- This topic has 10 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
-
Maha Brahma realm lies below the Abhassara realm and was destroyed in the last “loka vinasaya” described in the Agganna Sutta. See “Buddhism and Evolution – Aggañña Sutta (DN 27).”
- Maha Brahma (also called Baka Brahma) was the first to be born in that empty realm (coming down to that realm from the Abhassara realm) once the “reconstruction” started.
- He was there alone for a while and thought, “I was this realm’s Creator.” Then, he wished to have more “companions.” When others started coming down, he thought, “Oh, now I have created others too.”
- The Buddha visited that realm at least twice to try to dispel some of his misconceptions; see “Anidassana, Appaṭigha Rupa Due to Anidassana Viññāṇa.”
1 user thanked author for this post.
-
-
Maybe they do. As far as I know, this is the only recorded account in the Tipitaka.
1 user thanked author for this post.
-
By reading the first verse of the Bible (Genesis 1), we can see the consistency of the Aganna Sutta.
- As Lord Buddha said Maha Brahma had a thought that aligns with the events to come. The false view of Maha Brahma is the origin of monotheistic beliefs. This is also the same thing that some yogis feel in their samadhis. With Sila and Samadhi, our thoughts align with future events. What is dangerous is that it maintains the perception of atta (control) and nicca (the ability to keep things to our liking. This only happens among anariyas. In the suttas ariyas with abhinna powers had these abilities. However, they had an understanding of tilakkhana.
- In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.
The Aganna Sutta says that Maha Brahma was the only being below Abhassara Loka. Genesis 1 says God was the only being in the beginning!!
-
Yes. Both Hinduism and Christianity are based on a Creator. But their descriptions are not related.
2 users thanked author for this post.
-
I forgot to add the following in my earlier comment:
Hinduism (at least the early versions) originated with anariya yogis. They cultivated not only jhana but also abhinna powers (just like Devadatta, Alara Kalama, and Uddaka Ramaputta) in the days of the Buddha.
- Some of them visited those Brahma realms. So, it is quite likely that such yogis even had conversations with Maha Brahma and were convinced that Maha Brahma was the Creator of that Brahma realm. As described in the post ” “Anidassana, Appaṭigha Rupa Due to Anidassana Viññāṇa,” Maha Brahma believed that he and his fellow Brahmas would not die, i.e., they have attained “permanent life.”
- That was one reason the Buddha went to see Maha Brahma, as described in the “Brahmanimantanika Sutta (MN 49).” A brief description is at #4 in the above post. A longer description at #12 of “Anidassana Viññāṇa – What It Really Means.”
2 users thanked author for this post.
-
Reading the Brahmanimantanika Sutta (MN 49) we see Mara saying that those who do not have faith in Maha Brahma will end up in the lower worlds. This is exactly what monotheistic beliefs (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) say. Except that for them, it is an eternal hell. This is the basis of these beliefs “faith in a creative and eternal God”. Unfortunately, it is a well-established micchādiṭṭhi and it is very hard to get out of it. This is why these religions are the most widespread in the world.
1 user thanked author for this post.
-
True. I get really stressed out when I see people spreading such beliefs on the internet and when the opposite party accepts their beliefs. I don’t understand why don’t they see the reality and question the existence of an ever-present Creator.
There is one more problem.When a wise person questions the existence of God, they ask this famous question “Who created you then?”. “Who created everything?”. If we encounter such questions how should we respond to this? Because a one liner answer is not enough to explain how do we exist, it requires a firm background first about the Dhamma.
So what should be done in such a situation?
-
1. The following posts were written several years ago about the ideas of a Creator:
“What Does Buddha Dhamma Say about Creator, Satan, Angels, and Demons?“
“The Language of God” by Francis Collins“
2. Regarding Yash’s question: “There is one more problem.When a wise person questions the existence of God, they ask this famous question “Who created you then?”
- Each person (living being) creates one’s future lives by acting with avijja. That is the Paticca Sasumuppada process. There was no beginning to the rebirth process. “Origin of Life – There is No Traceable Origin.”
- That was the first post in the section “Origin of Life.” I have discussed many issues in detail there. It will take a while to go through!
Conclusion: “Origin of Life – One Creates One’s Own Future Lives“
1 user thanked author for this post.
-
I have an advice for you Yash don’t waste your time arguing with them. If you see that they don’t want to know anything else is better to stop the debate. Some may even threaten and insult you.
- The vast majority of them are narrow-minded people who categorically refuse anything contrary to their comfort zone. I clarified the vast majority because some are open-minded people who want to understand other points. The basis of these beliefs is unquestioned faith. In the Bible we often see Jesus saying “Do not be afraid, only believe” or “Go in peace, your faith has saved you”. “He who believes in me will have eternal life” He who does not believe will not be accepted into the kingdom of heaven. You already have a great insight into what type of person you are dealing with. Do you want to waste your time arguing with this type of person??
- In my case, it’s my merits. A monk told me it was my past pāramis who made it possible that despite being born in an environment where micchādiṭṭhi was predominant, I was able to learn the Dhamma and accept it. One of my greatest wishes is that the Dhamma spreads in Africa. The Dhamma would solve 99% of the problems of this continent. The problem is that micchādiṭṭhi is extremely strong there and it would take a lot of work. In the long term, I hope to work with the existing monastery there to better present the Dhamma and explain the key and important concepts of the Dhamma. It won’t be easy but there will be people open-minded enough to accept the Dhamma. (It was a little digression to say that we can hope that others understand the Dhamma like us but it can take time. In my case I would like Africans to understand the Buddha Dhamma.) It was books and painful experiences that brought me to the Dhamma (In this life anyway). I am not even a sotāpanna, even today. I am just developing the pāramis for the attainment of magga phala. Others will have different elements that will cause them to question these beliefs.
- Of course, some need a little more guidance to learn. If you think the person is open, go for it, otherwise it’s doomed. Soon I will write on the forum a teaching of the comments which describes 4 types of people found in the world. This comment helped me understand that everyone is different when coming into contact with the Dhamma.
1 user thanked author for this post.
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.