(Buddha's Wisdom) March 30, 2025:
š WHAT IF WE FELL INTO OUR PHYSICAL BODIES?
What if we weren't born into a body but fell into one? An ancient Buddhist text called the AggaƱƱa Sutta (DN 27) describes space beings of pure light who once floated about freely through space until they alighted on earth, devolved, and developed something we all struggle with today — sensual craving or desire (tanha). That first craving for sensual pleasure began our descent into increasingly dense physical form, creating humans bound by the very cravings that landed us here and kept us stuck in the quagmire of craving, karma, and karmic results. DISCOVER:
How the Buddha taught that consciousness preceded physical form, not the other way around
The striking parallels between Buddhist cosmology and modern scientific theories
Why a human birth is considered extraordinarily rare as the Buddha taught
The unexpected connection between desire and the densification of our physical bodies
How understanding our origins can transform our approach to spiritual practice today
TIMESTAMPS
00:00 Were we once beings of light?
02:06 The Buddhist cosmological view
06:17 Scientific parallels with Buddhist origin stories
08:40 The mental evolution of humanity
12:41 Why human birth is so precious
16:33 The mystery element: Where do we go from here?
The Buddha's Creation Story: Myth as History and Inspiration
(Doug's Dharma) Should ancient stories be looked at as historical myths or as inspirational literature? Let's look at both options through the lens of the Aggañña Sutta, a famous, early Buddhist creation myth. š New book by Dr. Doug Smith, PhD: A Handbook of Early Buddhist Wisdom, with foreword by Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi. š§” Find this material useful? Check out Patreon and get fun benefits like exclusive videos, audio-only versions, and extensive show notes: dougsseculardharma
Thus have I heard. The Exalted One (the Buddha) was once staying near SÄvatthÄ«, in the East Park, inside the mansion of MigÄra's Mother. Now at that time VÄseį¹į¹ha and BhÄradvÄja were passing their probationary period among the wandering ascetics, wishing to become fully ordained Buddhist monks.
Then in the evening the Exalted One, having arisen from his meditations, came down, and was walking back and forth in the open air, in the shade of the mansion. When VÄseį¹į¹ha saw this, he told BhÄradvÄja, adding:
“Let's go, friend BhÄradvÄja, let's approach the Exalted One, because we might have the good fortune to hear from the Exalted One a talk on matters of Dhamma (Doctrine)."
“Even so, friend," BhÄradvÄja replied. So VÄseį¹į¹ha and BhÄradvÄja approached the Exalted One and, having saluted him, they walked behind him as he walked back and forth. Then the Exalted One said:
“VÄseį¹į¹ha, being Brahmin (brahmana) by birth and family lineage, have gone forth from a Brahmin family and home into the left-home life of a wandering ascetic (sramana), do the other Brahmins blame and revile you?
“Venerable sir, yes, indeed, Brahmins do blame and revile us with characteristic abuse, copious, not holding back."
“VÄseį¹į¹ha, with what words do they blame you?
“Venerable sir, Brahmins say: 'The Brahmin caste is the best.... Only Brahmins are genuine children of BrahmÄ, born of Brahma's mouth, offspring of BrahmÄ, created by BrahmÄ, heirs of BrahmÄ. As for you, you have renounced the best human rank and have gone over to that low class — to shaven recluses, to the vulgar [nouveau-riche] rich, to those of dark skins, to those born of Brahma's feet. In these terms, venerable sir, do Brahmins blame and revile us with characteristic abuse, copious, not holding back....
"VÄseį¹į¹ha, surely those Brahmins have forgotten the past (ancient lore) when they say so? On the contrary, Brahmin females, wives of Brahmins, are known to be fertile, are seen to be pregnant with child, bringing forth and nursing children. Yet, it is these very [human] womb-born Brahmins who say such things… 'Brahmins are genuine children of BrahmÄ, born from his mouth; his offspring, his creation, and his heirs'! By this they make a travesty of the nature of BrahmÄ. It is false what they say, and great is the demerit that they thereby earn." More (suttacentral.net)
WARNING: Is "Bashar" right? We do not know. Ask Darryl Anka, his channel. As when "Seth" speaks or "Abraham" advises, we ourselves must judge and decide.
What is the way? Shall we follow our bliss, like Abraham-Hicks says of the Law of Attraction? Are we to follow our feelings and heart...maybe our reason and head? Is it the Law of Vibration? What is the way of manifestation?
All asking, none knowing. All talking, none showing. All searching, none finding, traveling roads that go on winding. Channel Darryl Anka seems so passionate and sure.
The experience of our physical reality is mediated by our thoughts and views, our cognitive labels and feeling tone. Our response matters more than the world or universe that provokes us. Life is 51% response to 49% things that happen. Maybe what happens is the result of our previous karma, but what it (the results) will mean is yet to be determined, discerned, designated?
The road opened up before me. The Universe said, "Not this way" but did not seem to say which way then. Who or what was that up to? Might I choose? Did I fail to see the signs? Whither go I? Which way is "right"?
The Dharma knows all. The Buddha articulated a path (of practice) to bring about realization. Is it in line with what Bashar is saying? How about Galactica and Abraham-Hicks? Who can say, who can say when it can be any way?
The simulation seems adaptable. Now what? It's always the now. That means it's ours to choose. But we know not which way this leads or that -- so what to do? What is the guide?
I know, I'll call 888-CALL PSYCHICS and they can tell me for as much as $9.99 a minute or more. There was also that mysterious lady at the palm reading shop at the pier. And there's Aunt Lucy the Slatanic seance meister who listens to Slayer while prognosticating futures. Cash only.
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").
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 (Äbhassara 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 (BrahmÄ-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.]
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 BrahmÄ [the Supreme], the Great BrahmÄ, 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
BrahmÄ, 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?
He says to
himself, “That illustrious BrahmÄ, the Great BrahmÄ, 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," DÄ«gha NikÄya1, BrahmajÄla 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
Ancient Aliens: Proof of ancient Egyptian time travel (Season 4)
(HISTORY) July 11, 2024: Sacred tales of the ancient world may provide new clues to the oldest records of time travel ever experienced, in this clip from Season 4, "The Time Travelers."
Watch all new episodes of Ancient Aliens, Fridays at 9/8c, and stay up to date on all favorite shows on The HISTORY Channel website at history.com/schedule.
#AncientAliens
I pray you, please let us stay in the garden, Dad! - Get the hell out of here!
This post seeks to do far too much, explaining God and talking about prayer in observance of the National Day of Prayer and whether or not Buddhists "pray" since there is no necessity of believing in God if one is a Buddhist and there is no command to pray even if one does believe in God or gods. These two will eventually be parsed into two different articles. Enjoy the draft while they are interwoven.
(Buddha's Wisdom) Why Buddhists Don't Believe in GOD? | April 29, 2024: š¤ Ever wonder why Buddhists don't seem to believe in a Creator-God? The answer might surprise you – and it's been sparking heated debates for centuries! š„ In this thought-provoking video, BW dives deep into the heart of Buddhist philosophy to explore one of the most controversial questions in religious history. š§♂️š Here's the thing – this isn't about convincing anyone to abandon any belief. Buddhism is all about free inquiry, questioning everything, even its own Teachings (the Dharma)! šš [This is why there is a Kalama Sutra, the invitation to free inquiry.] Whether one is a devout believer, skeptic, or just curious, this video challenges assumptions and opens minds to new possibilities. š Stay curious, stay compassionate, and remember – the truth is waiting to be discovered within you [so get wise]. Namaste, friends! š¼ #Buddhism #God #Spirituality #Philosophy #Enlightenment #Wisdom #Meditation #Mindfulness #PersonalGrowth #Inspiration
Half the things said in this video are incorrect, but the whole of it is trending towards correct. Of course, many Buddhists believe in God. Which God? There are more than one. The One all-consuming GOD is Brahman, a Vedic, Brahminical, and Hindu concept, the impersonal reality behind all of the illusory (maya). The Buddha and Buddhists frequently talked about a creator god, whose name is Maha Brahma (the "Great Supremo"), who is neither male nor female, as the brahmas have transcended sexual dimorphism and are both and neither, just like the Abrahamic God (whom some scholars suggest is not related to Abraham but is A-Brahmanic, meaning "not related to Brahma or Brahman"). There are many gods in Buddhism, and one favorite deity (deva) is Sakka, King of the Gods, a favorite Zeus/Indra-type sky god of the Sakas of Scythia, popular among the horseback warrior princes of Scythia and Sakastan. There are countless other devas and brahmas, "light beings" (lit. "shining ones") in all directions of space and on earth. The more down-to-earth devas, even though the others visit the planet, are woodland fairies, nature spirits, spaceship (vimana) traveling godlings and deities that love to sport about, vain, beautiful, petty, obsessed with pleasure and beauty, exactly like the ancient Greek and Roman gods, well understood throughout ancient India and proto-India as well born fortunate beings with long lives, subtle senses, much delight, and often too distracted by the good times to seek for their enlightenment and release from rebirth. There is not a Buddhist God in the sense that all of the brahmas are, although very long-lived, impermanent as are all beings. Maha Brahma is special in that this deva (because all brahmas are a higher order of deva) is the first born at the renewal of another world cycle, at the big recurring bang in the endless cycles of time known as kalpas or aeons.
Today is also the National Day of Reason, not just the National Day of Prayer.
It often sounds to Western ears as if the Buddha did not know so remained silent. This is completely mistaken, an understandable misunderstanding. Often when the Buddha remained silent and someone stormed off dissatisfied with his response, Ananda would turn to the Buddha and ask him why he didn't answer. And the Buddha would explain. The most common reason was because whatever answer was given would lead to a misunderstanding in the questioner's mind. People often came to the Buddha holding wrong views, certain about their position. They were in no mood to learn what the Buddha knew and saw and taught. Not being answers sometimes chastened them to return and be more open. In this way when the Buddha spoke, they would understand, shed their wrong views (or give up clinging to their opinions, preferences, and pet theories), and become open to directly seeing what Truth is. One does not need the Buddha for that. The Buddha (this one and any other) points the way. It is for us to practice, cleanse our hearts and minds to prepare for directly seeing without a mediator. Foremost in this regard is the case of the obstinate monk Ven. Malunkyaputta. He had a lot of philosophical questions which the Buddha left unanswered. But he figured since he was a monk in this Doctrine and Discipline, he deserved answers from the Buddha about these very basic and ancient points of controversy: Is the world finite or infinite, does the fully enlightened person continue to exist or cease to exist when passing away, does rebirth go on forever or does it end, and so on and so on. Such questions never end. The Buddha dismissed these questions and left many things undeclared exactly as the video above suggests -- because they are not conducive to dispassion, disillusionment, and awakening to the unbelievable Truth. Why ask all that and demand answers before practicing to directly see for yourself without any teacher as your authority? The Buddha provides the path-and-practice, the Middle Way, that leads to direct knowledge, vision, and wisdom. In most religions, we hope it's true but only find out if we were wrong when we die. In Buddhism, it is not that way at all. Enlightenment, awakening, spiritual knowledge-and-vision are for this life, here and now. When we pass away, we will already know if we are liberated, on the right track, following a path-and-practice that does indeed lead to complete liberation. There is no need to wait. The time is now.
Famously, Ven. Malunkyaputta asked his questions anyway, and more foolishly demanded the Buddha answer him or he would quit being a monastic and quit practicing altogether.
He didn't like the Buddha's answer. The Buddha told him it was fine to quit, fine to not practice, fine to not accept that there was a good reason for those answers to remain undeclared. But he did Malunkyaputta a favor. He gave him a powerful simile to illustrate what he was doing by asking and insisting on an answer before proceeding towards Truth himself.
That simile, which is useful for all of us with a questioning and skeptical nature, lacking faith and confidence (saddha) in the Teacher, the Teaching, and the successfully Taught (the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha), runs like this:
Imagine a man shot by a poison arrow. A master physician offers to remove the arrow, stem the bleeding, and give an antidote to the fast acting poison, but that man -- wishing to know, wishing to understand, insisting someone explain to him -- will not accept the doctor's services, the cure, the antidote unless and until these questions are answered: Who shot me? Why did he shoot me? With what did he shoot me? What kind of wood was used for the shaft of the arrow? What kind of feather was used at the end of it? What kind of poison was dabbed on the tip? And so on and so forth. Any such person would much sooner die than any of those questions could be answered to his full satisfaction. Therefore, why not remain alive by accepting the master physician's advice to set them aside, get well, and pursue the answers himself. He would neither believe nor understand what answers he was given anyway.
Sister Tina Turner leads us in prayer (of the devotional Sokka Gakai branch of Japanese faith-based Nichiren Buddhism, which came into being long after the historical Buddha and in many ways is very unBuddhist if what the historical Buddha taught is any measure):
Q: Do Buddhists pray?
Yes, some. Some Buddhists pray, but not in the way the West does, not petitionary prayers to "Buddha" nor to the many deities recognized in Buddhism which, after all, is nontheistic but is not atheistic.
Buddhism could well be said to be polytheistic (except that, ultimately, just as the "self" is unreal so, too, are the gods). There is an impersonal force at play called Karma, and it seems to us that so much of what is said about the Christian, Muslim, Jewish God is really being said about Karma, as if God is doing it all, judging everybody, meting out rewards and punishments, being begged and giving in, being mocked and smiting the infidels and unbelievers. This omniscient creator god view is wrong in so many ways, but it is a reasonable simplification of how things work.
It's just like when a child asks, "Where does rain come from?" and, wishing to shut the kid up, the loving parent thinks he or she is doing the child a favor by offering an untrue but age-appropriate explanation wrapped around a moral lesson: "It's God crying because you didn't clean your room and respect your elders." "Oh, no!" the child thinks and feels much fear, nervousness, and develops no good view of God. But this is what we tell kids. This is level of nonsense we accept from our religions most of the time.
Were we wiser, wishing to know, we might be receptive to a social-scientifical answer: "Um, well, you see, Hun, when Mr. Cloud drinks too much, he's like Uncle Jerry going to the bathroom and flooding the commode, which spills over and ruins the party." "Oh, I get it."
Worshipping at the altar of Scientism, which is the only acceptable source of answers nowadays (even if they're wrong, at least they sound reasonable). This becomes the only source of answers we'll accept, just the facts, Ma'am, no metaphor, no simile, no mythology:
"When the barometric pressure rises in inverse proportion to aridity, humidity predominates and clusters of hydrogen molecules with two oxygen molecules attached, form and fall out of a gaseous state, condensing into soluble moisture, pooling in droplets that precipitate pooling on the ground with other attendant meteorological phenomena." "Huh, Professor? Maybe I should ask Mary Ann."
Nontheism means one is not obsessed with gods, God, or GOD (brahmas, Maha Brahma, and Brahman) because one's enlightenment (awakening to the ultimate truth) and even one's rebirth in any of the many heavens within the Three Spheres (Sensual, Fine Material, and Immaterial) does not depend on the gods.
One does not need to worry about the powers, lifestyles, or knowledge of God and gods (and there are many, no matter who the Abrahamic faiths have twisted their ancient polytheism into a monotheism in name only). As wise and psychic as gods may be, they are not enlightened, do not know the Dharma, do not practice the Dharma, and do not teach a path of liberation from rebirth. They are stuck in rebirth, in a good position, in an office, a station. And this is important because, the individual will fall from that, but the office will remain. How?
How? The universe very big, very very big. In it are many (countless) world-systems, and each has a God (a Maha Brahma), each has a Sakka (a kind of Archangel Michael, MaghavÄ or Magha of Macalagama when he was a human), Jesus in heaven figure, who tosses an Asura, a Lucifer character, out of heaven, leading to a war in the heavens, as those Titans or Asuras seek revenge and try to burn down that world of the devas they were thrown out of. Where were they thrown? The answer is the same as in the Abrahamic faiths, only no one in those seems to read their sacred texts to know that the answer is not "hell." It is earth. They were thrown out of that lowly heaven, two planes up, down to this platform at the base of the Axis Mundi, Mount Sumeru, a kind of Mt. Olympus). Moreover, there are many many devas, brahmas, and more devas above Maha Brahma. They are mapped in Buddhism on a chart called the 31 Planes of Existence, which mentions the karma that leads to rebirth in those worlds. So to become a god or God, follow that karma. The lifespans are enormous, the sensual and supersensual delights are delectable, and it feels like forever and ever until it ends. It might be possible to live 80,000 aeons in such rarefied worlds. But any amount of time less than infinity -- and remember, time is different everywhere, so what for us is a year is nothing for them -- means one is soon back, reaping the results of all their karma, good and bad, grinding on, treading the Wheel of Rebirth and Death such beings never actually got free from. The heavens may seem eternal, particularly the immaterial (arupa) ones, but they are not. If lifetimes there never came to an end, they would still be impermanent. How is that possible? It is possible because things, all things, are radically impermanent. That is, it is not that they will one day end but rather that from moment to moment they are always ending. This is the liberating vision of anicca, one of the Three Marks or Characteristics of Existence.
It depends on us (our intentional actions, which are based and motivated by the extent of our right view or confidence/faith in a teacher or the Teachings of the Buddha himself) and more importantly on our karma (our deeds of mind, word, and body).
Of course, there are two Buddhisms (Mahayana and Theravada) and they should not be confused because they are very different. The larger of the two, or 90% percent of Buddhists in the world, follows a kind of Hinduism and is called Mahayana or "Great Vehicle." The other much smaller school is a back-to-basics movement that is devoted to the historical Buddha. Mahayana worships "Cosmic Buddhas" and gives little attention to the founder of the Dharma in the world today, opting instead for a reformed approach and syncretism with Hinduism, Vedic Brahmanism, Taoism, Bon, Confucianism, and Shinto, which are hard to distinguish from the original teachings of Shakyamuni, the "Sage of the Scythians."
The other form of Buddhism is called Theravada, the "Teaching of the Elders," the theras being the enlightened immediate disciples of the historical Buddha Gautama. While neither tradition may pray in the sense of petitioning a deity very much (though asking things of the Goddess Kwan Yin, the Taras, Amitabha, Ksitigarbha, and other manifestations of what, for all intents and purposes, seems to be the same old Brahman (the Absolute or Ultimate Reality behind all Illusion or Maya) idea. Now, rather than personifying the Vedic and Indian gods like Hinduism does, Mahayana Buddhists imagine countless buddhas with all kinds of specialties, like Catholic saints. There's Medicine Buddha, the Goddess of Compassion who hears the cries of the world (Kwan Yin or Guanyin, a Mother Mary figure), and many others as needed. Mahayana Buddhism is mainly devoted to the worship of Amitabha, a Cosmic Buddha they see as a savior who will save all who call upon him. That calling could be imagined as a kind of prayer.
However, the real purpose of prayer beads, mantras ("thought instruments"), bowing, and chanting is to make the mind pliable so that one rules it rather than being ruled by it. The Isaiah Effect would be an excellent way to pray for Buddhists, full of gratitude for what they have and giving thanks in confidence of what they already have for having been grateful with all their body and emotions, as Braden explains.
There are devotional schools of Buddhism that arose long after the historical Buddha. They seem to ignore what the Buddha taught, opting instead for easy answers and instant solutions to life's problems. Foremost among these must be the Japanese devotional schools, explained by Westerner Alan Watts as being self-powered vs. other-powered (jiriki versus tariki).
We know that we cannot do it on our own, so many in recovery and the 12 steps rely on a "higher power," any higher power. And that is good, very good. The way the historical Buddha originally taught will sound very self-empowering, very jiriki, based on one's own strength. It is actually not because that does not tend to work. But it sounds like that's what he's saying: His final words, after all, were "Be a lamp/island (dipa) unto yourselves and work out your own salvation (liberation, awakening) with diligence." Elsewhere, however, he famously points something out to good Ananda, who is always questioning things for his benefit and the benefit of all of us who wish we had had the chance to ask the Buddha these sorts of things: One day Ananda realizes that having good friends in the Dharma and Discipline (Dhamma-Vinaya), in this path-of-practice, is a very good thing, very useful for one's enlightenment. Realizing this, he seeks out the Buddha for his validation. To his shock, the Buddha does not validate him. He tells him not to say such a thing. All Ananda said was that he thought that "noble friendship" (kalyanamittata) was half the path. The Buddha corrects him and points out that it is 100% of the path. Without noble friendship, people would not hear the Dharma, would not have a model of the practice, would not find encouragement, would not be corrected and set right when one strays, and ultimately would become enlightened anytime soon. That does not sound like "one's own power," does it? We must put forward our effort but never lose sight how much we're actually standing on the shoulders of giants, depending on a historical lineage of others who came before us, and serving as a bridge to the future from what we contribute to keeping the Dharma alive and making known the practice. There are Three Jewels in the world, not just one. The first is the Buddha who realized the Truth and made known the path to that same realization so that any ordinary person could strive to realize it and achieve it in this very life, depending on one's karma. The second is the Dharma, the Teaching he left behind in his stead; he did not elect another leader after him because the Dharma itself is what leads. The third is the one closest to us, the Community of Those Successfully Taught, the Noble Sangha. (Many people think this means anyone wearing robes, but that is very mistaken and harmful because many people in robes are not enlightened, not successful students, and many people not in robes are enlightened though they may not be able to teach others. So monastics should be seen as quite valuable, maintaining this tradition, but they are not one of the jewels, or in any case, they are a symbolic part of the actual jewel, the aryans, the noble ones, those who are stream-enterers, once returners, nonreturners, and arhats, and possibly two other kinds of people who will not pass away until they gain a "change of lineage" or gotrabhu and reach the first stage of awakening, but information on these two types is scarce. See Bhikkhu Bodhi).
We can either make progress by our own efforts (not likely) or by depending on a powerful other to do it for us. Having fallen so far away from the Teachings of the Buddha which produce calm and insight, Mahayana started to go astray and invent "new" ways to try to get enlightened. Great teachers arose, founders of schools, claiming to reveal esoteric secrets of the path. Let's read these words aloud and be sure to get into Amitabha's Western Paradise heaven and then make efforts for enlightenment there, and it'll be easy! This is one example of the kind of thinking that took over Mahayana Buddhism, pushing it in an increasingly devotional direction. Prayer makes sense in a devotional religion full of ritual.
It makes much less sense in a path-of-practice where one must depend on oneself to make the effort to overcome ignorance through mental calm (samatha and samadhi) and systematic mindfulness of four things (satipatthana and vipassana).
Another very beautiful and super popular form of Buddhism arose in Japan as well as part of this devotional deviation from the Buddha's Dharma, and that is the Nichiren Shoshu (Sokka Gakai) movement who say there is one prayer better than all others to get all you want (as in The Secret's Law of Attraction and teaching of Abraham-Hicks): Nam Myoho Renge Kyo
Kickstart a devotional Nichiren practice with two hours of Tina Turner
Dhr. Seven, CC Liu, Sheldon S., Seth Auberon (ed.), Wisdom Quarterly Wiki edit, MSN.com
Our discussion began when scientists announced finding 'brightest object in universe' (MSN)
Brightest known object in the universe was hiding in plain sight for decades (CNN)
Countless worlds in 31 categories or planes
The Buddha, when talking about luminary beings on various planes of existence (devas or "shining ones" and brahmas "supreme beings"), pointed out their remarkable brightness. The strange thing is that it sounds almost as if the objects in the sky (space or akasha) are the beings themselves in various celestial worlds farther and farther away from the base or ground of the earth. This aligns with the ancient practice of many if not all cultures to equate beings (angels, demigods, godlings, Gods, deities, and divinities) with planets and stars, e.g., Gaia/Bhumi, Surya/Sol, Soma/Chandra/Luna, and the local planetary or "celestial bodies").
Even Dr. Steven Greer is adamant that our Earth is a literal living goddess, not a figurative one.
And the Buddha in the Jataka or "Rebirth Tales" speaks of people, himself included, as being reborn as the Sun and Moon. Buddhist cosmology ranks beings and 31 general Planes of Existence, who achieve their rebirth in those exalted worlds by the strength and profundity of their mastery of jhana (meditative absorption, which provides temporary purification). Rebirth is not random or by chance but based on karma. The karma of absorption is miraculous. Moreover, the order of the cosmos, each world-system, includes stations -- such as each world having a "Sakka" and a "Maha Brahma," with people reborn into those positions for a span of time. Sakka, the King of the Devas, is not Sakka; there are many sakkas (Indras, archangels). He is not king of all devas; there are many more devas above him.
Know and see for yourself without authorities.
The same is true of the many kinds of brahmas, or divinities. Maha Brahma or "Great Brahma" is not the only brahma and not at all the greatest brahma, with their being other maha brahmas in other world systems, just as there are other buddhas in other worlds but at most only one in each at any given time. The details or regularities of the universe (multiverse) are explained as the niyamas in Buddhism. What is ultimately unclear is, Are the beings born supreme on a planetary body lending their name to that body, or are they that body? Is Sol, the Sun (Surya in India), a person manifesting as the sun, or does he rule on the sun, like calling this country Joey and its rival Vlad, or imagining that all of our personal names for the local planets are those beings, rather than just powerful personalities on those inanimate worlds.
Reading Eastern and Western texts, one has to assume that the answer is both. Gaia is a being, and this very living planet full of living beings is the impersonal "Mother Nature" personified for animistic religions and astronomers.
Now science has stumbled on something so mindbogglingly bright in the universe that it can hardly fathom it and wants to leave us all in awe, just as the Buddha seemed to experience some awe at the brightness of the brahmas and supernal devas of which/whom he personally knew.
The sutra tells the long story of the arising of humanoid life on earth, arriving from space (the heavens or akasha), alighting on this planet, liking it, and becoming increasingly dense and coarsened as they enjoy sensuality here. But what if they are NOT literal personal beings coming down from space and setting foot on a rocky outpost in the sky but rather LIGHT itself congealing here, giving rise to all the life we now see in our world?
"Abhassara [shining ones] are taken to be PHOTONS, taking ‘Ć¢bhassara’ in a literal etymological sense of ‘hither-come-shining-arrow’" (Ven. Dr. Sugunasiri, Ph.D., Dhamma Aboard Evolution).*
Mystics know what scientists don't
It's a nice possibility that explains the hard-to-believe. But the hard-to-believe is often literally true. It's a matter of how expansive our understanding is, rather than attempting to kowtow to the ever-shifting God "Science."
For instance, we have reason to believe that the 31 Planes of Existence are literally true (unlike Bhikkhu Bodhi's suggestion that maybe they are merely psychological states) and that this can be confirmed by meditation if one develops the eight jhanas and looks for them. We have known people to do it.
Oh, great Buddha, how can we ever know?
It's a nice compromise to see not gods but natural phenomena as being the subject of the sutra made comprehensible for the Buddha's audience, two Brahmins asking how it all began. But if the Buddha is only speaking figuratively, which he might be, he is certainly going into a great deal of detail about these beings, what happened to them, and why.
They came from a world where they fed on joy and flew through the sky. They came here, ate mushrooms (a delightful, savory, fungal mat or biofilm that grew freely), became sexually dimorphic, had sex, enjoyed it, and then began to engage in worse and worse karma, resulting in a change of the environment for the worse: devolution not evolution. But things are cyclical, so evolution returns later in the span of a great aeon (maha kalpa, part of India's staggering conception of geological and cosmic spans of time based on the Vedas, "Knowledge Books," and other seers such as Jainism's founder Mahavira).
Now science tells a new story, lumping unbelievable thing on top of further unbelievable thing. There are black holes. Unbelievable. This is what black holes are. Unbelievable. There are also supermassive black holes. Unbelievable. We don't see them because it's all invisible, but an accretion disk forms at the event horizon, where light and shadow blend and get pulled in by gravity too strong to resist, falling into oblivion and maybe popping out the other end where a white hole gives rise to other universes. And in the process, light is given off by things heating up... Unbelievable. But you have no choice! Believe. Obey. Bow to scientific speculations, and mock mysticism in the process.
Eternal oblivion: "cessation of consciousness after death" does not happen because samsaric rebirth (patisandhi) asserts itself and relinks so that there is reappearance, again-becoming, renewed existence again and again...without end until awakening (bodhi).
Science: mythmaking mixed with math
If only we could merge subjective experience of Buddhist meditation with objective science.
.
Priest dressed all in white speaking gibberish
The brightest object in the Universe is a Black Hole that eats a Star a day (msn.com) because He's hungry and the Stars are in his way as he's trying to grow and spin everything around Himself to swallow other competing Black Holes in other parts of Infinite Hyperspace throughout the Multiverse until Doomsday and the End of Time, when even Death shall die and return to the Nothingness from which the Great Big Bang produced itself because it was lonely and needed to know itself through an infinite number of photons it shot out into the inky blackness of space, and that's how we came into being, in God's drama (lila), His play-pretend that we are separate rather than One, and as Priest Einstein tells us, we shall again be One when we wake up from the dream of separation. We can prove it. Here's the proof: E=MC2. If you don't know what that means, tough S. Should have studied Sanskrit and memorized the slokas or merged with Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva or gone to Cambridge Church and the Oxford Temple of Knowledge so that esoteric dons in robes could reveal it encoded in numbers. Thou shalt worship at the feet of Data and learn to love it. And bow to anyone who can spin a tale not contradicted by newer numbers coming from our telescopes and computer models.
Science: brightest thing in the universe
Christian Wolf (phys.org via MSN.com, 2/20/24); Eds., Wisdom Quarterly
Let's ask science, the know-it-alls of objective truth. Q: What is the brightest thing in the universe? A: QuasarJ0529-4351, which is a glowing disc of matter around a supermassive black hole, and it is 500 trillion times brighter than the sun.
[How much is a "trillion"? It is 1,000 billion. How much is a "billion"? It is 1,000 million. And how much is a "million"? It is 1,000 x 1,000. So how many millions is 500 trillion?]
Here's the evidence. Check our math if you want.
Scientists have now reported evidence of the true conditions in Hell [which is apparently located in the heavens], perhaps because no one has ever returned to tell the tale.
Hell [in Buddhist cosmology, there are many hells, the worst of which is this one, "The Waveless" or Avici] has been imagined as a supremely uncomfortable place, hot and hostile to bodily forms of human life.
You mean you think a black hole makes light?
Thanks to a huge astronomical survey of the entire sky [all of visible space or the akasha loka], we have now found what may be the most hellish place in the universe.
A new paper in Nature Astronomy describes a black hole surrounded by the largest and brightest disk of captive matter ever discovered. The object, called J0529-4351, is therefore also the brightest object found so far in the universe. More
*Who were theÄbhassaraspace beings who gave rise to human earthlings?
Wisdom Quarterly Wiki edit, Section on Spatial cosmology (31 Planes of Existence)
Trying to explain cosmology (MC Owens, SF)
ÄbhÄsvara worlds (second absorption): The mental state of the devas ("shining ones") of the ÄbhÄsvara (ą¤ą¤ाą¤ø्ą¤µą¤°) worlds corresponds to the second jhana (Sanskrit dhyÄna) and is characterized by delight (piti) as well as joy (sukha); the ÄbhÄsvara devas are said to shout aloud in their joy, crying aho sukham! ("Oh joy!").
These devas have bodies that emit flashing rays of light like lightning. They are said to have similar bodies (to each other) but diverse perceptions. [Humans are said to have different bodies and different perceptions.]
The ÄbhÄsvara worlds form the upper limit to the destruction of the universe by fire at the end of a mahÄ kalpa ("great aeon," see Temporal cosmology below), that is, the column of fire [temperature] does not rise high enough to reach them.
After the destruction of the world [world-system, galaxy, cosmos, universe], at the beginning of the vivarta-kalpa, the worlds are first populated by beings reborn from the ÄbhÄsvara worlds.
The lifespan of the ÄbhÄsvara devas is eight mahÄ kalpas (or two mahÄ kalpas). Eight mahÄ kalpas is the interval between destructions of the universe by water, which includes the ÄbhÄsvara worlds. The height of this world is 81,920 yojanas [roughly 573,440 miles] above the Earth. More
All materials on this site are submitted by editors and readers. All images, unless otherwise noted, were taken from the Internet and are assumed to be in the public domain.
In the event that there is still a problem, issue, or error with copyrighted material, the break of the copyright is unintentional and noncommercial, and the material will be removed immediately upon presented proof.
Contact us by submitting a comment marked "private."
Do not follow this journal if you are under vinaya or parental restrictions. Secure protection by Sucuri.
Wisdom Quarterly: American Buddhist Journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at creativecommons.org/about/licenses.
