[Lal]

The following video is from a physicist:

Despite the clear illustration that photons are particles, many physicists still lean towards the “wave picture”!

The bottom line is that photons ARE particles. But their trajectories MUST BE allowed “all possible paths” per Feynman diagrams.
– She needs to experiment with single photons. Her laser beam has numerous photons. Of course, a single-photon experiment requires a sophisticated laboratory. But such experiments have confirmed what I state below.
– With a single photon, it will take ONLY ONE path each time a photon is sent through. But when the experiment is repeated, it will take different paths allowed by that calculation. More photons will follow paths with higher probabilities in such experiments.

Those ideas are explained in “Basis of the Proposed Interpretation – Feynman’s Technique in QED”

The background discussed at “Quantum Mechanics and Dhamma”
– However, one must have at least a high-school physics background to understand those concepts.

[Tobi-Wan Kenobi]

Hello Lal….. here is the interpretation that I think is good.
I hope this is translated well by me?

It is always crucial how we interpret the world or a formula

So the double-slit experiment is seen in the world as it is, only people interpret it wrongly or differently. There are many interpretations such as “The Copenhagen Interpretation. It has neither. With the wave-particle dualism still to do with consciousness? That the photon behaves like this.
A photon has the nature of a probability wave. And has hardly any mass. Therefore, a photon is in a 6 dimensional world. As Burkhard Heim describes it. Not present in space as it is present in the transcoordinate ( x4) x5 and x6. As a result, the photon lacks structure in space. The electron absorbs the energy of the photon when it hits the slit and since they both have wave characteristics, they are superimposed in this experiment. The particle character occurs when energy is transferred to spatial components. This is always the case, for example, when an electron emits a photon or recombines with one at the moment of interaction to form a particle, because it releases or transfers its energy at a specific location. But it is and has a wave character to the end.

At the slit, the electron interacts with the material (of the slit) in a way that it does not spatially transfer energy, but where only the wave character is superimposed and this creates two probability waves behind the double slit. Those electrons that spatially interact with the material of the gap repel each other and are no longer registered anywhere. The disappearances from the experiment. If I now observe my electron by forcing it to emit a photon at the moment of passage through the double slit, then the particle wave is set to reset, so to speak. Because a spatial interaction takes place here. Then, viewed from the specific slit, it propagates as a particle wave, as a new material wave in the direction of the screen. And that just appears as a blob on the screen.
The wave character of quantum mechanical objects is a purely transcendent temporal property and an interaction of transcendent temporal terms of my quantum mechanical objects.

6 dimensional world by Burkhard Heim

x1 to x3 = The lengths/or Space

x4 = Time

from here it starts———————————transcendence

x5 = structure

x6 = The will or the target dynamics

http://heim-theory.com/?page_id=173

[Lal]

Hello Tobi,

I cannot read the German website you quoted. But here is a brief article on Wikipedia: “Heim theory”

The description you quoted above involves an electron absorbing/emitting photons. But there is no need for such mechanisms.
– This experiment has been done on electrons and photons separately, i.e., similar interference patterns have been observed when the experiment was done with a single electron or a single photon.
– Also, whether this experiment has anything to do with consciousness is a separate issue. (It does not)
– The question of whether a photon is a particle or a wave has also been resolved: “Photons Are Particles Not Waves”

[Tobi-Wan Kenobi]

Hello Lal

Lal said:

This experiment has been done on electrons and photons separately, i.e., similar interference patterns have been observed when the experiment was done with a single electron or a single photon.

to evaluate would be:
In the sense that the place of energy transfer is determined by the interaction of a single probability wave with the transcomponents of the particles of the screen material.

And yes, consciousness has nothing to do with it…. sorry for my English

The Burkhard Heim page can be changed from German to English

[Lal]

Tobi wrote: “The Burkhard Heim page can be changed from German to English”

Thanks. I took a quick look at it. I did not see a post specifically on the double-slit experiment.
– Anyway, I got the impression that his model is not good either.

I am not specifically interested in these explanations. But the conclusion of these experiments is that nature is “non-local,” meaning far apart events (even separated by across a galaxy) can be correlated. They can influence each other instantaneously! Meaning such events are not limited by the speed of light, as Einstein envisioned.
– The recent Nobel prize award was for the confirmation of that “non-locality.”

– My interest is that it is the exact mechanism under which the laws of kamma operate! When a human dies (cuti) on Earth’s surface and grasps a Deva existence (patisandhi), a Deva appears in the corresponding Deva realm instantaneously. There is no time delay
– Cuti and patisandhi are only apart by less than a billionth of a second (time between two consecutive cittas.)

1 user thanked author for this post.

Jorg

[Jorg]

I wasn’t aware that the 2022 Nobel Prize in Physics confirmed the non-local nature of this world. My knowledge regarding this topic is limited, but I can clearly see how this sheds a tremendous light on the concepts of instantaneous rebirths, birth of gandhabba, kamma bhava, kamma, vipaka, etc. 

<br />
@Lal: I remember you posted this a long time ago:

Going “Against the Grain” of Scientific Consensus

3. When I started working on this project over two years ago, I had conversations with Professor Gayanath Fernando. We tried to get a paper published on the proposed interpretation of QM. However, we were unable to convince the reviewers, and the article did not get published. I am attaching the pdf of the last version here: “A Self Consistent Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics Based on Nonlocality.”

• But it got rejected from several journals because physicists refuse to believe that the “light speed barrier” can be broken: Einstein’s relativity theory says nothing can propagate faster than light.

• Our point is that nothing actually “travels” between the two “connected electrons.” They are intrinsically connected.

• However, it is ironic that the nonlocality of Nature was firmly established in 2015, as we discussed in the above paper.

 

I’m just wondering if you ever attempted to get it published again, since more evidence has come out.

[Tobi-Wan Kenobi]

Hello Lal.

My interest is also more in the pure Dhamma. I was already out with my knowledge before that and confronted Hannes Schmid from 6 Dimensions in Color with your question and he said:
Yes. The principle of causality must also be reassessed: it has to recede the more highly organized the matter is. So, paradoxically, it may be true at the micro level, but not for more complex structures

6 Dimension in Color
and I agree with that

I would assume that the basis of everything is a spirit, everything consists of the encompassing spirit. From the cell, atom, suddhāṭṭhaka down to the smallest unit of the rupa and even the energies.
Our world with its 31 realms is embedded in mind, also known as the clear light, whatever that is. Nibbāna maybe?
Now to the mechanism that comes from x5 and interacting with x6.
So responsible x5 seat of our consciousness embedded in the Infinite Invisible Consciousness and the docking points for our data storage Gati, Namaloka, Rūpakkhandha etc. and x6 the Hadaya Vatthu seat of our mind.

The two together Consciousness (Viññāṇa) and Spirit (Hadaya Vatthu) create a state of mind with the well-known mechanisms Rupa, Citta, Cetasika, Gati. I would describe this state of mind as probability.
A unicellular organism is very likely in our world, an atom even more so, humans are rare and a Buddha even rarer. We all know the story about the turtle and the ring.

So this attitude of mind, like the mechanism with the spin, creates a similar image, a structure (this image/structure consists of kamma energies) like that of the four realms, apayas, kama loka, rupa loka and arupa loka, so that we without time Delay appear in the appropriate loka/room.

The key is the mindset. So the composition of the energies behind it (e.g. Kama energy), what happens to us in the cuti and patisandhi moment and to which stream, area we attach ourselves.

That’s how I understand it.

PS Briefly on structure: Structure is an organizational principle. In my example, a Din A4 sheet has the structure 1 and if I fold this sheet of paper into a paper airplane,
It gets a higher structure. Let’s say 10 and each intermediate step from sheet to
Paper airplane thus has the next higher level. So also a direction that is irreversible.

[Lal]

Thank you, Tobi.

I watched the video “6 Dimensions in Color.” I also glanced through the document that you emailed me. In the following I will list the major contradictions of this theory with Buddha Dhamma.

1. This theory also tries to DERIVE mental aspects. The higher two dimensions are attributed to the mind in a subtle way, but it is abstract. In Buddha Dhamma, one starts with the mind: “Manōpubbangamā Dhammā..”
– In other, more mainstream scientific proposals, mental aspects are attributed to the brain. This theory is different, but it also does not give the predominant role to the mind but tries to DERIVE it in a subtle abstract way.

2. In the write-up you sent me, you gave NUMBERS to represent the universe’s size and lifetime.
– In Buddha Dhamma, both are infinite. It is impossible to derive such numbers.
– If the principle of causality is true (the basis of Buddha Dhamma AND modern science), one cannot trace a “beginning to sentient life” and hence to the universe.
– As modern science has illustrated, the boundaries of space are limited only by technology. The most recent telescope can look deeper into space, but that is not a limit.

3. It is fruitless to try accommodating this theory — or any other theory — to Buddha Dhamma.
– There is no need to do that since Buddha Dhamma is self-consistent. See “Buddha Dhamma: Non-Perceivability and Self-Consistency” No other theory can provide any more insight than what is already there in Buddha Dhamma.
– All such efforts are just a waste of time. Such efforts will only take precious time away from pursuing Nibbana: “Nibbāna “Exists”, but Not in This World”

[Tobi-Wan Kenobi]

Hello Lal,

Thank you for your analysis, great and correct as always.
I guess I have a distorted Saññā there.
I’ll work on that.

to point 1: The Burkhard Heim theory is correct physics and should only be seen as that, only better than school science.
Only the Buddha Dhamma brings us to Nibbana, all other theories are just crutches. That includes point 3 as well.
Manōpubbangamā Dhammā..
is in this context and also on the page dhammā…..with ā not lowercase?

to Point 2: I think my bad English is a bit to blame and writing always leaves room between the lines.
I also described a material universe that arises but then doesn’t completely cease and again arises an infinite loop.
Our own mind will always place us in the center of the universe and we will never see an end of the universe, not even with larger telescopes.

Thank you again for taking the time to help me in advance.
I could well use a sangha that knows puredhamma or better an ahrant to help me apply the noble eightfold path to eliminate my gati.
Unfortunately, there is no such noble thing in our country or I am not aware of it. So thank you Waharaka Abhyaratanalankara Thēro and also Lal that we having you!

sadhu, sadhu, sadhu

[Lal]

Tobi asked: “Only the Buddha Dhamma brings us to Nibbana, all other theories are just crutches. That includes point 3 as well.
“Manōpubbangamā Dhammā..” is in this context and also on the page dhammā…..with ā not lowercase?”

Yes. Two meanings.
– Dhamma (with uppercase D and no long “a”) refers to teaching. Buddha Dhamma means “teachings of the Buddha.’
– Dhammā (with a long “a” and normally lowercase d) refers to “things that bear/sustain worldly things.” That is what comes in the phrase “Manōpubbangamā Dhammā” since everything in this arises with the mind as the precursor. See “The Origin of Matter – Suddhāṭṭhaka” and “What are Dhammā? – A Deeper Analysis.” These are a bit deeper discussions and may require understanding fundamental concepts in Buddha Dhamma.

[Tobi-Wan Kenobi]

Hello Lal,

My friends asked me how your analysis of my theory and the answer to my questions turned out.

Can you address the following issues? I would appreciate that.

Again, for clarification, Burkhard Heim`stheory is correct physics, for example,how the string theory aspects. Even a well-educated physicist needs at least a year to familiarize themselves with it!
-I can express myself more clearly in German; German has more words than English..

In any case, the following are my questions.

Manōpubbangamā Dhammā

Manō pubbangamā dhammā Manō pubbangamā dhammā manō setthā manōmayā manō setthā manōmayā
manasā cē padutthēna manasā cē pasannēna
bhāsati vā karoti vā bhāsati vā karoti vā tatō nam dukkhamanvēti
tatō nam sukhamanvēti
cakkamva vahatō padam. chāyāva anapāyani.
(Dhammapada verses 1 and 2)

1. Manō is, of course, the mind. Dhammā (plural, not Buddha Dhamma) are the energies the mind generates (via javana power.) Dhammā means “to bear,” meaning “everything arises due to Dhammā.

2. Those dhammā then give rise to everything (all phenomena) in this world – whether living or inert.

3. Pubbangama (pubba + anga) means what comes first. The first line (in both verses) says the mind creates all dhammā that give rise to everything in this world. The second line says everything is prepared (settā) and manifests in mind (manōmayā).

4. The mind creates those Dhammā with thoughts (saṅkhāra.) That requires a lengthy explanation that can go to profound levels: “Buddha Dhamma – A Scientific Approach” and “Worldview of the Buddha.”

1. Mano the mind. Is Hadaya Vatthu + viññāna correct? In my theory, I only gave the Mano coordinates, i.e., a location with x5 + x6 in the universe. The processes remain the same PS, etc.
Where can I find something about the Javana power?
2. That makes sense
3. That makes sense too
4. In which sutta or where is this point described? Does the mind create those dhammā with thoughts (saṅkhāra.)?

Another question: What is the connection between the process of creation (Saṅkhāra) and attaining Nibbana? When someone attains Nibbana, is the universe still there for all other living beings? Or not?
– If we go to Paranibbana, do we disappear from the universe?
– This process represented in a formula would have to be embedded in an overall formula. Wouldn’t there a hole in the formula to account for all other processes?
Or is the piece simply shortened and gone? Will the universe remain after this?

[Lal]

Thanks, Tobi. It is good to discuss these issues since other people may have similar questions. Following is my initial response, and I may keep revising it during the day to avoid multiple posts.
– Please wait until later today to ask follow-up questions (12 hours from this post.) I can answer any questions after that.

1. I don’t have doubts whether Burkhard Heim`s theory is consistent with the CURRENT string theory or any other proposed theory. String theory is just that, an unproven theory: “String theory”
– My argument is that ALL scientific theories up to date have been either rejected or revised. New theories can explain more, but then scientists discover more phenomena that are not consistent. Einstein’s theories replaced Newton’s theory of gravitation. However, Einstein’s idea about locality has been proven wrong, and the recent Nobel Prize was awarded for that. See my post on this thread on November 17, 2022 at 5:29 pm.
– All scientific theories either exclude mental phenomena or try to accommodate them forcefully (e.g., thoughts arise in the brain) or explain abstractly (e.g., the theory you quoted).

2. In contrast, Buddha’s explanations are radically different. It is a paradigm change compared to all current scientific theories based on “materiality.”
– In a post above, I provided one reference describing that, and here is another simpler one: “Dhamma and Science – Introduction.”

3 (a). Now, let me answer your questions raised at the end:
First question: “1. Mano the mind. Is Hadaya Vatthu + viññāna correct? In my theory, I only gave the Mano coordinates, i.e., a location with x5 + x6 in the universe. The processes remain the same PS, etc.
Where can I find something about the Javana power?”

Hadaya vatthu is the “seat of the mind,” i.e., that is where thoughts arise. Viññāna is another name for thoughts (but there are different types of viññāna; some are just consciousness or “being aware,” and other types have expectations.) See “Viññāṇa – Consciousness Together With Future Expectations.”
– Hadaya vatthu has the smallest amount of matter in Buddha Dhamma. It is less than a billionth of the size of an atom in science. That hadaya vatthu can be created only by kammic energy. A human’s hadaya vatthu differs from an animal’s. I cannot explain all that, even in many posts. But a good starting point could be “The Grand Unified Theory of Dhamma.”
– Einstein failed to accomplish his goal of a Grand Unified Theory. No such theory is possible without the mind playing the dominant role. That ultimate theory is Buddha Dhamma.
– Of course, just saying that would not make it so. But by scientific standards, Buddha Dhamma has withstood all scientific findings, whereas science makes revisions (or proposes new theories) to accommodate new findings.
– As for dimensions, Buddha’s differs from the picture you propose. There is a way to divide everything in this into six categories: four great elements (pathavi, apo, tejo, vayo), space element (akasa), and viññāna dhatu. All material objects are made of the four great elements and are located in the space element. Viññāna dhatu incorporates all mental phenomena. Understanding these concepts would take a significant effort, especially because it is a different paradigm.

3 (b) Second question: “4. In which sutta or where is this point described? Does the mind create those dhammā with thoughts (saṅkhāra.)?” That question is regarding “The mind creates those Dhammā with thoughts (saṅkhāra.)”

This is getting to the full explanation of 3 (a) above. You have reached the right point, the crux of the issue!
– Again, this is not something I can explain in a comment like this or even with many posts. This whole website is about that.
– It has taken me over eight years to assemble the posts on the website. But there is much more, depending on how deep I want to go.
– Let me give an example. Any scientist (like your friend) had to spend many years learning basic concepts until he could start understanding string theory. Buddha Dhamma is much more profound/more complex than any theory scientists will ever have if one takes a theoretical approach (i.e., the Abhidhamma approach.) There are no suttas that explain Abhidhamma. The Pali Canon has three parts, two of which are Sutta Pitaka and Abhidhamma Pitaka; the third one, Vinaya Pitaka, is mainly for the bhikkhus. A brief summary at “Preservation of the Buddha Dhamma.”
– However, there is a simpler way to follow the Buddha’s Path and get to Nibbana. That is to take a “practical approach” explained in the suttas. It starts with teaching how to live a moral life first. The second step is to get rid of the first level of wrong views about this world (ten types of miccha ditthi.) The final step is to get rid of the deeper level of wrong views about this world (that pursuing sensory pleasures can only lead to eventual suffering in the rebirth process.) See, for example, “Is It Necessary for a Buddhist to Eliminate Sensual Desires?”
– You asked: “What is the connection between the process of creation (Saṅkhāra) and attaining Nibbana?” One needs to understand Paticca Samuppada to get the basic idea. The basic idea is briefly explained in “Distortion of Pāli Keywords in Paṭicca Samuppāda.” But, of course, it requires much more detail.

3 (c) Final set of questions: Here is the basis. Any sentient being lives in this world (going through the rebirth process) until attaining Arahanthood. At the death of that Arahant (Parinibbana), that sentient being leaves this world, i.e., is not reborn in any realm of this world.
– Another way to say that is: “Existing in this world” and “in Nibbana” are mutually exclusive. One can be either in this world or in Nibbana (after Parinibbana.)
– Nibbana cannot be described in the terminology of this world. The Buddha emphasized the following. This world has both pleasures and suffering. Pleasures dominate suffering in the realms above the human realm (i.e., in Deva and Brahma realms.) Suffering dominated pleasures in the lower four realms, including the animal realm. The human realm has pleasures and suffering. The problem is that MOST rebirths are in the four lowest realms! Nibbana is suffering-free. That is all anyone can say about Nibbana. Nothing in this world (people, Devas, houses, mountains, stars, ..) is there in Nibbana. See, for example, “Nibbāna “Exists”, but Not in This World”
– Your question: “When someone attains Nibbana, is the universe still there for all other living beings?” Yes. There are an infinite number of beings in the universe. See “The Infinity Problem in Buddhism.”
– Your question: “If we go to Paranibbana, do we disappear from the universe?” Yes. As explained above.
– Your question: “Will the universe remain after this?” Yes. As explained above.

4. There is a lot of material condensed in the above comments. Please make a list as you read and refer to relevant post(s) if you have questions. As I said above, it will not be possible to understand everything even after reading those posts. But we need to start somewhere. I will be happy to answer any questions.

[LayDhammaFollower]

Greetings to Lal and other dhamma friends!

Lal said,

It has taken me over eight years to assemble the posts on the website. But there is much more, depending on how deep I want to go.

Sadhu!

Lal, I am really happy to read above statement.

#1 Can you share some concepts which you have not been able to share so far on website due to time constraints and you think are good to know and understand? (Concepts Outside complex abhidhamma details.)

#2 Also, Let’s say someone hypothetically studies this website completely and understands dhamma to extent it is explained and shared on website, what should be the next steps for his/her learning journey in dhamma? (Especially people unfamiliar with sinhala language.)

You don’t need to answer this question right now, but, I wholeheartedly request you to share some advice on this topic from your own experience of learning dhamma throughout the years.

[Lal]

Yes. I hope to write at least double what I have written so far.
– They include both Sutta Pitaka and Abhidhamma. Also, I am constantly learning new ways of looking at concepts.

Compare that to what the Buddha told bhikkhus in the “Sīsapāvana Sutta (SN 56.31)”
“The Buddha took up a few siṁsapa leaves in his hand and addressed the bhikkhus thus: “What do you think, bhikkhus, which is more numerous: these few siṁsapa leaves that I have taken up in my hand or those in the siṁsapa grove overhead?”
“So too, bhikkhus, the things I have directly known but have not taught you are numerous, while the things I have taught you are few. And why, bhikkhus, have I not taught those many things? Because they are not beneficial and irrelevant to attaining Nibbāna. Therefore I have not taught them.”
– But what I need to write down will be beneficial, even though I may have grasped only a fraction of what the Buddha taught.

– By the way, if you have not read the series on “Origin of Life” you should read it. It explains why there can be no beginning to life.
– Some people worry about whether artificial intelligence (AI) is possible. It is not. All life in the universe has been there from a “beginningless time.” It is not possible to create a brand-new life. While there is an unbroken “dynamic lifestream,” no soul is traveling the samsara (rebirth process): “What Reincarnates? – Concept of a Lifestream.”
– Even if an infinite number of beings attain Nibbana, there will always be an infinite number of them left. Scientists have also confirmed the existence of “levels of infinities”: “The Infinity Problem in Buddhism”
– Many such interrelated issues can be explained so that people would not be distracted by such matters. That will build faith in Buddha Dhamma and allow one to focus on the main goal: “stop future suffering in the rebirth process.”
– So, I intend to build on the series on the “Origin of Life,” too.

P.S. Even if something happens to me and this website becomes non-operational, the “puredhamma Netify App” developed by Seng Kiat can last for many years. It does not require a website: “Pure Dhamma: A Quest to Recover Buddha’s True Teachings.”
– Also see “Pure Dhamma Essays in Book Format”
– Much merit to Seng Kiat and his family for his ongoing efforts!

[LayDhammaFollower]

Lal said above,

Yes. I hope to write at least double what I have written so far.

Yes, great to know, Lal.

They include both Sutta Pitaka and Abhidhamma. Also, I am constantly learning new ways of looking at concepts.

Me too, Lal. It is profound experience, seeing the absolutely 100% consistency of dhamma.

By the way, if you have not read the series on “Origin of Life” you should read it. It explains why there can be no beginning to life.

Yes, I have studied that section three or four times so far.

Many such interrelated issues can be explained so that people would not be distracted by such matters. That will build faith in Buddha Dhamma and allow one to focus on the main goal: “stop future suffering in the rebirth process.”

Yes, I have gut feelings that actually all the important questions about life, existence, meaning, whether those questions are abstract or concrete, all can be answered by dhamma. One needs to just look and one will find the answers to those questions.

======

I have a sincere request for you, If you can I request you to Please pen down your journey of learning dhamma. I know few bits of it from reading posts and forum comments on websites.

(I have read “about” section, post on “parinibbana of Waharaka thero” and few forum comments and posts where you have shared some details on this matter.)

But, still it is good idea. It will be inspiring to many people including me. If you can share with all, How you came to learn so much and especially, what are your study/research methodology for independent learning.

In one way, positive feedback loop is permanently established at moment of first magga phala, then onwards it is only going up (in understanding dhamma).

I think having skill in dhamma learning and helping others with it is, highest level of possible altruism in my opinion. Because, all other help, other than help through dhamma pales completely in comparison. Your ideas, thoughts and advice has helped many and will help many to become skilled in it.

[Lal]

Thank you for your kind words, LDF.
– I am impressed that you read the series on “Origin of Life” a few times!

1. I was born to a Buddhist family. I remember attending the Sunday “Dhamma school” at the village temple, taking precepts on Poya (Full Moon) days, and regularly visiting the temple to offer flowers/incense to the Buddha, followed by listening to a discourse by a bhikkhu.
– After I started attending Ananda College, one of the premier Buddhist schools in Sri Lanka, such activities were reduced. But Buddhism was taught through high school. Then I went through four years of undergraduate studies focusing on physics.

2. From my early years, I wanted to “get to the bottom” of any subject, and thus I read everything I could get my hands on. I think that mindset led me naturally to specialize in physics. I came to the United States for graduate studies and have been here since then. I worked at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory after getting my Ph.D. and taught a few courses at the close-by University of Tennessee, Knoxville.

3. Even though I liked doing research, I was getting “burned out” with administrative responsibilities and keeping up with environmental compliance activities. So, I took early retirement. I started reading widely again and naturally started thinking seriously about Buddha Dhamma. I had the essential background, but there were many “unanswered questions.” Thanks to the internet, I could listen to discourses by many prominent bhikkhus in Sri Lanka and elsewhere.

4. That went on for almost five years before I listened to a discourse by Venerable Meewanapalane Siri Dhammalankara on July 31, 2013. That discourse changed my life. I immediately realized that it was Buddha’s teachings. Within a few months, I went to Sri Lanka, met a few people (including that Thero), and gathered some recommendations. By that time, I learned that Waharaka Thero had uncovered the true teachings several years prior. Even though I made a couple more visits to Sri Lanka since then, I was never able to meet Waharaka Thero.

5. Soon after I visited Sri Lanka in 2013, I started working on this website. I knew nothing about operating a website but was able to launch it on January 1, 2014. I wanted to share what I had learned, especially with those who could not listen to those discourses in the Sinhala language.

6. I want to mention some things that may benefit others, particularly young people like you.
– One must have an interest in pursuing any subject. If someone is not interested in Buddha Dhamma, that is because one does not have the necessary background. It takes effort to set up that background, especially in the Western world. When engaged in the “rat race” trying to experience maximum sensory pleasures (and how to pay for such activities), there is hardly any time left to investigate issues like the “meaning of life.”
– Are we here just for a brief time? Why are we here? Did it happen without a cause, or can everything in this world be explained logically?
– That is why I think reading the “Origin of Life” section will be beneficial, especially for those with such an interest.
– However, some already have faith in the Buddha (and his Dhamma) and may not be interested in such analyses.

7. In either case, I highly recommend taking notes while reading or listening to Dhamma.
– I have done it from my school days (on any subject). Even if I may not read some of them, just writing down what one learns helps get it into “long-term memory.” I have accumulated a pile of notebooks from Waharaka Thero’s discourses. I recently glanced through them and saw that I had taken notes of the same discourse a few times in some cases (unknowingly.) But the interesting point is that my latter notes are much better; they were taken with a better understanding.

8. Explaining a concept to others is another way to clarify/solidify one’s understanding. But before trying to explain verbally, write down at least in point form. When you try to express an idea, you may realize that more questions need to be answered.
– Furthermore, as one’s understanding grows, one can see the errors one may have made in the early days. I see that there are early posts on the website that require re-writing or revision.

9. There is always room to improve. Only a Buddha knows everything perfectly. But it is an exhilarating experience to advance on the Path as things become clear more easily. Now I can read an earlier post of mine or a sutta translation by another person and see the flaws right away, in most cases. It is just that it takes time to organize my thoughts and write.

I may add a few things to this comment in the future if anything else comes to mind, especially if it could benefit others.

11/24/22:

10. Regarding #7 above, it is NECESSARY to summarize what you learned in your own words. Just copying and pasting quotes directly from the source is useless.

11. If one would like to learn Buddha Dhamma at a deeper level (which is not necessary), it is essential to learn a bit of Abhidhamma. Abhidhamma is not different from Buddha Dhamma but is a systematic analysis of Buddha Dhamma.
– Some issues that may not be resolved within the Sutta Pitaka can be resolved with Abhidhamma.

12. Related to #11 is the following that I also mentioned in another thread at the forum. It is time to write a series of posts on willpower and the human mind.
– Arising of citta (loosely translated as “thoughts”) is a purely mechanical process. It happens within a billionth of a second.
– Then how is it that we have “willpower” to change our destiny?
– That requires systematic analysis. There is sufficient background material on the website, and there are enough people who will be able to follow.

It is primarily humans who have willpower.
– For example, animals are essentially robots who instinctively respond to sensory inputs (arammana.) But that is not to say they don’t have feelings. They do, and they suffer tremendously. But they are helpless (that is the true meaning of “anatta“) because they cannot alter their destiny.
– Even most Devas and Brahmas are like that. They enjoy their mental states until the sustaining kammic energy runs out. Of course, Devas and Brahmas with magga phala do have willpower because their gati have been permanently altered (no going back to bad gati.)
– That is why the Buddha said that human bhava is precious and not to be wasted!
– Those who are interested in the new series may want to grasp the essential aspects of Abhidhamma in the Abhidhamma section.

2 users thanked author for this post.

dosakkhayo, Jorg

[LayDhammaFollower]

Greetings, Lal!

Thank you for sharing your journey of learning dhamma.

=======

From my early years, I wanted to “get to the bottom” of any subject, and thus I read everything I could get my hands on. I think that mindset led me naturally to specialize in physics. I came to the United States for graduate studies and have been here since then. I worked at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory after getting my Ph.D. and taught a few courses at the close-by University of Tennessee, Knoxville.

I have inclination like you too , Lal. I thought I could find the answers to questions of life, existence, purpose, meaning and suffering through physics. I will finish the bachelor’s degree in physics in few months.

I searched for answers widely for many years, but all worldviews failed to incorporate all the
different facets of life and existence.

I sought transcendence from mundane existence. Initially when I came across dhamma, I was sad for while, because, I wanted some sort of higher purpose and meaning to life and existence. But, well, obviously there is none.

There were lots of contradiction and lack of clarity and facts in many worldviews that I explored.

Only buddha dhamma is ultimate theory of literally everything, which is 100% self consistent.

Ofcourse, we can only say that with faith emerging from removal of dukkhā.

Even though I liked doing research, I was getting “burned out” with administrative responsibilities and keeping up with environmental compliance activities. So, I took early retirement. I started reading widely again and naturally started thinking seriously about Buddha Dhamma. I had the essential background, but there were many “unanswered questions.” Thanks to the internet, I could listen to discourses by many prominent bhikkhus in Sri Lanka and elsewhere.

Lal, It is great to see the work you have done despite your age.

Very Inspiring to read that you plan to write double of what you have already wrote so far on website.

One must have an interest in pursuing any subject. If someone is not interested in Buddha Dhamma, that is because one does not have the necessary background. It takes effort to set up that background, especially in the Western world. When engaged in the “rat race” trying to experience maximum sensory pleasures (and how to pay for such activities), there is hardly any time left to investigate issues like the “meaning of life.”

Very true, Lal.

I highly recommend taking notes while reading or listening to Dhamma.
– I have done it from my school days (on any subject). Even if I may not read some of them, just writing down what one learns helps get it into “long-term memory.” I have accumulated a pile of notebooks from Waharaka Thero’s discourses. I recently glanced through them and saw that I had taken notes of the same discourse a few times in some cases (unknowingly.) But the interesting point is that my latter notes are much better; they were taken with a better understanding.

Yes, I take lots of notes in different forms too. I tried mind maps, but, it became overwhelming. Nowadays I just draw flowcharts and take plain written notes from Desanas, Reading posts, sutta, essays, tipitaka etc.

Many people don’t really understand the power of taking notes. Taking notes is very efficient way to expand RAM (working memory) of our CPU (brain).

With notes, one can hold many facts simultaneously in mind.

Also, it is very very interesting to hear about “Piles” of notebooks made from sermons of thero. This is the real temptation for me! :)

There is always room to improve. Only a Buddha knows everything perfectly. But it is an exhilarating experience to advance on the Path as things become clear more easily. Now I can read an earlier post of mine or a sutta translation by another person and see the flaws right away, in most cases.

Yes, It is really exhilarating experience. I am confident in your ability that you can explain many concepts of dhamma from many many different POV.

As you have said at few places,
Once the fundamentals are strong and clear, buddhda dhamma learning journey can be really exponential.

=====

Learning and realising dhamma seems almost impossible feet to achieve, considering the timescale of saṁsāra and odds of so many variables aligning in suitable way. Thanks to you many have accomplished this almost impossible feet!

Thank you for very detailed reply, Lal.

Thanks to Seng Kiat too for maintaining forum, for ebook compilation, website etc.

Many merits to both of you and may blessings of noble triple gem be always with all of us.

☸️

1 user thanked author for this post.

Jorg

[Author]

Posts