Who created Creation? Who's the Creator?

Siddhartha in awakening, found 'the Creator'

It's interesting that when the wandering ascetic Siddhartha became "the Enlightened One," the Buddha, he found the Creator and said so. The words are famous in Buddhist history for what they say about our present situation even though we have not yet realized it. But we will at our awakening, when and if we become enlightened. It's not guaranteed that we will. In fact, if we do nothing, it's guaranteed that we won't. The Buddha's final words were, "All things are hurtling towards destruction; work out your salvation (enlightenment) with diligence." So what did he say?

"Through the round of many rebirths I roamed without reward, without rest, seeking the house-builder. Painful is rebirth again and again. House-builder, you are seen! You will not build a house again. All your rafters broken, the ridge pole destroyed, gone to the unformed, the mind has come to the end of craving."

— Dhammapada 153-4

I’ve seen you, house-builder!

You won’t build a house again!

Your rafters are all broken,

your roof-peak is demolished.

The mind, set on deconstruction,

has reached the end of craving.

Dhp 154—Bhikkhu Sujato (edited trans)

If there's no Creator, why does the Universe exist? A Buddhist answer

(Buddhism Podcast) June 4, 2025: Buddhism Explained. The universe exists not by a creator, but through endless cycles of conditions. The Buddha (in Buddhist cosmology) presents Dependent Origination, where everything that arises does so from interconnected causes, challenging traditional and scientific quests for a first spark [or prime mover].

Understand why the Buddha redirected focus from cosmic origins to the immediate path of ending suffering right here right now.

This profound wisdom finds surprising parallels in modern scientific thought, revealing a cosmos shaped by karma and interdependence. Learn how to transform external questions into inner clarity and liberation, finding peace in understanding reality as it truly unfolds.

• 00:00 - The human longing: Who made this?
• 06:12 - No creator: the universe of conditions
• 13:29 - The six realms [31 Planes of Existence] — where consciousness can reappear
• 17:43 - Waking from the cosmic dream [Maya]
• 21:20 - The real answer: From external questions to inner freedom

Ironic sarcasm (with a point)

Black Joshua, how shall we live? - It's all yours.

Aha, Buddhism must be wrong because obviously Creation must have a Creator. It's built right into the word. All of this was created by someone somewhere somehow at sometime. That much we know. The rest is a mystery. The Black God came down to Earth after it evaporated from being the "face of the deep," a great big sea or primordial soup, and he made a matching pair called Steve and Eve, or was that Adam and Lilith? And He, it was a he, right? We can all at least agree He was a white man, very Germanic, kind of Ashkenazi Scandinavian, but the Pair in the Garden got tanned from not wearing clothes or using the sunblock the Lord provideth... Preposterous, but so many of us buy into our society's creation myths without thinking.

Who created us? - We looked...

The Native American stories are best, very direct and campfiery. The Indigenous people were living by the beach in Tovaangar (future Los Angeles) and the Creator made a Rainbow Bridge for people to go to Catalina Island, saying, 'Don't look down as you cross over the ocean.' But some did, and as a result they fell off the bridge and became our brothers and sisters the dolphins."

Now that's a creation tale we can embrace, living on the beach, traversing rainbows, swimming with the dolphins.

down and fell. It had to be the Great D!

As Westerners invading the area, we laugh, but we can't imagine anyone laughing out our nonsense: "Once upon a time, before time, there was this nothingness but this Guy lived alone, very lonely, nothing to do all day but putter about, so he created us, put us in a Garden, male first to set the social order, populated the place with plants and animals, everyone living in peace, no one eating anyone else, everyone purely vegan and peaceful.

Should I have mentioned my Snake?

Except for this one snake jerk, a real troublemaker, doubting the Lord, and contaminating the mind of the Jenny-come-lately female pulled out of the male's rib. The Great Creator God wanted to keep us pig ignorant, and this dang Serpent (Reptilian) had to go and lead the Pair to the fruiting body of some kind of psychedelic mushroom growing off the lignans of a tree the Lord God forbade us from ever eating from. It's not like He set us up for failure or anything. We are full of sin and sinners, most of us unrepentant, so we deserve all we get. (Ya think maybe Natives roll their eyes at hearing such campfire tales from Bible thumpers?)

Both sound good. Don't know which to believe

Get real and stop joking around

Isn't the Buddha just another philosopher? NO!

Is irony any way to teach? Probably not given that we live in a Post-Ironic Age and everyone suffering from irony deficiency.

The Buddha often spoke of an imagined "Creator," Brahma ("Supremo") or Maha Brahma ("Great Supremo"). There are gods. Gods have powers and can create things. Now imagine a God creates something, as the creative gods can do on higher planes. That would not mean that they really bring us into being or end us, save us from bad karmic ("sin") results, or get us into heavens, of which there are many, none of which are actually permanent. No God creates new beings, new souls, new selves and individuals. But, then, what is creating ALL of this?

In a sense, each of us is the creator of our experience. This is deep and hard to understand by our usual way of thinking -- all of the misguided assumptions we've inherited. The Buddha was well aware of these philosophical problems and questions. Some are good. Most such questions do not lead to freedom, liberation, the end of suffering, enlightenment, or nirvana.

Indeed, there was once a dissatisfied Buddhist monk (Malunkyaputta) who, failing to meditate, got to thinking: Who am I, why am I here, is life infinite or not, what happens after death, and many such perplexing questions. He realized he had never asked the Buddha and gotten clarity on these philosophical conundrums, yet he was a monk.

So he went over to the Buddha and said, "If you cannot answer these questions to my satisfaction, I will stop being a monk and leave the sangha." Rather than answering him, the Buddha asked if they had ever entered into an agreement that if he became a monk, the Buddha would answer all of these perplexing questions.

The monk agreed that he did not. The Buddha further pointed out that what he said was for fast progress toward enlightenment and freedom. And these questions, whatever the answer, were not conducive to that.

It was far better to follow the Path than to remain stuck pondering all of these types of questions (which probably included the Four Imponderables). Become enlightened and see for yourself is the spirit of the matter. The monk was flummoxed by this logic.

Then the Buddha removed all doubt by teaching this monk using an amazing analogy: The Parable of the Poisoned Arrow

#BuddhistCosmology #Buddhism #NoCreator. Channel's purpose and commitment: This channel is committed to sharing the beauty and wisdom of Buddhist teachings with the purpose of education and inspiration. All content is created with deep respect for the [historical] Buddha’s teachings, aiming to promote understanding, mindfulness, and compassion in everyday life. The goal is to present the values and practices of Buddhism in a way that is accessible and beneficial to everyone, regardless of their background or [religious, agnostic, or atheistic] beliefs. It does not seek to influence or alter anyone’s faith but simply to offer insights into the timeless wisdom of Buddhism as a source of guidance and positivity. This channel is a space for learning, reflection, and connection, guided by the principles of respect, kindness, and truth. Feedback or concerns are welcomed as is open and respectful dialogue. Thanks for supporting the mission to share the meaningful messages of Buddhism with the world.

• Seth MacFarlane (Family Guy, American Dad); Buddhist Podcast (video), 6/4/,25; Bible stories with Mrs. Betty Bowers, America's Best Christian; text by Dhr. Seven, Ashley Wells, Amber Larson, Xochitl (eds.), Wisdom Quarterly

Who "Created" the Universe?

(Buddha's Wisdom) Who created the Universe? | Buddhism's answer according to Matt

Baka Brahma, luminous,

entertained these [wrong] views:

“I AM that God, the One who makes,

Father of the whole World.

I flourish from My own purity.”

But He had wrongly conceived of

views that wrapped around Him

as tight as serpents’ coils:

The supreme wandering ascetics

conquered Him by knowledge.

He was cured. Source

Why don't [some] Buddhists believe in God? | Buddha's Wisdom

I am that I am?

A god (brahmā) known as Baka once reflected privately that he and his heavenly plane of existence were everlasting. He thought that it was not possible that there could be a higher plane of rebirth and was therefore convinced he had overcome all rebirth and suffering.

The Buddha discerned his deep-seated wrong view and decided out of sympathy to pay Baka a visit in his heaven. When the Buddha appeared in that brahmā world, Baka Brahmā welcomed him formally but immediately announced:

“Now, good sir, this [place] is permanent, this is everlasting, this is eternal, this is total, this is not subject to pass away; for this neither is born nor ages nor dies nor passes away nor reappears, and beyond this there is no escape” (MN 49).

The Buddha, however, contradicted him, pointing out that every one of his claims was wrong. Just then Māra the Tempter [a kind of Lucifer figure] joined their conversation. Māra’s task is to prevent beings from being won over to the Dhamma, to keep them trapped in the cycle of rebirth and death, what Mara views as his personal domain [11].

Taking possession of one of the brahmā’s attendants, Māra urged the Buddha, with a display of sympathy, to accept this brahmā as God, the creator of all other beings.

He told the Buddha that wandering ascetics of the past who delighted in things of this life and “who lauded Brahmā” won happy rebirths afterwards, while those who disbelieved and rejected Brahmā had to endure terrible punishment [in hells].

The Awakened One (the Buddha) let Mara have his say and then called his bluff: “I know you, Evil One. Do not think, ’He does not know me.’ You are Māra, Evil One, and the Brahmā and his assembly and the members of the assembly have all fallen into your hands, they have all fallen under your power. You, Evil One, think, ’This one, too, has fallen into my hands. He, too, has fallen under my power.’ But I have not fallen into your hands, Evil One. I have not fallen under your power.”

“All beings subject to craving—humans, subhumans, devas (celestial deities), or brahmās (grand divinities)—are said to be under Māra’s power because they can all be moved by their mental defilements and must drift along in the current of rebirth and death.

But the Buddha and the other arahants (fully enlightened ones) have permanently and completely escaped Māra’s circle of influence, for they have eliminated all defilements. They have exhausted the fuel that leads to rebirth and thus have vanquished the Lord of Death (Mara).

Baka Brahmā begins to speak on his own behalf. He reminds the Buddha of his opening statement on permanence. He warns him that it is futile to seek “an escape beyond” his own brahma realm. Then he cajoles and threatens the Buddha in the same breath:

“If you will hold to earth… beings… gods… you will be close to me, within my domain, for me to work my will upon and punish.”

The Buddha agrees that if he clung to earth (or any other aspect of existence) he would remain under the control of Mahā Brahmā ("Great Supremo") and Māra, too, but he adds:

“I understand that your reach and sway extend thus: Baka the Brahmā has this much power, this much might, this much influence.”

The Buddha points out that beyond the thousandfold world system over which Baka reigns there are planes of existence of which Baka is totally unaware, and beyond all conditioned phenomena there is a reality that transcends even “the allness of the all”—a consciousness without manifestation, boundless, luminous on all sides—to which Baka has no access whatsoever.

The Buddha, demonstrating his superiority in knowledge and power, then uses his superior psychic powers to humble Baka in front of his entire assembly. By the end of the discourse, these once haughty divine beings marvel at the might of the wandering ascetic Gotama:

“Though living in a generation that delights in being…he has extirpated being [becoming, bhava] and its root” [12].

A brahmā with wrong view

Once an unnamed brahmā gave rise to this deluded thought: “No ascetic is powerful enough to reach my [divine] realm.”

The Buddha read his mind and proved him wrong by simply appearing before him and sitting at ease in the air above his head, while radiating flames from his body in a dramatic display of supernormal powers.

Four great arahant (fully enlightened) disciples—Mahā Moggallāna (the monk the Buddha declared "foremost in psychic powers" among his disciples), Kassapa, Kappina, and Anuruddha—independently realized what had happened and decided to join their Teacher on this divine brahmā plane.

Each disciple sat cross-legged in the air respectfully below the Buddha—but above that brahmā—in one of the cardinal directions, emitting fire around himself. A short dialogue in verse took place between Mahā Moggallāna, the Buddha’s second chief male disciple, and that brahmā:

“Today, friend, do you still hold that view,

The same view that you formerly held?

Do you see a radiance

Surpassing that in the brahma-world?”

“I no longer hold that view, dear sir,

[I reject] the view I formerly held.

Indeed, I see a radiance

Surpassing that in the brahma-world?”

Today how could I assert the view

That I am permanent and eternal?”

According to the Commentary (tika) to this story, the brahmā gave up his wrong view, his wrong belief in his own superiority when he observed the magnificence of the Buddha and a few of his arahants.

When the Buddha preached the Dhamma to him, that brahma was established in the fruit of stream-entry and stopped thinking of himself as permanent.

When this brahmā saw his own [radical] impermanence clearly and distinctly for himself, his former tenacious wrong view, wrong opinion that his world and life were immortal was uprooted.

Many aeons of preparation, the brahmā’s quick intellect, the Buddha’s perfect timing, and the support of the four arahants bore fruit in this divinity becoming a stream enterer (one who has reached the first stage of awakening).

After the Buddha and those arahants left and returned to Jetavana, the great brahmā wanted to learn more about the powers of Buddhist monastics. He sent a member of his retinue to ask Mahā Moggallāna whether there are even more monastics of this teacher who can perform such feats as he can. Maha Moggallāna replied:

“Many are the disciples of the Buddha

Who are arahants with taints destroyed,

Triple knowledge bearers with spiritual powers,

Skilled in the course of others’ minds”

(KS I, 182–84; SN 6:5).

Not only do large numbers of monastics have such special powers and the ability to know other people’s minds, but there are numerous fully purified arahant disciples of the Buddha as well. The emissary was glad to hear this answer, as was that brahmā when he received the report. Source

• Matt (Buddha's Wisdom); Susan Elbaum Jootla (Buddhist Publication Society, Wheel 414/415/416, Teacher of the Devas); Dhr. Seven and Amber Larson (eds.), Wisdom Quarterly

Why don't all Buddhists believe in God?

(Serene Mind) Why Buddhists do not all [necessarily] believe in God | The truth behind Buddhism

• Nontheistic religions
• Nontheism
• A God in Buddhism: Maha Brahmā
• Secular Buddhism
• Engaged Buddhism
• The many heavens and gods in Buddhism
• A judge after death: Yama, king of the dead
• Buddhist cosmology: 31 Planes of Existence
• The Divine Abidings of the Supreme (Brahma)

What 'God' do nontheistic Buddhists pray to?

SEE VIDEO: (Buddha's Wisdom) If Buddhism has no God... who are they praying to?

If Buddhism has no God, who are Buddhists praying to?

(Buddha's Wisdom) 🔍 IF THERE'S NO BUDDHIST GOD, WHO GETS ALL THESE PRAYERS?

The Buddha with gods Sakka and Brahma

Buddhism famously teaches that there is no "creator God." Yet, Buddhist temples across Asia overflow with [what sounds like] prayers, chants, offerings, and devotion.

From bodhisattvas and buddhas to spirits, protectors, and ancestors, this video explores whom Buddhists are actually praying to—if anyone—and why [petitionary] prayer never disappeared from Buddhism.

Discover how Buddhist "prayer" works in the absence of a supreme deity and why this "godless" religion created one of the most elaborate spiritual support systems ever conceived.

• [NOTE: Theists are sure there's a God; atheists are sure there is not; agnostics say they do not know and remain on the fence. But nontheists are different. They say, "Whether there is a God or is not a God, we must still concern ourselves with our own enlightenment and liberation/salvation." No one else, not even "God," can do it for us. We must develop calm and insight, study and practice, to awaken from this illusory samsara or Wheel of Suffering and Rebirth.]

DISCOVER:

• Why Buddhism rejected [an all-powerful, all-knowing, omnipresent] creator God but preserved devotion
• Why [Mahayana] Buddhism has multiple buddhas instead of one God...and what each one specializes in
• The bodhisattvas who postponed enlightenment just to help all living beings (and millions pray to them daily)
• The terrifying wrathful protectors (guardian deities) who guard Buddhism with fangs and flames
• How Buddhism absorbed local spirits, gods, and ancestors without losing its core philosophy
• Why the three Buddhist schools (Theravāda, Mahāyāna, Vajrayāna) solve this paradox differently
• How this ancient system still explains modern meditation, ritual, and faith

📿 If this changed understanding of Buddhist devotion, subscribe to Buddha's Wisdom for more deep explorations into Buddhism's most fascinating mysteries and apparent contradictions.

TIMESTAMPS

• 00:00 If Buddhism has no God
• 01:31 The core confusion: No God yet prayer everywhere
• 06:50 Chapter 1: The Buddha specialists (Shakyamuni, Amitābha, Medicine Buddha, Guanyin)
• 14:55 Chapter 2: The Bodhisattva Help Desk—compassion incarnate
• 21:53 Chapter 3: Protectors, Gods, and spiritual security
• 27:40 Chapter 4: Where Buddhism meets local spirits and ancestors
• 34:48 Chapter 5: Human bridges—the power of dead masters
• 41:48 Chapter 6: Theravāda, Mahāyāna, Vajrayāna Buddhism — three different solutions
• 50:12 Chapter 7: How all the layers work together
• 54:45 Chapter 8: Why this still matters today
• 56:17 What 'prayer' really cultivates

📚 SOURCES AND FURTHER READING:

Primary Buddhist texts:

• The Pāli canon (Tipiṭaka) - the Buddha's final words on self-reliance
• Lotus Sutra (Saddharmapuṇḍarīka Sūtra) - foundation of bodhisattva devotion
• Pure Land Sutras (Sukhāvatīvyūha Sūtras) - Amitābha Buddha and rebirth in [his western] Pure Land
• Tibetan Book of the Dead (Bardo Thödol) - death and intermediate states between lifetimes
• Platform Sutra - Zen Buddhism's approach to "sudden enlightenment"

Scholarly resources:

• Buddhism Without Beliefs by Stephen Batchelor
• The Bodhisattva Ideal in Buddhism by Sangharakshita  
• Mahayana Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations by Paul Williams
• Tantric Buddhism in East Asia by Richard Payne
• The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism by Robert E. Buswell Jr. and Donald S. Lopez Jr.
• Popular Buddhism in Sri Lanka by Michael Ames (folk religion integration)
• The Cult of the Book of the Dead in Tibet by Bryan J. Cuevas

Academic articles:

• "The Concept of the Bodhisattva in Early Buddhism" - Buddhist Studies Review
• "Wrathful Deities in Vajrayana Buddhism" - Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies
• "Pure Land Buddhism in China" - Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies

Historical context:

• The Buddhist Conquest of China by Erik Zürcher (syncretism examples)
• Buddhism and Society in Thailand by Tambiah (spirit house integration)
• The Making of Buddhist Modernism by David McMahan

📱 Join community: Instagram (buddhaswizdom), Facebook (buddhaswizdom), X (BuddhasWizdom), Spotify (open.spotify.com...), TikTok (buddhas.wisdom)

☕ Support the channel: buymeacoffee.com/buddhaswisdom

#Buddhism #BuddhistPrayer #NoGod #Buddha #Bodhisattva #PureLand #Meditation #Spirituality #ReligionExplained #BuddhasWisdom #BuddhismExplained #MahayānaBuddhism #TheravādaBuddhism #VajrayānaBuddhism #Avalokiteśvara #GreenTara #BuddhistDeities #ComparativeReligion

• Buddha's Wisdom, Jan. 8, 2026; Pat Macpherson, Dhr. Seven (eds.), Wisdom Quarterly

Dear Buddha: Who created the universe?

Someone asked the Buddha, "Who created this universe?"

It's a question we (metaphysical thinkers, philosophers, and intellectuals) love. We would probably all want to know. That someone may have been the foolish monk Ven. Malunkyaputta. Here's how the Buddha answered to subdue his delusion, ignorant confusion, and pernicious wrong views.

Metaphysical questions

Malunkyaputta, do not trouble yourself with such Qs

Once when presented with a problem of metaphysics (questions that go "beyond physics") by the Buddhist monk Malunkyaputta, the Buddha calmly responded with the Parable of the Poisoned Arrow.

On that occasion, Ven. Malunkyaputta had been meditating when he got distracted and started pondering. The hindrance of skeptical doubts arose in his mind, realizing that he had never gotten the answer to all of the usual "spiritual" questions seekers were usually in search of. All of those unanswered (some might even say unanswerable, the imponderable questions that plague Homo sapiens or "thinking human").

• Is the physical world finite or infinite?
• Did the universe have an origin, and will it end?
• Who created this Universe?
• Is the soul the same as the body or different?
• What becomes of a fully enlightened person after death?
• And so on ad nauseum. There is really no end to possible metaphysical speculations.
• There is even a Buddhist text that summarizes all of the view prevalent at the time of the Buddha, which is called the Brahmajāla Sutta or "The Net of All-Embracing Views."
• "Views" (ditthi) generally refers to wrong views (miccha-ditthi) unless otherwise qualified with samma- ("right-") views. They are as dangerous as a thicket one will get caught up in; it is far better to set them aside, awaken, and with an enlightened mind try to recall what they were when they used to make sense because they will not make sense -- and will not arise -- to the awakened (enlightened) mind/heart.
• Ven. Malunkyaputta did not stop there. He threatened the Buddha that he would quit the monastic life and disrobe if he did not get answers to these things.
• The Buddha gave him a powerful parable, asked him if the Buddha had ever promised to answer such questions in exchange for him becoming a monastic disciple, and thereby encouraged him to pursue the Path to the end of all suffering at which time he could see for himself independent of any teacher or teaching. This was that parable:

When one is shot with an arrow smeared with poison, that wounded person's family may summon a doctor to have the poison removed and provide an antidote [9].

But what if the wounded person refuses to let a doctor do anything until such time as certain important questions are answered? What if the wounded person demands first to know:

• Who shot me with this arrow?
• What is that person's caste and job?
• WHY did that person shoot this arrow?
• What kind of feather was used in its tail?
• What kind of wood was used in its shaft?
• What kind of poison was smeared on its tip?
• What was the method the poison was procured?

One who demands first to have answers to all of that would surely die long before such questions were answered.

So, too, Malunkyaputta, a meditator will die long before getting such [fruitless metaphysical] questions answered.

It is no different for one who follows the Middle Way, which teaches only those things necessary to realize enlightenment (direct knowing-and-seeing for oneself).

Things not helpful and not necessary (but harmful and misleading), the Buddha (the Tathagata or Wayfarer, the Supremely Awakened One) does not teach.

It is because those types of questions are not helpful in one's quest for enlightenment that they have been left undeclared. More (Nontheistic religion)

More, more? Enough has been said, but for those persistent thinkers who question

I have more questions, Sir. - Ask them.

NOTE: It is not because they can't be answered. They can (but any answer will be misleading, confusing, entering a thicket of views). It is not because a Supremely Awakened Buddha does not know; such an extraordinary being does know. But it is precisely because those questions are not useful (but a detriment) that the great Teacher -- concerned with the welfare and wellbeing of students -- sets aside such things and leaves them undeclared.

A disciple, a student, also sets them aside and pursues this path-of-practice to its culmination: awakening in this very life. Then one may ask all such questions.

One will not ask them because they will not arise because they will not make sense once one understands and penetrates DEPENDENT ORIGINATION (paticca-samuppada).

One may even answer them for others on their quest who ask such loaded questions, but to do so will be a disservice to them which the Awakened One has avoided, set aside, and left undeclared.

• It would be like asking the question, "Have you stopped beating your wife? Yes or no!" What is the right answer? There isn't one. There's an explanation but not an answer.
• A more ancient example that still makes sense is the question, "When this fire goes out, which way does it go: up, down, sideways?" It doesn't "go" somewhere, for it ceases when its causes-and-conditions cease because, really, it never had an independent existence (an existence independent of those very causes and condition: fuel, wick, heat, oxygen, and process-of-combustion...
• In exactly the same way, when we ask about the "soul" (the "self," atta, atman, ego, personality, being, consciousness), "Where does it go after death? To annihilation? To eternal life? Which is it?!" The question is wrong, so any answer will be misleading and mistaken. But there is an answer:
• The Buddha formulated that answer in accordance with ultimate truth: Dependent Origination. "When this is, that comes to be; when this is not [present], that does not come to be." Or it may also be phrased more poetically as, "Not having been, they come to be; once having been, they cease." What? Those things. Which things? All composite things (nirvana being the only compact, a.k.a. non-composite, thing and so not a "thing," no-thing yet not "nothing") but most importantly the Five Aggregates clung to as self.
• That is why the Heart Sutra says, "Form (the first aggregate or heap) is emptiness, and emptiness is form." A better modern translation would be to say, "Form is impersonal [not self], and the impersonal is form." Then the exact same thing is then said of the remaining four aggregates: feelings, perceptions, mental formations, and consciousness(es), the khandha or skandhas in Sanskrit.
• The Buddha also went into greater detail when he answered, "What things?" with "the ALL that is burning."

How could this possibly be true? There are many who have followed the Middle Way, who have avoided four foolish (and detrimental) questions and pursued four wise (and beneficial) questions. What are they?

1. Was I in the past?
2. What was I in the past?
3. Will I be in the future?
4. What will I be in the future?

The fool ponders such thing fruitlessly, full of wrong view, caught in a thicket of views. However, the wise pursue four other questions which the Buddha has suggested, commended, and advocated:

1. What is dukkha (disappointment, suffering, pain)?
2. What is its cause?
3. What is its solution?
4. What is the way to its solution?

These, indeed, are of great benefit. They are known as the Catu-Ariya-Sacca, the Four Ennobling (Enlightening) Truths, the fourth being this very Ennobling Eightfold Path declared by the Buddha.

• Video; explained by Dhr. Seven and Ananda (Dharma Buddhist Meditation) (ed.), Wisdom Quarterly Wiki edit

God made Man (used Monkey to do it)?

According to the Ohio band Devo (devolution), "God made Man, but He used a Monkey to do it."

 

Scientists studying a 4.4-million-year-old fossil named Ardi may have uncovered the evolutionary step ["missing link"] that turned ancient [nonhuman] climbers into early [human-hybrid] walkers

Here’s what there is to learn when reading this Popular Mechanics' story:

• Ardi is the oldest known partial skeleton of a hominin and shows foot features that are transitioning from vertical climbing to bipedal walking.
• While Ardi has the primitive grasping big toe of the more apelike human ancestors that came before her, other parts of her feet are more evolved.
• It is Ardi’s talus, a bone in the ankle, that lies somewhere between the morphology of the same bone in apes and humans.

As humans, it’s important to remember that some of our oldest primate ancestors were apelike creatures.

Besides our much larger brains and visibly obvious differences, such as facial [structure and] features, one thing we evolved to be much more adept at than chimps and gorillas (which we, according to Darwinism, diverged from millions of years ago) is walking on two feet.

But just when did human predecessors first descend from the trees and walk upright?

A 4.4-million-year-old female skeleton named Ardi may answer that question. Predating even the iconic Lucy (Australopithecus) by a million years, she belongs to the species Ardipithecus ramidus and is revealing more about our human origins and how we became bipedal.

Unearthed in the Ethiopian desert back in 1994, Ardi is the oldest known partial hominin skeleton, though her species has been known since 1925 under the name Australopithecus ramidus.

Biological anthropologist Thomas Prang of Washington University in St. Louis and his research team discovered that Ardi was able to walk upright but still retained a grasping foot and other apelike features.

“Our observations of the human and ape fossil record are inconsistent with recently proposed models of human origins, which envision the last common ancestor of humans and chimpanzees as a generalized arboreal ape,” he said in a study recently published in Communications Biology.

“Instead, our results strongly imply that humans evolved from an African ape-like ancestor.”

• Related video: 300,000-year-old fossils: The true origin of Homo sapiens (History with Kayleigh Official) My name is Kaylee, and I guess it's safe to... (13:41)

Homo sapiens [not plural homos ("mankind") but Latin for "Thinking man"] belong[s] to the Homo-Pan clade, a group that evolved from a common ancestor and includes [violent, aggressive, militant] chimpanzees, [peaceful sex-centered hippie] bonobos, and both extant and extinct hominin species [Sasquatch, Bigfoot, Almasty, Yakkhas, Yeti, Orang Pendek, etc.]

This is part of a larger clade that gorillas also belong to. It has been argued that Ar. ramidus was more humanlike than apelike and had already evolved out of climbing trees vertically and dropping to all fours and walking on its knuckles in order to get around on land.

What Dr. Prang found was that Ardi is a mashup of primitive and modern features. She has a big toe designed for grasping branches, but other features of her feet, cranial base, and pelvis suggest that her species was adapting to bipedalism.

There is one bone that especially stands out: Ardi’s talus, a bone in the ankle which is also the second largest bone in the back of the foot. It transfers body weight between the lower leg and foot and helps African apes climb.

The talus enables dorsiflexion, or the backwards flexing of the foot, and inversion, the sideways turning of the foot. Both put the animal’s center of mass in a position closer to support, so apes are at much less risk of suffering lethal backward falls.

In ape species that primarily climb trees and primarily use dorsiflexion for vertical climbing, the forefoot is shorter than those of bipeds and quadrupeds, so Dr. Prang’s team turned its focus to the front of Ardi’s foot and also figured out her approximate body mass using the widths of the talar trochlea, or the upper joint surface of the talus.

There have been previous arguments that the morphology of the talar trochlea may not be the greatest indicator of how apes and early humans moved. Gorillas, chimps, bonobos, and gibbons have short forefeet for their body masses, while orangutans and larger monkeys have the longest forefeet.

The human forefoot is longer than those of chimps and gorillas and shorter than those monkeys, but there is still some overlap with bonobos. More

• 

  Extraterrestrials have intervened many times.

  Michael Cremo, the Forbidden Archeologist, has something to say to the contrary: Human life is FAR older on this earth (bhumi) than science yet admits. And "modern humans" are a misnomer because we are far older, according to ooparts and other pieces of inconvenient (and suppressed) evidence in the fossil and archeological record: We are not evolving but devolving and have been for hundreds of millions of years (in yugas and kalpas as declared by the Dharmic religions).
• Popular Mechanics via MSN.com, She Was Half Ape, Half Human—and She May Hold the Secret to What Makes Us Who We Are; Eds., Wisdom Quarterly

Why ME? The 'Law' of Karma

(Buddhist Audio books) Invisible Law Controls Our Life: Kamma (Karma) in Buddhist Abhidhamma

First of all, what is Abhidhamma? It is the systematic treatment of the Dharma, the Buddha's Teachings, in ultimate terms.

Second, what is karma in Buddhism? It is a deed, willed action, which the Buddha divided as either physical, verbal, or mental, singling out intention or motivation (cetana) as the key to determining what it is and what it will produce.

If I do something, why I do it matters. A Manhattanite is walking down the boulevard on a dark and rainy night. She looks down an alley as see me over someone, lifting a blade that glints in the light of a dingy streetlamp about to bring down a blade on the body.

There's always a solution, a fix it.

What's happening? Can we judge? What's the karma (deed, action, doing)? She screams, "bloody murder!" and I look up and show her my scalpel. She looks down and sees a woman on the ground unable to breathe. And I explain that I was about to stab her in the throat, draw blood, and let air into her windpipe because she has something jammed into her mouth and is about to go unconscious and die if I do not intervene. "Oh, are you a doctor?" she asks me. "No, of course not, but I do watch lots of reruns of MacGyver," I answer.

Now that we know all this, what's the karma? The horrible act of attempted murder or the exact opposite, the precious act of preserving life?

It's hard to say, so we should reserve judgment at least a little, until we can discern my MOTIVE, my INTENTION, my VOLITION, my cetanā or underlying impulse to act.

The Roots of Good and Evil: Buddhist Texts

That mental motive is the real "karma," the real determinant of the deed, and it doesn't matter what others think, approve of, or condemn. She may hate me, she may get a beat cop to shoot me to prevent what she thinks is going on, a judge may imprison me based on her testimony, but all of that is HER karma, not mine. I will be "judged" impersonally by myself or the universe for what I was actually doing when that ACT matures and comes to fruition.

Importantly, there are only six root motives for an action, a deed, any kind of karma. See The Roots of Good and Evil: Buddhist Texts translated from the Pali (Buddhist Publication Society, Wheel Series 251-253) by Western monk Ven. Nyanaponika Thera.

There are other divisions, such as the Ten COURSES (kamma-patha) of Unwholesome Action and, of course, Ten Courses of Wholesome Action. There are probably millions of deeds, but getting to the root (radix, radical) of the matter, we have only six roots:

1. greed (lobha, lust, craving, clinging, desire, wanting)
2. hatred (dosa, aversion, fear, anger, annoyance, ill-will)
3. delusion (moha, ignorance, wrong views, confusion)
4. nongreed (alobha, letting go, selflessness, sharing, giving, generosity, dispassion, detachment)
5. nonhatred (adosa, loving kindness, compassion, mudita or joy in others' joy, unbiased onlooking)
6. nondelusion (amoha, wisdom, knowledge, knowing-and-seeing, understanding, penetration).

• See the Discourse on Right View or Sammādiṭṭhi Sutta.

We can divide karma (acts) into ten kinds:

• Three of body

1. destroying life

2. stealing

3. sexual misconduct

• Four of speech

4. false speech

5. divisive speech

6. offensive speech

7. senseless speech

• Three of mind

8. covetousness

9. malice

10. wrong view.

Ah, what does the Buddha know anyway?

What is there to notice here? Most karma is produced by the mouth or other means of VERBAL expression. The body may do things, but when does it do them that it is not being motivated (directed, willed) by the mind? Not acting out, not speaking out, it is still possible to produce karma (deeds with the power of producing a subsequent result) JUST BY THINKING. There really is mental karma. The RESULTS of karma are not karma, even though we in an offhand, shorthand way often refer to results as karma when we say, "It is my karma," referring to something that happened to us. That is never our karma, technically, but we all understand that what we think we're saying is, "This is a result of my deeds," and that may well be. Not everything that happens is due to karma. There are other causes. But most of the important things that happen to us that we notice and think are unfair, that's likely due to our bright and dark karma. This is a world of mixed results. To live in a world of predominantly bright results, there are karmas (acts) for that. Similarly, to live in a world of darkness and even worse suffering than we have here on the human plane (which is regarded as the lowest of the worlds one can be reborn in that is still considered "good"), there are deeds for that. Unless we get real with ourselves, privately, and recognize our motives, our intentions, what is impelling us to act, we cannot be surprised what we get as a result.

Remember, what we experience is not what we are doing now. We have a massive cache of past karma (from this and countless past lives even if we disbelieve those former lives and rebirths ever happened) that is trying to mature and come to fruition, to ripen and produce results.

The two names for karmic results are vipaka (resultants) and phala (fruits). The distinction seems to be, although we cannot prove it but remember Ven. Nyanatiloka (the Western translator of the Buddhist Dictionary) always making the distinction being mental-resultants and outward-circumstances. If we act, we immediately feel some way about it -- regret, remorse, anxiety about being found out or caught or punished, and so on, or rejoicing, approving, carefree or proud to be found out or recognized or rewarded, and so on, depending on the kind of action.

There is a terrible kind of karma, one that is possibly the worst of all karmas, and what is strange about it is that most of us most of the time would not even think there's anything wrong with in our Western society. What is it?

• What is the worst thing in the karmic world, the producer of the most amount of bad (unskillfulness, demerit, evil, misery)?

Wrong view (micchā ditthi), sometimes manifesting as the perversions or distortions (vipallassa). This is the one to be most wary of, for we will be held responsible for what we think, what views we cling to and act on. If we believe something is good because that's what people around us told us or it's the way we were raised, that DOES NOT make it good or okay. It is what it is, in accordance with the six roots mentioned above, and will produce corresponding results that are either welcomed and wished for or unwelcome and unwished for. Proceed cautiously before acting. A little or a lot of introspection helps.

• Outline of Buddhism

If there were just ONE primer to understand the complexity of karma in Buddhism, Wisdom Quarterly would say it is American scholar-monk Bhikkhu Bodhi's treatment of the subject here:

Bhikkhu Bodhi, The Buddha's Teaching: As It Is, Talk 5, "Rebirth and Kamma"

• Buddhist Audio Books (video), June 8, 2025; Bhikkhu Bodhi, "Rebirth and Kamma"; TEXT: Dhr. Seven, Amber Larson, Ananda (Dharma Buddhist Meditation) (eds.), Wisdom Quarterly