics of the person who has undergone that stage (knowing-and-seeing described in two parts as path-and-fruit)?
• The stream enterer is the first person to be safe in this interminable sojourn, this samsara, this Wheel of Life and Death, for this person has for the first time in all these aeons put a limit on suffering (dukkha). Other beings may go on suffering for as far as the mind can see, but such a noble one now has to endure no more than seven rebirths. And all of these rebirths will be on the human plane or higher, never lower. This is one of the wonders of enlightenment.
• Now, indeed, what could go wrong? Nothing that happens can matter much because one is sure to get out. For example, say we were all serving life sentences and one of us got a reprieve, a pardon, and held a letter for the warden that had to be heeded. That person is already free in theory and now need only wrap it up and go from our h*ll hole or choose to stay longer to help others, or putter about, or fulfill karmic obligations and promises or waste away on trivialities like more sensual enjoyments for their own sake (though how this is done if one knows better is hard to fathom).
• One wrong view many hold, which seems to be a part of Theravada (Pali canon) lore, is that a stream enterer can do no moral wrong. This is completely mistaken. There are certainly at least five things one cannot do, but everything else, it's possible. (Those five cannot be done because they would entail an immediate result in the very next rebirth on a subhuman plane, which now one is no longer liable to fall into). For evidence that such exalted beings can behave badly, be immoral, do wrong, be bad, commit an offense, one need only read the Ratana Sutta ("Jewel Sutra"). Though one engages in whatever misconduct, one will nevertheless not fall into worlds more miserable than this, nor will one reappear anywhere more than seven more times.
• Furthermore, of course stream enterers can have lapses if even arhats might violate Monastic Disciplinary Code rules, which are listed indicating which rules those are that even an arhat might slip up on.
• Of course, it must be that this does not sound good to most people -- who are people (human or deva) because they are beset by greed (lust, attraction, clinging), hatred (aversion, fear), and delusion (wrong view, ignorance) -- because we want to go on, have more rebirths (ignorant of the countless number that have already transpired and the countless yet to come as we engage in karma and those deeds work themselves out).
• When one knows-and-sees, directly has knowledge-and-vision of some past lives and how this life and this present suffering came to be (which is the knowledge that arises from the practice of Dependent Origination, which most people do not know is a practice rather than a theory), one will be able to let go.
• Moksha or liberation is possible by letting go, but letting go is only really possible as a result of knowing-and-seeing. So it is not willpower or brute force or strong determination (a triumph of will) that does it. It is practice (bhavana, kammatthana, sadhana) that brings about knowledge and vision. For instance, say you had a warm bowl of rice in the dark and would not part with it for the world, not to give away not even to share with anyone. And someone told you to throw it away. You would think them mad. Throw away this thing I'm about to devour and have so much greed/attraction for that I don't even want to share a grain of it with anyone else? You cling to the rice bowl. And again the person advises, admonishes, and asks you to let go and toss it. Do you? Could you? Do you possess the faith (saddha) to take that person's word for it and do it? Probably not. So what is it going to take that person to have to do since words won't work? What now if that person were to get you to turn on the light or bring a candle or step out of the dark and look into the bowl? And say that in doing so, you were to perceive what was really there all along -- maggots not rice grains? How hard would it be to let go now, how hard to throw away, toss, discard, abandon? Not hard at all, right? It takes no willpower, no force, no faith even. What does it take? Knowing-and-seeing, direct perception for oneself so that one need never rely on another for what is true and what is not.
• How does that tie in? We have lust. Who or what do we lust after? Beautiful objects. Why are they "beautiful"? It is exactly because we do not see their true nature but just their appearance. Skin is beautiful, complexion, hair, scent, softness... How deeply do we need to look into it to see what's really there? Worms, blood, flesh, gore, guts, partly digested food, mucus, urine, oil, feces... Ahhh! How fast can you let go?
• One cannot do it fast enough -- and with no willpower, no force, no sense of loss, no triumph of will, not even any faith. Faith can be a great thing but, ultimately, it is not the necessary and sufficient thing. It is excellent for starters, but we need to know and see for ourselves. That is what the Buddha promises. That is the path to enlightenment.
• With the attainment of stream entry, these mental defilements go away:
• With the attainment of stream entry, one will instantly gain unshakeable faith in three things: the Teacher, the Teaching, and those successfully Taught (Buddha, Dhamma, and Sangha). Why? It is because now one knows for sure that they were all three right.
• Through the path of stream entry (stream-winning, sotāpatti-magga) one "becomes" free (whereas by realizing the fruition, one "is" free) from the first three fetters (samyojana) that bind beings to existence in the Sensual Sphere, namely:
  • (1) personality-view (sakkāya-ditthi; see ditthi),
  • (2) skeptical doubt (vicikicchā),
  • (3) attachment to mere rules and rituals (sīlabbata-parāmāsa; see clinging upādāna).

The seven groups (sets) of noble disciples are as follows:

1. (1) the faith-devotee (saddhānusārī),
2. (2) the faith-liberated one (saddhāvimutta),
3. (3) the body-witness (kāya-sakkhī),
4. (4) the both-ways-liberated one (ubhato-bhāga-vimutta),
5. (5) the Dhamma-devotee (dhammānusārī),
6. (6) the vision-attainer (ditthippatta),
7. (7) the wisdom-liberated one (paññā-vimutta).

What is the significance of these groupings? I've asked Bhikkhu Bodhi and other scholar-monks only to hear that there are limited references in the Pali canon. They offer hope because it is said by some (mentioned in Ven. Bodhi's endnotes to his Middle Length Discourses (Majjhima Nikaya) translation) that such beings as 1 and 5 will not pass away until becoming stream enterers. Why this is said or what the proper understanding is remains to be seen. (Dhamma-viyama is a strange and fascinating subject).

• What if a better list of the "noble ones" can be argued for: (1) saddhānusārī (the faith-devotee who will not pass until attainment), dhammānusārī (the Dharma-devotee who will not pass until attainment), (3) the stream enterer (who is now destined to no more than seven rebirths), (4) the once-returner (who will return to this world at most one more time but will be reborn in the Pure Abodes and make final attainments there), (5) the non-returner (who will no longer be reborn on the human plane but in the Pure Abodes until final attainments), (6) the arhat with remainder (still in human form, experiencing the results of past karma, making no new karma only kriya), (7) the arhat without remainder (no longer in form of any kind, no longer experiencing any karmic results, utterly freed from delusion, having entered final-nirvana). (The suggestion that the "change of lineage" or gotrabhu is another "noble one" makes no sense since all of the noble ones are this. The reason there are four stages yet "eight individuals" is because they are distinguished between path (magga) moment and fruition (phala) moment, which by orthodox tradition is explained as meaning one nanosecond of difference as one mind-moment (citta) supplants the previous one and one goes from gaining the path and experiencing the moment or change of lineage inherent in gaining the path-moment. It is not a satisfying explanation for such a big distinction as to list Eight Individuals among the "Noble or Enlightened Ones."

So until Ven. Analayo (who exhaustively defined Mindfulness in Early Buddhism, Journal of Buddhist Studies, Vol. XI, 2013) makes a dissertation of it, the Buddhist Dictionary entry Ariya ("Noble Ones") by Ven. Nyanatiloka will have to do. The Apadana Commentary gives a little explanation.

So to answer the question, "How to know if I'm enlightened?" it's as easy as 1-2-3 (which is not to say it's easy to reach, because it is extremely rare, but easy enough to know for yourself):

1. Do I have perfect, unshakeable faith (confidence, conviction) in the Triple Gem or "Three Jewels" (Buddha, Dhamma, and Noble Sangha, the Teacher, Teaching, and the successfully Taught), because I have glimpsed nirvana and seen what they had seen (when we were all set free by the Truth)?
2. Am I no longer inclined, and does it no longer make sense, to compare self to others (seeing as how one has understood it is all impersonal and there is no self, no ego, no soul to cling to but there is, and one has directly seen, that all things arise based on Dependent Origination with the sole exception of nirvana, which is the only thing that is not a "thing," not a constituent composite, not a conditioned phenomenon, and is therefore called the "unconditioned element" or the asankhata dhatu)?
3. And have I irreversibly put an end to three of the defilements/hindrances: personality-view, skeptical doubt, and clinging to mere rites and rituals as if they could ever bring about enlightenment.

• NOTE: As for morality and monastic rules (vinaya), there are different lists of what we might generally call "defilements," such as: āsava, kilesa, nivarana, samyojana, and very generally the Three Roots or Three Poisons. They are all overcome by an arhat. More
• Dhr. Seven, Ashley Wells (ed.), Wisdom Quarterly; story by S.N. Goenka (dhamma.org); Ven. Nyanatiloka, Buddhist Dictionary: Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines

Islam explains 'Big Bang' as act of God

Oh my God, Miriam, can you believe how they dress their girls? - We mustn't judge, Khadija!

The Big Bang problem for atheists: What Hawking and Tyson get wrong | God’s Cosmos

Muslim graffiti over Hunza Buddhist petroglyphs

(Basira Education) This video challenges the [Western] materialist view of the universe by using the [supposed] "Big Bang" as evidence for God's existence [that God being Allah, the One and Only true God, with only one messenger, peace be upon him, the Prophet Mohammed, with only one true revelation of His will and His orders for how to live].

Shaykh [Sheikh] Hamza Karamali explains that the "Big Bang" marks the beginning of the universe, making it impossible for materialism to explain its origins without invoking some [pre-existing] thing beyond physical matter and time.

• Science: Is our universe a black hole? New cosmological model challenges the Big Bang
• What does it mean to be human?

Khilji destroys Buddhist Nalanda

He contrasts this with the views of [wheelchair scientist] Stephen Hawking and [gatekeeper mouthpiece] Neil deGrasse Tyson, arguing that their denial of a pre-Big Bang cause overlooks the need for a immaterial, timeless creator — God [or an impersonal ground or source].

The Big Bang, once rejected by materialists, now serves as overwhelming scientific evidence for a finite universe that points to a divine creator.

To learn more about a "Why Islam is True" course, go here: whyislamistrue.com/course. To learn more about Basira's classical curriculum in a modern context click here: basiraeducation.org.

Why listen to a Muslim or learn about Islam?

Why do Jews hate Muslims?

Salam alaykum. A Buddhist website giving Islam a forum? But they're monotheistic Abrahamic fanatics!

Wisdom Quarterly is interested in all faiths and practices, explanations and views, particularly those we disagree with, so we listen without necessarily expecting to be listened to in return. Why?

In the future, when peace reigns in the world, one can only hope that it will not be because we all agree but rather because we have all learned to respect, enjoy, and celebrate differences.

The Buddha originated the famous simile of the elephant, which like the Aesop Fables (rooted in the Jataka) gained so much popularity people use it without realizing who came up with it: A group of blind men are asked what an elephant looks like. So depending on their sense of touch, they feel a portion of the elephant and extrapolate a global view. The one who feels a leg describes the elephant as a column. The one who feels an ear describes the elephant as a supple palm. The one who feels the trunk describes the elephant as a snake, and so on. Each, going on limited information, proceeds to form a wrong view about the whole.

All of their views combined might get us somewhere, but instead they are with each other: "How can you say a supple palm when this is a post?" "How can you say post, when this is a snake?" and so on.

One of the best classes to take in college is comparative religion. If they were presented fairly and accurately, we might be drawn to the best religion for us, rather than all being baptized by fire into Scientism. Lots of students would surely become agnostics, and a few might become militant atheists and even fewer pantheists and animists. Who's right?

This is a question of epistemology (the philosophy of determining what qualifies as proof and knowledge), which is very ontological (concerned with being). Go, Socrates! The unexamined life is not worth living, which seems to be what our Western hedonism (pleasure above everything else) seems to really be about. In any case, we already hear the anti-Islam view by its most articulate critic on YouTube.

• Basira Education (video), 9/20/24; Ashley Wells, Dhr. Seven, Shauna Schwartz (eds.), Wisdom Quarterly