There's a chemical in dark chocolate (real Theobroma cacao) related to happiness and good sensations. It's also present in mary-jah-wanna, which probably explains why consumers get so clingy and attached to using the herbal substance. This naturally occurring chemical is called anandamide.Ananda, of course, is the name of the Buddha's closest friend and monastic attendant (likely his son with Mriga from before the birth of Rahula with his wife Yasodhara (aka Bimba Devi, according to some Buddhist schools). In Sanskrit and Pali anand means "bliss, joy, rapture." The suffix amide is added: In the usual nomenclature, one adds the term "amide" to the stem of the parent acid's name. For instance, the amide derived from acetic acid is named acetamide (CH3CONH2).
Now, one might be wondering, “What on earth is anandamide, and why should I care?” Well, pull up a chair and grab a square of dark chocolate, because we’re about to embark on a flavor-filled journey into the world of neuroscience and cocoa chemistry. Anandamide, derived from the Sanskrit word ananda, meaning “bliss or joy,” is a naturally occurring compound in our brains. It’s part of the endocannabinoid system, a complex network that helps regulate various bodily functions, including mood, appetite, and pain sensation. In essence, anandamide is the brain’s very own mood-enhancing, stress-busting superhero. But how does this marvelous molecule work its magic? When anandamide binds to specific receptors in our brains, it triggers a cascade of feel-good effects. More
Happiness is literally an inside job, according to scientific materialism, which believes that we are nothing more than material constructs and that the miracle of consciousness is but an epiphenomenon following on the interaction of material objects like cells, chemicals, molecules, and ever smaller atom, electrons, and quarks.
Organized religion errs on the side of spiritualism, believing us to be a "soul," "spirit," or "magical subtlety." These three things are real, but they are not the self any more than consciousness is.
There is nama rupa, "name" (the instructions) and "form" (the carrying out of those instructions in the material sphere). But self (atta) is not that. How else could it be? If it not one, it has to be the other, unless it is both? It is both both and neither.
What we regard as "self" (soul, ego) is mind-and-body, but though mental and physical processes exist and are active, they do not amount to a concrete "self."
The "self" that exists is dependent, temporary, ephemeral subject to Three Characteristics of All Conditioned Things: they are impermanent, incapable of satiating/fulfilling, and are impersonal.
This last characteristic is the one that is impossible to believe, but it is the key to awakening/enlightenment in the Buddha's teaching.
We can see that all things are impermanent, in flux, constantly changing, undependable. We can see that we have never been fulfilled for long; we experience great pleasure but remain hungry, in many cases becoming more hungry for newer and better pleasures.
IF THERE IS NO SELF, WHAT IS THERE THEN? The Buddha answered this question in terms of Dependent Origination (paticca-samuppāda). And it is on account of not seeing this, not grasping, not penetrating this that we have wandered so long in this painful samsara.
Will we fall under the spell of scient-ism, run to religion for shelter, or begin to see what the Buddha was getting at when he encouraged us to strive for calm and liberating-insight?
"Science can prove what it says." Can it? It redefines "happiness" as an endorphin then shows a peptide "walking," and viola, nonmaterialistic Buddhism is wrong? That's how it might seem, but it is not the case. We must look more deeply. Science fails us. And coming and seeing and investigating what the Buddha taught liberates us. Try it.
Buddha's Brain: The Practical Neuroscience of Happiness, Love, and Wisdom
Change your brain, change your life with this essential classic from New York Times bestselling author Dr. Rick Hanson—now celebrating 15 years in print with more than 500,000 copies sold.
Great teachers like the historical Buddha, Jesus, Moses, Mohammed, and Gandhi were all born with brains built essentially like everyone else’s—and then they changed their brains in ways that changed the world.
Neuroscience now reveals how the flow of thoughts actually sculpts the brain. More and more, we are learning that it’s possible to strengthen positive brain states.
By combining breakthroughs in science with insights from thousands of years of mindfulness practice, we too can shape our own “Buddha’s Brain” for greater happiness, love, and wisdom.
Buddha’s Brain draws on evidence-based neuroscience to show readers how to stimulate their brains for
more fulfilling relationships,
a deeper spiritual life, and
a greater sense of inner confidence and self-worth.
Using guided meditations and mindfulness exercises, learn how to activate the brain states of calm, joy, and compassion instead of worry, sorrow, and anger.
Most importantly, anyone who implements these practices will foster positive psychological growth that will literally change the way life is lived day-to-day.
This book provides an essential intersection of psychology, neurology, and contemplative practice. It’s filled with practical tools and skills useful every day to tap into the unused potential of the brain and rewire it over time for greater well-being. More
Roshi Philip Kapleau | Zen Bow | Winter 2018, Vol. XL, No. 4, rzc.org
Shōkei (Andreas Praefcke/Wiki)
Here is a vintage koan ("public case") commentary by the Rochester Zen Center’s founder, the late American Roshi Philip Kapleau.
Mumonkan, Number 14. [Itpresages countless college discussions about Schrodinger's cat below.]
The Case
Once the monks of the Western and Eastern Halls were arguing about a cat. Nansen, holding up the cat, said: “You monks! If you can say a word of Zen, I will spare the cat. Otherwise, I will kill it!”
No one could answer, so Nansen cut the cat in two. That evening, when Joshu returned, Nansen told him of the incident. Joshu thereupon took off his sandal, put it on his head, and walked off.
Nansen said, “If you had been there, the cat would have been saved!”
The Commentary
Just say, what is the real meaning of Joshu’s putting his sandal on his head? If you can give a turning word on this point, you will see that Nansen’s action was not in vain. But if not, beware!
The Verse
Had Joshu only been there,
he would have taken charge.
He would have snatched away the sword,
and Nansen would have begged for his life.
Roshi Kapleau: The two protagonists of this koan, Nansen (748-835) and Joshu, are two of the great masters in Zen. Nansen (Chinese Nanchuan) was the teacher of Joshu (Chinese Zhaozhou). Nansen in turn was a disciple of the great Baso (Chinese Mazu). More: rzc.org
In this thought experiment, a hypothetical cat (and not the precious companion of Wisdom Quarterly's companion fish, Captain Shiny Sides, no relation to Hecklefish Moriarty of The Why Files) in a closed box may be considered to be simultaneously both alive and dead until it is observed, as a result of its fate being linked to a random subatomic event that may or may not occur. The thought experiment, viewed this way, is described as a paradox.
It is not alive but not quite dead?
It was devised by physicist Dr. Erwin Schrödinger in 1935 [1] in a discussion with Albert Einstein [2] to illustrate what Schrödinger saw as the problems (inconsistencies and contradictions) of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics.
In Schrödinger's original formulation, a cat, a flask of poison, and a radioactive source are placed in a sealed box.
If an internal radiation monitor, such as a Geiger counter, detects radioactivity (a single atom decaying), the flask is shattered, releasing the poison, which kills the cat.
But if no decaying atom triggers the monitor, the cat remains alive.
The Copenhagen interpretation implies that the cat is therefore simultaneously both alive and dead.
Yet, when one finally looks in the box, one sees that the cat is either alive or dead, not both alive and dead.
This poses the question of when exactly quantum superposition ends and reality resolves into one possibility or the other. More
Most people don't get Schrodinger's Cat (including you?)
Looking Glass Universe, Nov. 7, 2024; Roshi Kapleau, Rochester Zen Center (rzc.org); Brian Cox via Explainify; Amber Larson, Dhr. Seven, CC Liu, Sheldon S. (eds.), Wisdom Quarterly
(Jupitar Star) This thought-provoking video explores Bertrand Russell's classic essay, "Why I'm Not a Christian," in which the logician and renowned philosopher outlines his reasons for rejecting Christianity and organized religion.
Russell critiques the historical and philosophical foundations of Christianity, addressing topics such as the problem of evil, the lack of empirical evidence for religious claims, and the contradictions within religious texts.
Through logical reasoning and intellectual clarity, Russell presents a compelling case for skepticism and atheism (or at least rejection of monotheistic claims by the Abrahamic faiths), challenging traditional beliefs while encouraging viewers to think critically about religion and its role in society.
(T&H - Inspiration & Motivation) Alan Watts gives a clarifying and powerfully insightful lecture on knowing, religion, Jesus, and the big questions we ask. "Life is not a problem, in other words, not a contest between ourselves and our environment. This conception of life turns out to be basically phony." Original audio source: Alan Watts, "Extended Seminars, Early Radio Talks - Ghosts" (T&H).
Jupitar Star, March 26, 2025; A Dose of Reason (YouTube), 2024; T&H - Inspiration & Motivation, Oct. 23, 2023; Sheldon S., Seth Auberon (eds.), Wisdom Quarterly
Western atheists (the gatekeepers in the academy) run science, so they won't listen to mystics and seers (rishis). Therefore, no scientific lab is investigating KALAPAS (Buddhist subatomic "particles," the original Greek "atoms" (a concept ancient Greece borrowed from Buddhist-influenced ancient Vedic India), the characteristics of materiality or rupa, perceived particles, rúpa-kalapa), or are they without realizing it?
Maybe they are called quarks or strings or bosons, whatever the label. Some thing (not quite a thing or dhamma) is there eluding us, though it may not be a "thing" yet.
A dhammaor "thing" in this sense of the term refers literally to the "bearer," constitution, or nature of a thing; quality; object of mind (see āyatana) "phenomenon." In all of these meanings the word dhamma is met with in Buddhist texts. The Commentary to the Digha Nikaya (Long Discourses of the Buddha), instances four applications of this term:
nijjīvatā (lifeless, soulless, egoless [without jiva], e.g., "All dhammā [all phenomena] are impersonal").
The Commentary to the Dhammasangani has hetu (root condition, cause) instead of desanā. Therefore, the analytical knowledge of dhamma [things, phenomena, or the Dhamma/Doctrine] (see patisambhidā) is explained in The Path of Purification(Vis.M. XIV.) and in the Vibhanga as hetumhi-ñāna (jñāna) or "knowledge of causes and conditions."
NOVEL INSIGHT: Source (cause and condition) of dark energy and matter
What scientist can explain this? Yet, a simple Buddhist meditator/reader made sense of it? What if dark energy is immaterial pre-matter, dark matter is subtle matter, and the rest matter?
Science is dense and not about "seeing directly." That's what Buddhism is about. Scientists are about being ignorant of their biases while attempting to objectively measure and show (prove it to) others without themselves knowing what they're seeing. No scientist believed in invisible radiation until it proved its presence by killing people then showing up on instruments built to translate what was detected into the visual medium of pixels, photons, and screens -- then radiation existed. Pure ideas become essential outlines (blueprints) that become working models.
.
Matter (rupa): immaterial, subtle, tangible all of it "energy" in a torsion field exhibiting
Imagine a kind of matter (let's call it pre-matter) so ethereal it does not yet reflect light, but it does already begin to exert gravitational pull, magnetism, or other interactions with its environment. That would fit the description of "dark energy" and "dark matter" that scientists know must exist due to their calculations but are as yet unable to directly detect in a way that can be objectively confirmed.
(This is very general, theoretical, arrived at by philosophizing based on the reports of modern meditators and ancient mystics, not materialist-scientists in experimental labs, groping their way to objective truths).
If it (pre-matter) exists, this is how and why it (dark matter) may be behaving the way we experience: It enters this dimension, having built up density, or gaining a sufficient number of neutrinos, photons, allegrons (joyous particles that abhassara-brahmas feed on?), joe-blowons, whatever-ons (some kind of "stem cell particles" with pluripotential power), or kalapas.
It (that pre-matter) changes "lineage," as it were, from fine-material (rupa, sublime) to sensual (sensible, sensory, kama, where we experience it), but it originates in the immaterial (arupa, formless, ethereal, strictly mental state).
What is ultimate reality? Nama-rupa.
Ah, then, what is mind, what is consciousness? That is another conversation altogether. Note that the Buddha broke down all of experience to just these two ultimately impersonal things, mind (feelings, perceptions, mental formations, consciousness) and body (kaya, rupa, the Four Elements or dhātus taken as one unit). These are the Five Aggregates clung to as self. (See the Heart Sutra for the poetic expression or the Abhidhamma for their pedantic Theravada analysis).
Who can believe there are only four "elements"? No one. That archaic system was inherited by the Buddha and filled in. What it means is not that there are only four things everything else is made of but that what we conventionally call matter may be broken down into four categories of qualities or characteristics (hardness, cohesion, support, and temperature), which become directly known to one who practices Four Elements meditation. This is not a "theory" but a practice.
Everything in Buddhism is kind of this way, very packed and needing to be unpacked to understand. For instance, the Four Noble Truths are not four "truisms" to believe. That would be ridiculous. The fourth is the Noble Eightfold Path. There are not only eight "steps" to take to enlightenment (bodhi) and nirvana (vimutti, moksha, ultimate liberation). That would be ridiculous. There are in fact 37 Requisites of Enlightenment. Again, it is a practice, not a theory. Moreover, if we ask what is ultimately true about our existence, the answer is not "nothing." It is Dependent Origination. This is not a belief but a practice. By practicing these things, one directly comes to know and see -- and one is freed from all suffering by that wisdom.
If you become a great scientist, the greatest scientist -- a Nicola Tesla, an Issac Newton, an Albie Einstein, you will not be freed, liberated from suffering, a knower of worlds, a noble one. In fact, it will probably ruin you, make you deranged and your hair kinky. However, if you practice the Buddha's Path successfully, not as the greatest practitioner just as a solid one, you will directly know-and-see AND be freed, liberated from ignorance and suffering. It's no contest which would be better to aspire to be, in the world or out. Why did Steven Hawking get so perverse as time went on? It must have been because of the ennobling qualities of scientific data.
There are, after all, these three spheres (trailokya), according to the Buddha. Consider it in reverse: Things are sensual, tangible and appearing to us. And passing away from here, they are sublimated (rarefied) to the fine-material. And passing away from there, they dissolve and become altogether immaterial (mind-made, ideations, Platonic forms, bodiless, software utterly without hardware, visualizations without tangible expression from whence they came).
This would explain not only the origin of all tangible things -- illusory, maya, in the sense of not being what a thing appears to be (permanent, able to please, or personal) born of mind, mind-made, formless, full of potential but not yet formed -- in this "reality," this simulation, this world that we can touch and feel, but also explain the fine-material (rupa) underlying it, acting as its support, scaffolding, undergirding, armature, foundational substructure, or hidden (unseen) basis.
How to see the Four Elements
PRACTICAL EVIDENCE: When we look (with purified, intensified mind) at matter, it breaks down under analysis to smaller and smaller components. Imagine seeing a British house in the distance. It looks like a block. When approached and examined closely, it is many smaller blocks (bricks), piled in heaps of well-arranged (functionally integrated) walls and foundation. What was thought to be one thing is in fact not at all what it seemed. Looking at each block more closely, it breaks down further to molecules and atoms and subatomic particles [then, presumably to wavicles and strings or vibrating energy fields of (gravitational) attraction that, when further condensed, appear to us as matter in various states: temperature, gas, liquid, solid (qualities known as the Four Elements), and sometimes the empty space between these]. How can we know or prove it? Through the meditation described below.*
A thing is a compound of constituents, so if we're looking for indivisible things, we are not likely to find them anytime soon, not with that mindset. We'll miss the forest for the trees.
Someone once said, "Humans can't see atoms; they're too small."
"Oh, really," said we then asked: "What do you think you're looking at when you see something?"
(It's ALL atoms, strung together, arranged just so, reflecting photons and letting neutrinos pass through with little to no interaction. This (dense material dead) hand, for example, is made of atoms. Can you see it? So what are you seeing?
"Oh, yeah. Atoms! OMG! I didn't realize it."
Yes, we may not be able to see individual atoms, but we see them all around in the collective, just like one citta is hard to perceive, but the stream of consciousness (mind moments) is easier to discern.
But there is more to a living hand, as revealed by Kirlian photography, aura viewers (like the one Edgar Cayce left instructions for), and the sensitive material in the eye some humans regain, which dogs and other animals may have been using all along to see ghosts, subtle beings, and invisible entities all along. Let's look at the state of the science of subatomic/particle physics with Jade at Up and Atom:
Clear the mind of assumptions and wrong view
Stilling the mind in samadhi (meditative absorption known as jhana), one begins to perceive a "sign," animitta, usually of light or shadow or some color. It happens naturally with consistent practice. At first it is the "learning sign," but with proper meditative guidance, it can become the "learning sign" and bring one to deeper, subtler levels of absorption. There are eight levels, the first four are form (increasingly rarefied and sublime), and the second four are formless (immaterial). This single-mindedness, often misleadingly rendered "concentration," temporarily purifies the mind so that it can penetrate things as they really are and come to know-and-see things as they really are. This is "meditation," mental cultivation, approaching awakening, letting go, and liberation. The clouded mind will never be able to see things free of distortions and perversions of view.
It took 20 years, but we finally found it
My cuteness or alleged sexiness has no bearing on donations, attention, or popularity of Up and Atom (YouTube), which is solely a function of the depth and frequency of my scientific posts.
.
(Up and Atom) March 14, 2025: Hi, I'm Jade! Subscribe to Up and Atom for physics, math, and computer science videos (upandatom). If you'd like to consider supporting Up and Atom, head over to my Patreon page :) upandatom.
Special thanks to Chuankun Zhang, Tian Ooi, Jacob S. Higgins, and Jack F. Doyle from Prof. Jun Ye's lab at JILA/NIST/University of Colorado, as well as Prof. Victor Flambaum from UNSW's Department of Theoretical Physics, for their valuable assistance and consultation on this video.
This is speculative, theoretical, not science. What's the proof? "Seeing is believing," so here's how to see it?
Burma preserves practical Theravada Abhidhamma (the Doctrine/Dhamma in Ultimate Terms, a collection of Buddhist text).The tradition (as promulgated by Pa Auk Sayadaw and his certifiably successful students) spreads to other countries like America, Malaysia, Europe, Sri Lanka, China, and Indonesia, and the result is direct seeing of the ultimate truth of matter: "ultimate materiality" (abhi-rupa) or matter (solids, liquids, gases, and light or flux, the Four Great Elements, mahadhatu, which are not four "things" but four general characteristics of matter made completely real and sensible as a theory by Four Elements Meditation even if we scoff.
*Buddhist physics: Analysis of the causes of rūpa kalāpa
(Dhammavihari Buddhist Studies) Even though one is able to observe the 28 essential substances, it is not enough to realize nirvana. The person [meditator] must still be able to analyze the causes of the arising of the mind-and-matter [nama-rupa, cittas-and-kalapas].
In this last lecture Sayalay Uttarā explains how to analyze the causes of arising of rūpakalāpa (clusters of matter). There are four causes for the arising of matter (rūpa), namely,
AHH! I'm beginning to see but using the mind's eye, the dibba cakkhuafter purifying the mind.
. There are nine clusters of matter produced by karma; eight by consciousness; four by temperature, and two by food essence. These 23 clusters of matter must be analyzed by a yogī [Buddhist meditator, cultivator, Dharma-practitioner] to gain the understanding that matter arises through [causes and] conditions and that there is no single entity [no self, ego, God, soul] that controls it.
Of the 28 essential [forms of] matter [ultimate materiality], there are four that arise without a cause [which might explain how everything comes to be, just arising spontaneously of their own nature, not created, not Big Banged, never being brought to an end and therefore not necessitating a beginning or prime mover, not self, not anything but suchness (tathata), just the way things are in and of themselves, like science's definition of "energy"]. [Practice!] Enjoy!
This video is a Dhamma [Pali canon-based Dharma] lecture that is part of the DBS Temporary Pabbajā (monastic ordination, going forth) series of events in 2018. The pabbajjā activity guided by Sayalay Uttarā lasted for 10 days at Chan Forest Mega Mendung [Theravadan Indonesia]. In addition to practicing meditation, the participants also received a Dhamma shower from Sayalay Uttarā through six lectures. DBS also provided a DVD of the Pariyatti Sāsana [text dispensation, intellectual instruction]. Class lecture by Ashin Kheminda.
For more information about this class, please contact: DHAMMAVIHARI BUDDHIST STUDIES (DBS) SECRETARIAT. Email: yayasandhammavihari@gmail.com. Phone: 0857 82 800 200, 0812 86 30 3000, and 021 22556430. Website: dhammavihari.or.id. Facebook: Dhammavihari Buddhist Studies.
Walaupun seseorang sudah mampu mengamati 28 materi yang hakiki namun hal tersebut belum cukup untuk merealisasi Nibbāna. Orang tersebut masih harus mampu menganalisis sebab kemunculan dari batin dan materi. Di ceramah yang terakhir ini Sayalay Uttarā menjelaskan tentang cara Menganalisis Sebab Kemunculan dari Rūpakalāpa (klaster materi). Ada empat sebab kemunculan dari materi (rūpa) yaitu kamma, kesadaran (citta), temperature (utu) dan sari makanan (āhāra). Materi yang lahir dari keempat sebab tersebut dinamakan kammajā rūpakalāpa, cittāja rūpakalāpa, utujārūpakalāpa dan āhārajā rūpakalāpa. Ada 9 klaster materi yang dihasilkan oleh kamma; 8 oleh kesadaran; 4 oleh temperatur dan 2 oleh sari makanan. Dua puluh tiga klaster materi ini harus bisa dianalisis oleh seorang yogī untuk mendapatkan pemahaman bahwa materi muncul dengan kondisi dan tidak ada satu wujud yang mengendalikannya. Dari 28 materi yang hakiki, ada empat materi yang muncul tanpa sebab. Selamat menikmati! Video ini merupakan ceramah Dhamma yang menjadi bagian dari rangkaian acara Pabbajā Sementara DBS tahun 2018. Kegiatan pabbajjā yang dibimbing oleh Sayalay Uttarā ini berlangsung selama 10 hari di Chan Forest Mega Mendung. Selain berlatih meditasi, para peserta juga mendapatkan siraman Dhamma dari Sayalay Uttarā melalui kegiatan ceramah yang dilakukan sebanyak 6 kali. DBS juga menyediakan DVD ceramah Kelas Pariyatti Sāsana oleh Ashin Kheminda. Untuk informasi lebih lanjut tentang kelas ini, silakan menghubungi: SEKRETARIAT DHAMMAVIHARI BUDDHIST STUDIES (DBS) Email: yayasandhammavihari@gmail.com. Telpon: 0857 82 800 200, 0812 86 30 3000, dan 021 22556430 Website: dhammavihari.or.id. Facebook: Dhammavihari Buddhist Studies.
Sayalay Uttarā, Dhammavihari Buddhist Studies, Feb. 13, 2019; Jade (Up and Atom); Dhr. Seven (speculation), edited by Amber Larson, Pat Macpherson, Wisdom Quarterly
MIT Scientist: “Aliens are simulating our reality”
(Jesse Michels) 11-22-24: In today's episode of American Alchemy, Jesse Michels sits down with MIT Professor Riz Virk to explore the provocative idea that our reality might be a simulation, blending cutting-edge physics, ancient mysticism, and gaming theory.
They dive into topics like quantum mechanics, free will, and the Mandela Effect, offering a fresh perspective on the nature of existence.
Riz Virk's book The Simulated Multiverse: tinyurl.com/rizvirkamazon.
Timestamps
00:00 - Introduction
03:32 - Are We Living in a Simulation?
07:10 - The Physics of Simulation Theory
12:08 - Evidence from Fine-Tuned Constants
18:14 - The Mandela Effect and Changing Realities
20:40 - Information Theory
30:42 - The Role of the Mind
35:57 - Free Will
37:17 - Time
39:50 - Parapsychology
48:32 - Donald Hoffman's Theory
50:38 - Breaking Out of the Simulation
01:07:33 - Reality is Maya
01:12:00 - UFOs
01:18:40 - How to Play the Game
01:22:54 - NPCs
01:27:04 - Outro
ABOUT: AMERICAN ALCHEMY is an original series hosted by Jesse Michels that explores the frontier of science and tech. Each week brings exclusive interviews with some of the leading thinkers of our time. #podcast #simulation #aliens #uap #technology #quantum #physics #timetravel #computercode
Join new WHOP (group calls with Jesse) ➤ whop.com/jessemichels. Support American Alchemy by becoming a YouTube member: @jessemichels. WHOP ➤ Get access to exclusive behind the scenes episodes: whop.com/jessemichels. SPOTIFY ➤ tinyurl.com/jessemichelsspotify.
DISCORD ➤ discord
INSTAGRAM (personal) ➤ jessemichels. INSTAGRAM (show) ➤ jessemichelsofficial. TWITTER ➤ alchemyamerican. EMAIL/BOOKINGS ➤ usa.alchemy@gmail.com.
Produced by
Jesse Michels and Bryan Felber. Written by
Jesse Michels. Editing and animation by Bryan Felber. Additional animation by Ross
@FlatPackFX. Featuring
Jesse Michels and Prof. Rizwan Virk. Cinematography by Isaac Rodriguez. Additional cinematography by Mario Kidd. Appearances from
Jacques Vallée
Garry Nolan
Rob Rinehart
Brian Muraresku
Graham Hancock
Paul Schatzkin. Special thanks to Roger Penrose
The PEAR Lab
Philip K. Dick
The Simulated Multiverse and The Simulation Hypothesis
by Rizwan Virk are available in print, eBook, and audiobook now. Original music: open.spotify.com/artist/6LlLR...
Impersonal organic broth or 'primordial soup' fed by stars needed energy to move. Lightning!
A human can develop ESP?
In the beginning, which repeats in an endless cycle of inconceivable duration, there were the great elements or maha-dhatus. These are not things but characteristic of materiality. The things they are characteristics of are minute particles, kalapas.
Physical, material, tangible things are conglomerates of these particles, which amazingly are discernible to minds purified by profound stillness and attention in meditation. It is within the capacity of human minds. By the time physical beings came into being on this human plane and this planet in particular, the world was already very old.
The third eye can see molecules and particles?
And something preexisted it, a more subtle plane of the immaterial, the energetic, the abstract. These two domains are interdependent and not found apart except in the immaterial sphere (arupa loka). Between the extremes of that immaterial sphere (a set of four rarefied worlds somewhat like places of Platonic forms) and our sensual sphere (kama loka), there is a third sphere of subtle form (rupa loka).
The 31 Planes of Existence (and more)
From the sensual to the fine-material to the immaterial (formless) there are planes of rebirth. All 31 Planes of Existence within these three spheres are reached by karma, in particular the tremendously weighty karma of meditative absorption (the jhanas). It is because one gained, developed, and mastered the four formless attainments that rebirth is possible in those worlds in accordance with that attainment.
Because of gaining, developing, and mastering the four form attainments, rebirth is possible in the fine-material sphere or "heavens" (sagga).
Otherwise, skillful karma (good, profitable, beneficial action of mind, speech, and body) leads to welcome states in our sensual sphere, which is replete with sensual heavens far superior to the pleasures possible for humans experiencing bliss on the human plane. But here within this lowest and densest of the three spheres, we have worlds of great suffering of seemingly interminable duration.
Science says earth's organic life began with impersonal amino acids (star dust) and energy.
If a kalapa is an "atom," does it look like one? No. It is fast and resembles a dying ember.
The IVC had nuclear bombs long before the USA
It might be alright, tolerable, and sufferable to do a misdeed here, expressing some harmful intention in an ill-done deed, and as a result be reborn as an animal and then come back to the human plane. That might be alright. It might seem horribly disproportionate to what we did -- let's say steal a bunch of food and hog it down like a certain kind of animal. But this is not what happen. The results are far worse because once someone falls in the "great waste" or "downfall" (niraya), it is not clear when one will emerge from those worlds.
Instead, one revolves and turns, going from worse to worse to worse in accordance with our karma (our "just desserts"). The Buddha made this point particularly clear in one sutra where he speaks of going from bright to bright worlds, bright to dark worlds, or dark to dark worlds. Imagine one is born in poverty in the human world on account of past greed and an unwillingness to share.
Ancient IVC = Indus Valley Civilization
Then, still suffering form that active form of greed, one gets in trouble in the human world, engages in unskillful karma, and as a result is reborn in a subhuman world. From there, with the possibility of doing any skillful karma but instead feeling a necessity to engage in more and more unskillful karma to "survive" or get by, one inherits the result of new misdeeds and plunges into more trouble and misery.
This having happened, what is the chance of turning it around and emerging out of this abyss or downfall? It is not likely, and when it eventually happens (as it will because these worlds are not eternal), it will be because of some past skillful deed finally fortuitously coming to fruit and providing an opportunity.
Having come out and being reborn a human again? What is most likely to happen? Habit is likely to draw one back into the entire morass of all that previous suffering. We don't learn very well, and the universe is not trying to "teach" us anymore than a branch reaches out to scratch us or a fire leaps to burn us. Thorn and flame are there; we bump them. They do not attack back for our bump. The bump merely bears a result.
I like sex, so I married a rich 16-year-old and took her from the UK to US to start a cult.
.
Who needs wisdom? You got crazy
This is quoted beautifully in The Tibetan Book of the Dead by Sixties sex guru Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche a beloved former lama (shyster, fraud, and sex abuser) caught up in the delights of our Western world. I bought the whole crumby book thinking there would be more gems in it like this, presented as if Rinpoche had come up with this brilliance. But it is the poetic product of Portia Nelson that, if memory serves (and it does not), runs something like this in the book:
"There's a Hole in My Sidewalk: Autobiography in Five Short Chapters" (Portia Nelson).
What about the symbolism on Buddhist temple walls? This is an oversimplified version of the 31 Planes of Existence as Six Worlds (devas, asuras, humans, animals, hungry ghosts, hellions)
.
Not only do those subtle physical heavens exist, but there are also lower subhuman states -- the planes of animals, ghosts, shapeshifting spirits, monsters (ogres, ghouls), demons (demigods), and hellions.
These may seem unbelievable to us, just as for many the idea of any kind of "heaven" is silly. But as American Theravada scholar-monk Bhikkhu Bodhi has pointed out (As It Is), does it not make sense that there would be worlds for experiencing the results of deeds good and ill?
What are the Four Elements?
All of these things and places pre-existed the "beginning." Why? The beginning we speak of is the one we can see, the one that would have taken place in this world. But this world is just one of countless similar worlds all within the human plane (manussya loka). So to speak of the beginning is a flaw pursuit. We are already on shaky boards. There was already warmth, sky, ground, and the deep. There were already the Four Elements or the 14 specific characteristics of our tangible materiality.
When we imagine the theory of the Four Elements (earth, wind, fire, water) is an antiquated notion easily replaced by our modern Periodic Table of Elements, it is only because we do not understand the former, and we assume the latter is stable when it is actually fluctuating and hurtling toward replacement all the time.
Earth Element: solidity, heaviness (teeth, bones, hair, flesh in the body)
Water Element: liquidity, cohesion (mucus, blood, spit, sweat)
Fire Element: temperature (heat, warmth, cool, cold)
The Buddha did not come along and say, "Oh, yes, this old theory of there being Four Elements, that's correct." People by then did not understand the theory in detail, so he either restored it to what it originally meant or refined it to give an accurate explanation using the archaic terms.
For example, let is look at "fire." As a mahadhuta or great element, it does not mean the symbol 🔥 representing a burning flame. A burning flame is a symbol representing it, and what is it? It is temperature. What is temperature (tejo)?
Unique flow of info IDed in the human brain
It is cold as well as heat and includes chemical fire such as we see in digestion (dissolving, dissolution, breaking apart). This need not stay at an abstract level of belief and categorization; in the practice of Four Elements Meditation (💩🔥💧💨), we see it directly and know it intimately. All of the characteristics of matter are brought into consciousness and made very noticeable, just as the breath grows more and more subtle and is known more and more clearly with practice of stillness and attention (samma-samadhi, which is part of the Noble Eightfold Path).
A successful meditator can SEE a kalapa? Yes. How? These particles are fast, very fast, arising, turning, and falling away in a finger snap. They are too fast to see. However, and this is a big however, human perception is such that it is recorded in the seat of consciousness near the heart.
If a successful meditator looks down, there's a greenish mirror of sorts. This reflects what has been perceived. While the active kalapa is far too rapid to discern, the "tape" or trace of it recorded by perception can be review. In the review, the particle can be slowed down, making it discernible. This is one secret why a knowledgeable and experienced guide is necessary. One would not stumble on this problem and find a solution by chance.
We are humans and rely on culture, and culture means handing down knowledge. The Buddha is the best friend we have (utilizing the idea of Buddhist "noble friendship," kalyāṇa-mittatā, because he made known how he awoke, and others awoke, and all of those awakened in any of the four major phases of awakening became the Noble Sangha, the community of enlightened practitioners). Learning the Dharma (Dhamma) from these individuals.
THEREFORE, none of the aforementioned is a "theory" for science to decide on. It is an outline of what happens already, what works already, what others have done already. There are awakened people in the world, not all of them Buddhist monastics, all of them practitioners of these sorts of things. The Buddha was like a candle, giving rise to countless other candles in the world. THESE THINGS ARE ALL PERSONALLY VERIFIABLE.
But that would take individual initiative and effort, first finding a teacher who can actually teach these things just as the historical Buddha did. (They exist in the Year 2024. Contact us, and we will point some out).
How did life begin?
All of these things can be known-and-seen
If all the inanimate elements were present, and if the immaterial energies or the formless intelligence, structure, or "software" were present, all that had to happen was the merging of the two. They are, after all, interdependent. One does not exist without the other.
When DOES it all begin? This might be a better question. This weekend we were out in the woodlands above Los Angeles learning survival skills with the School of Self-Reliance. It is revelation to have the wisdom of the Native Americans handed down to us and our urban-suburban mindsets. The ancients were very clever and efficient.
The surprise came when we tried figuring out how to make a net out of simple cordage, yarn, fibrous strings rolled up in a spindle. Well, there's no way to do. It's like trying to connect some points within in box without lifting the pencil. (The secret is always to "think outside the box"). If one does, one suddenly sees a way, has an aha moment.
Abhidhamma (Sayalay Susila, Dhr. Seven)
The instructor and nature guide Christopher took a length of string and cut it. That was the first aha. We're making a net, yet we cut the string? Yes. He tied both ends to two twin coastal live oak trees (which are going extinct after thousands of years because of chemtrail corruption and artificial drought but being blamed on the cleanup crew, the oak beetle, that takes out sick trees).
Then he cut more lengths. That was the second aha. (We had been trying to imagine a way of weaving the one string into itself to form a basket of loops like a bunch of fancy Celtic knots). Then he had us tie lengths of string to the line tied to the tree. This can also be done with a circle armature by taking a supple branch and making a basketball hoop then tying down from there, which is good for skirt making and anything requiring a closed basket like pattern.
Does the West have any idea?
The final aha came when we began tying simple knots into the hanging strings, taking one side and tying it to the next. That's when the big AHA hit us. Once a netmaker starts doing this, there suddenly is no beginning and no end. But there is a beginning! That first knot! But that "knot" didn't come from nowhere and nothing. It came from all the non-knot things (string and structure, pattern and pulpy material). There is actually no "knot" (in an ultimate or philosophical sense) because there, when we analyze it, are actually only two things -- the material and the metaphysical, neither of which are the "knot."
See the new bear knot for a demonstration of this magic trick, this very useful camping, survival, and construction technique in rope use and knotting, recently released on TikTok.
This wise Western monk can explain in detail.
But when we combine the two, usher them into interdependence, suddenly we see "knot." That is to say, the illusion of "knot" arises. The knot is unreal, but it has form and function. It is easily returned to the unreal when undone. Nothing new actually comes into being. Nothing is born. What was there is still there.
What was there? In the beginning, there was the material (Four Elements or characteristics of matter in varying degrees to make every other physical things). And there was the metaphysical, the pattern, the design, the intelligence, the immaterial, the software, the idea, the "name" if you will. In ancient times these two were known as nama-rupa, "name and form." Name is mind, and form is body (or the physical inanimate thing that becomes animated by the formless thing, in a manner of speaking).
How does any "thing" (dhamma) come to be? The Buddha had a very, very profound explanation of this. All things are Dependently Originated. (They may be no thing, but they are not nothing). And if we say to anyone that there is no "knot," or no "self," or no "ego," they will necessarily misunderstand what this means.
For those with a greedy (lobha-type) nature, it will seem that there must be a merging with the eternal and clinging to it;
For those with a hate (dosa-type) nature, it will seem that there must be an annihilation or separation from the eternal and rejecting it;
For those with a deluded (moha-type) nature, it will seem uncertain, unknowable, doubtful, confusing.
All explained in detail (Sayalay Susila)
But it's actually knowable and answerable. IF a "knot" indeed comes into actual existence when tied, then where does "it" go when untied? Does it go into the eternal, the world of Platonic forms, that is, the immaterial world of ideas, names, software, the mystical Judeo-Christian logos? (In the beginning, there was the word, and the word was good, God, Good god, gawdammit? What was the first word? Om (🕉️). Why?
Because this whole universe, the world we see and the unseen world behind what we see, is vibrating at varying frequencies. So all that is seen and experienced is a sort of binary of on-off (1-0) in endlessly varying degrees and quantities, magnitudes and tones, and if one listens very carefully, one can hear or at least imagine that one hears the hum of the universe. This mechanism, vast and spread out, is revolving and doing something, and that is making a low hum sound. What does it sound like? Listen. It sounds like aummmmmmmm. (To Catholic and Christian ears, it may sound like this, A'mennnnnnnnnn).
Is this the logos (word) Judeo-Christians mean?
Or does "it" go to nothingness, the abyss, emptiness, annihilation, the dark?
It doesn't "go" anywhere. What was there before is still there (name and form); what was never there (the thing, in this case the knot) is still not there. So it does not go away and it does not return, but it sure seems like it does.
Are we light like devas (shining ones)?
So what does it do? It manifests or does not. It is seen or remains unseen. The software works its magic on the hardware, and the hardware reflects the magic and limitations of the software. This happens interdependently so that the limitations and magic of the hardware are also revealed by the software. (E.g., if we want to run up a rocky hill, we might be able to, given the will and a body that does not wear out or crash. All the wanting won't make it so if the body gives out, and all the perfection of the body will not make it so if the will is not present, obviously).
Help, Alan Watts!
Everything's a verb; nothing's a noun.
Each thing, every thing, arises dependent on other things. What other things? Its constituents. Therefore, in this way, paradoxically, it (the actual thing) does not arise; there is just what there was before (the constituents and the pattern), but now they are functionally integrated and so give the illusion of something new coming into being. This is what there is: an illusion (maya) has come into being. What will go out of being at death? The illusion will go out. Where will it go? It will go back to potential rather than manifested. One can go into physics and sound all too metaphysical. But this is actually quite simple and self-evident and can be proven in an instant. Alan Watts pointed this out: Take your hand, open it wide, and look at your palm. Now make a fist. Where did the hand go?
It's right there, same as before.
Yes, but now there's a "fist." ✊
(Open the hand). No, there isn't. 🤚
(Ball the hand). Yes, there is. Look! ✊
Ah, yes, that thing.
Yes, it's a fist. ✊
So a "fist" came into existence just now?
Yes, obviously.
It looks like a hand (palm-hub, radiating fingers, wrist, muscles, skin, blood, bones...), the same as before.
Yeah, but now it's a "fist."
But when you open it, it's a "wave."
(Open it). It's a wave!
(Ball it). It's a fist!
What's going on?
A "fist" is just what we call the functional integration of these elements (palm, fingers, etc.) in this way (pattern). In another way, it's a "wave."
What defines it?
Interestingly, Watts had the genius to realize long ago, it's NOT a thing but rather a process.
Huh?
When it's waving, we call it a wave. When it's fisting (balling up into a fist), we call it a "fist." When it's handing, we call it a hand....
But isn't it?
Sure, conventionally speaking, but ultimately of course it's not. It's always just a hand (handing) -- a hand being defined by what it's doing.
But what is a "hand"?
It's a thing (constituent amalgam)` that is handing, that is all these mudras (hand poses)
So what are we? I'm a "being," you're a "being," right?
We're always in flux, transforming, decaying, perishing, hurtling toward destruction, even when we're birthing, surviving, growing...like this wave, falling away, becoming a fist, falling away, becoming a wave (waving goodbye), just a hand, handing, falling away.
Oh yeah. I guess maybe that's what the Buddha meant when he emphasized impermanence (anicca)?
Yes! There's no static "being" here, but what there is (the Five Aggregates clung to as self) is always becoming, turning, morphing, changing, falling away, rearising, endlessly. This is samsara, the endless cycling. We're usually too busy to ever notice. But a little stillness, or even an attempt at stillness (samadhi) reveals it.
But isn't a "fist" real? Say yes, or I'll punch you. 👊
Yes. Of course, it's real on a certain level, the day to day, in the conventional way of speaking.
What else is there but the conventional way of speaking?
Unclench your fist and I'll tell you.
Oh, sorry. 🙇♂️
There's the ultimate (paramatha), of course, as in what is it really?
But it's not really a "fist"?
No, it's just a hand fisting. And when it's chopping, we call it a "chopper" (thing that chops), or a slapper (slapping), or a clapper (clapping), or a wiper (wiping), or a poker (poking)... 👃
Oh yeah, huh?
Yeah.
Help, Thich Nhat Hanh!
The simpler one makes it, the better (Thay).
The late great Thich Nhat Hanh said this in a much prettier way when he observed one day on tour, coming through Pasadena, California, and stopping at the Convention Center. Jeff and I were there to see what greatness he would evince, what pearl of wisdom he would utter. He didn't say much of anything. But he did say this. He pulled out a bag of rocks being sold or given to kids to meditate with at Plum Village in France. We have Deer Park here in Southern California, and I didn't see this bag of pebbles for sale, though I imagine they must have been available somewhere. And taking out a pebble at a time, there was a word on it to reflect on. As I pulled my eyes back down because they were rolling too much and someone might see, Thay (Ven. Hanh) said something profound. It caught me by surprise.
He asked, "Did you ever notice that clouds are made completely out of non-cloud elements?" Huh? Well, ground water is not a "cloud," and heat is not a "cloud," and the mysterious process of condensation is not a "cloud," and altitude is not a "cloud," and "white" or "blue" or "fluff" is not a cloud. BUT when these merge, what arises but a "cloud"? Or the illusion "cloud" seems to come into being, arise, appear. It's just the name given by the mind to the functional integration of all these constituent factors, the elements. I wasn't sure he knew what he had just said.
No Mud, No Lotus (Thay)
Fortunately, he immediately gave another example to prove he had. He asked, "Did you ever notice that flowers are made completely of non-flower elements?" There's mud and fertilizer (very anti-flowery dung and watery dirt), the seed, the sun, the heat, the season, all this and more. Then they all come together when the conditions are "right" (and we'll call them "right" after the fact then try to assemble them again for it to happen again). For what to happen again? Flower(ing). Look at the flower, its beautifully scented, delicately structured transience. Is it mud? There's no trace of mud that was so important to its birth. Is it dung? Doesn't smell like it. Is it water? It's not water but there must be water in it, wet yet dry to the touch...it's clearly not water. Is it air? It's airy or must have air in it, but it's not air. Is it color? It has color but clearly is not the color itself. Is it any of these things of which it is made? No, not as such, yet there's nothing else here but the immaterial stuff, the structure, the pattern, the math, the sort of invisible parts. Did Thay think up this example? It was almost worth waiting around in there looking at "now" watches to hear just this one example.
Back to the point, the final and biggest aha: When one gets to the stage of making the first knot (assuming the previous things were not knots when they probably were, tying to the tree and hanging the strands of string down from the first line), one grabs any strand and ties it to the strand next to it.
Seemingly out of nowhere, a "net" starts to emerge. It starts to arise. It starts to appear.
Because there has been a net existing before (somewhere in the netmaker's past or mind or schooling), the net is actually reemerging, rearising, reappearing, and for this reason all birth is rebirth, patisandhi, not a first birth.
Where is the beginning? It cannot be found, and it doesn't matter. It is not apparent in the net. It is not "right" to say it began with this knot (even though we marked it so we would be able to say with certainty that it was this one) because it is very unsatisfying. There is a net of many identical knots all strung together, and that's the beginning? Why, how, who says so? The point is, it is not obvious in the data, in the tangible, observable, sensible field of perception. There's no reason why that one is or should be the first, but it is, and the real question is not "What was the beginning?" but, What preceded the beginning? What gave rise to that? As we have seen, there were many beginnings, many things setting up before a net came into illusory being, but once it started, there it is rolling along.
SOLUTION: A better simile might be the convective power of water drawn through a hose. Cause low pressure in the hose by blowing or sucking on it, and water starts to come through all on its own. Now place the other end of the hose into the tank being sucked out, and when will it end? When did it begin? As soon as the loop completes, the question doesn't make sense. That is to say, it becomes meaningless. What we want is not a first point but a better explanation to, Why? What for? To what end? What is the purpose of life. And for that, Buddhism has an answer. But people aren't going to like it. It doesn't satisfy. What if all this were just for its own sake, just impersonal phenomena rolling along, things clinging to themselves as the fundamental attachment causing all of this strife, worry, dread, and longing for eternal life or endless anything? If ending is the problem, then not-ending must be the solution. This sounds logical, perfect, but it is incorrect. The real solution would be not to start. Bringing the process to an end, if it does not rearise then there's no problem. We dread this solution because what about all the aspects of the illusion we like? Are we to lose those? You propose to take away our illusion(s)? Told ya you wouldn't like it. Awaken to the Truth; it's much better.
Buddhism likes science because both attempt to explain the world. Ask the Dalai Lama.
And having been born (not really), it will die (not really). It will not do these things, because it itself in an ultimate sense did not exist, does not exist, and will not exist, but the illusion that arose, that did come into being, that does carry on for awhile, and that does "die" or come to an end until it is arises again.
This is how life began. For details on how life began in this world (on this planet if this is a spinning planet and not a stationary platform much bigger than what we are shown with a hollow center of other levels as described in Buddhist, Hindu, and Jain cosmologies since ancient times) this time around, see the Agganna Suttaor "A Buddhist Genesis" a discourse on "Knowledgeof Beginnings."
The Buddha leaves out what was stated here and begins with a preexisting world and the subtle light beings (or, according to at least one sagacious scholar, Dr. Sugunasiri, Ph.D., light beams) that alighted on it, became coarse, and lost their subtle abilities, becoming denser and denser, in accordance with karma (habits) of the past reemerging again in a new cycle.
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.
%20dead%20cat.jpg)
%20kalapa,%20nimitta%20approximation,%20nama%20rupa,%20wiki.jpg)
%20sayalay%20anutara%20pa%20auk%20forest%20monastery%20WQ.jpg)
