A Creator God in the suttas?

You get to appreciate and respect other religions the more you study the suttas.

Indirectly The Buddha teaches how other religious founders came to their conclusions in their respective religions. So please do read the scriptures of other religions! :slight_smile:

For example, it is obvious that Taoists regard the formless realms as the highest attainments and the whole teaching is based on these attainments.

I could go on and on with other religions but instead I would like to ask, in the name of interreligious understanding and communication, when or why buddhists started denying that there is a Creator God?

The Buddha himself affirms that there is a creator of Kama-Loka in MN49.

”‘Brahmā, I too know that if I attach to earth, I will lie close to you, in your domain, subject to your will, and expendable. If I attach to water … fire … air … creatures … gods … the Creator … Brahmā, I will lie close to you, in your domain, subject to your will, and expendable. And in addition, Brahmā, I understand your range and your light: “That’s how powerful is Baka the Brahmā, how illustrious and mighty.”’

‘But in what way do you understand my range and my light?’

‘A galaxy extends a thousand times as far

as the moon and sun revolve

and the shining ones light up the quarters.

And there you wield your power.

You know the high and low,

the passionate and dispassionate,

and the coming and going of sentient beings

from this realm to another.

That’s how I understand your range and your light.”

In this video with the venerable monk @Sarana he mentions that exact sutta MN49 but then says that Baka the Brahmā is not the creator of kama-loka.

This makes no sense at all. There’s nothing like what venerable monk @Sarana says in the video to be found in the actual sutta he mentions. The Buddha actually affirms in MN49 that there is a creator but that there are also realms above the creator. That is why The Buddha could become invisible! Also someone in Baka the Brahmā’s assembly gets possesed by Māra…but what happens in the following sutta MN50? Moggallāna (an arahant) gets possesed by Māra:

”Now at that time Māra the Wicked had got inside Moggallāna’s belly. Moggallāna thought, “Why now is my belly so very heavy, like I’ve just eaten a load of beans?”

In MN50 it is obviously ”Sloth and torpor”, so why should it be any different in MN49 (”delusion”)?

What actually makes perfect sense is that one being or several beings in the luminous form realms could create a universe below them with this earth and the various heavens.

The only thing The Buddha denied about the creator in the suttas is that ”everything that happens is the creator’s will.”

There’s a group of people probably none of you have heard about.

They are called ”Quranists”, they call themselves ”Quran Alone/Only” muslims.

These people completely reject the later fabricated texts like the Hadiths (things supposedly the Prophet Mohammad had said and did - some very disturbing stuff to be found in the Hadiths…), they also reject the Sunnah: For this they get ridiculed, harrased, put in jail or even killed by ”muslims” from the various sects…

I would say these lovely Quran Only people are the most authentic muslims out there (nothing like the sufis with their initiations, rituals and other useless stuff and certainly nothing like militant ”muslims”). They stick to the actual teaching found in the Quran and nothing else! :smiley:

Even they hold firmly to that not everything that happens is the will of the creator.

And they, if anyone should know since they actually follow what the creator of Kama-Loka has put forth in The Holy Quran.

But sadly plenty of theistic people have this wrong view, that everything is the creator’s will - They even had it during the Buddha’s time…!

Since there are so many similarties found between all the various religions and buddhism: the same precepts, same descriptions of the various heavens and devas/angels and tons more I would easily say that a Buddhist would be the very best there is to promote interreligious understanding and communication! :slight_smile:

Here’s a summary about Quranism:

1 Like

Post split from thread here: Can a Buddhist look at the scriptures of other religions? - #10 by Ric


Hi Attus !
About the “Creator God” I think that when the Buddha said “the Creator”, he probably just followed the meaning of Brahma. It is because Buddha also talked about the world formation in Dn.27 Aggaññasuttaṃ. In this sutta seem that Buddha didn’t mention about any “creator God”. But thanks alot for joining the discussion too!
And also increased my knowledge about Quranism :grin:

1 Like

3.1.2. Partial Eternalism

There are some ascetics and brahmins who are partial eternalists, who assert that the self and the cosmos are partially eternal and partially not eternal on four grounds. Despite being views of the “self and the cosmos”, the main focus in the next four views is the self.And what are the four grounds on which they rely?

There comes a time when, after a very long period has passed, this cosmos contracts. This is the end of an eon. It might be compared with what the physicists call the “big crunch”.As the cosmos contracts, sentient beings are mostly headed for the realm of streaming radiance. The human and similar realms are destroyed in the conflagration at the end of the universe, but sentient beings are sustained by the power of their past kamma. The “realm of streaming radiance” is a Brahmā heaven corresponding to the second jhāna.There they are mind-made, feeding on rapture, self-luminous, moving through the sky, steadily glorious, and they remain like that for a very long time.

There comes a time when, after a very long period has passed, this cosmos expands. This might be compared with the “big bang” of a cyclic universe.As it expands an empty mansion of Brahmā appears. The realms into which beings are reborn exist interdependently with the beings themselves. The different dimensions correspond with different kinds of kamma.Then a certain sentient being—due to the running out of their life-span or merit—passes away from that host of radiant deities and is reborn in that empty mansion of Brahmā. That is, they pass from a world corresponding to the second jhāna to one corresponding to the first jhāna.There they are mind-made, feeding on rapture, self-luminous, moving through the sky, steadily glorious, and they remain like that for a very long time.

But after staying there all alone for a long time, they become dissatisfied and anxious: ‘Oh, if only another being would come to this state of existence.’ Then other sentient beings—due to the running out of their life-span or merit—pass away from that host of radiant deities and are reborn in that empty mansion of Brahmā in company with that being. These beings are reborn according to their own kamma, and it is just a coincidence that they appear after the first being made their wish.There they too are mind-made, feeding on rapture, self-luminous, moving through the sky, steadily glorious, and they remain like that for a very long time.

Now, the being who was reborn there first thinks: ‘I am Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Undefeated, the Champion, the Universal Seer, the Wielder of Power, the Lord God, the Maker, the Author, the First, the Begetter, the Controller, the Father of those who have been born and those yet to be born. The idea of a creator god arose due to ego and delusion.These beings were created by me! Why is that? Because first I thought:

“Oh, if only another being would come to this state of existence.” Such was my heart’s wish, and then these creatures came to this state of existence.’ The other creatures appeared after his wish, not because of it. God confuses correlation with causation, a mistake perpetuated by no small number of his followers.

And the beings who were reborn there later also think: ‘This must be Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Undefeated, the Champion, the Universal Seer, the Wielder of Power, the Lord God, the Maker, the Author, the First, the Begetter, the Controller, the Father of those who have been born and those yet to be born. And we have been created by him. Why is that? Because we see that he was reborn here first, and we arrived later.’

And the being who was reborn first is more long-lived, beautiful, and illustrious than those who arrived later.




Legendarily Buddhist atheism began many æons ago when Brahmadatta was ruling Benares. At that time, the Bodhisatta was born as a wise nāga by the name of Bhūridatta, one of the sons of the nāga chieftain Dhataraṭṭha. Another of Dhataraṭṭha’s sons was the foolish nāga Kāṇāriṭṭha, who many lifetimes later was to become the foolish monk Sunakkhatta.

In the Bhūridatta Jātaka’s account, Kāṇāriṭṭha recites a series of verses in praise of the tenets of Brahminical theism, to which the wise Bhūridatta replies with a series of verses ridiculing and refuting them.

Sutta Central has an English translation of this Jātaka, but it’s a very free rendering. Better to read Julius Dutoit’s German translation, using Google translation if you don’t know German.


(By the way, the date given for Dutoit’s translation – 2007 – is incorrect. The six volumes were actually published between 1908 and 1914).

1 Like

Regarding DN27 - Thank you for this one @IKhan06! :slight_smile:

So it starts of at the Luminous Form realms,

Here they are mind-made, feeding on rapture, self-luminous, moving through the sky, steadily glorious, and they remain like that for a very long time.

But the single mass of water at that time was utterly dark. The moon and sun were not found, nor were stars and constellations, day and night, months and fortnights, years and seasons, or male and female. Beings were simply known as ‘beings’.

The Qur’an describes that Allah “made from water every living thing” (21:30).

[Quran 25:54]
And it is He who has created from water a human being and made him [a relative by] lineage and marriage. And ever is your Lord competent [concerning creation].

Back to DN27:

After a very long period had passed, solid nectar curdled in the water. It appeared just like the curd on top of hot milk-rice as it cools. It was beautiful, fragrant, and delicious, like ghee or butter. And it was as sweet as pure manuka honey. Now, one of those beings was reckless. Thinking, ‘Oh my, what might this be?’ they tasted the solid nectar with their finger. They enjoyed it, and craving was born in them. And other beings, following that being’s example, tasted solid nectar with their fingers. They too enjoyed it, and craving was born in them.

  1. The Moon and Sun Appear

Then those beings started to eat the solid nectar, breaking it into lumps. But when they did this their luminosity vanished. And with the vanishing of their luminosity the moon and sun appeared, stars and constellations appeared, days and nights were distinguished, and so were months and fortnights, and years and seasons. To this extent the world had evolved once more.

Why the moon and sun appeared is in the sutta but not how the moon and sun and stars etc. appeared.

Now I really love reading this sutta DN27 even more and will have to study it much further.

Now it reads as the most beautiful poem ever but with a horrific theme:

The Sun and Moon show up as reminders and symbols of our previous inner light that we no longer have due to craving.

Now in this day of age we live in, we have uncountable diseases, yet somehow there also uncountable plants out there with healing/medicinal properties to remind us how we could feel… :slight_smile:

Who made those plants? :wink: If there’s no compassionate creator we are incredibly lucky that these various medicinal plants just showed up ”all on their own” and also just happen to help us with the various health issues we face. :wink:

Then again one could argue that, if there was a benevolent creator, there would not be such things as mosquitos…

But personally I prefer focusing on the good things and surely no such things as mosquitos in the heavens, who even The Buddha says are very pleasurable. :slight_smile: :pray:

1 Like

I know perfectly well that I’m in the territory of AN 4.77
Acintita Sutta: Unconjecturable:

"Conjecture about [the origin, etc., of] the world is an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it.”

But still feel I need to point out a few things.

Thank you @LucasOliveira but the DN1 quote on partial-eternalism is about the luminous form realms and how someone who used to live there, later on here on earth through ascetic practices, remembers having lived there.

Also looks like you added some other views to the text not present in the actual sutta. From where are these extra added things, might I ask?
The reason I ask is because whenever a buddhist says that a Brahma is egotistical and delusional, or like David N. Snyder in his bland books writes that devas are delusional we have a major problem.

Regarding the insights taught in DN1 - These insights also highlight a certain bad tendency shown among some buddhists. What I mean is this:

It is not like the three characteristics Anicca, Dukkha & Anattā are evident to anyone other than a Buddha.

Think about it.

If we start meditating we might get access to previous life experiences. It is quite natural and logical to then create a ”eternal soul/self” theory from these experiences, right?

Anicca is evident to some degree, things do change and dissolve, but impermanence is not that evident if I lose loved ones and later reunite with them in heaven, right?

Dukkha is also not really evident if we take heaven in to consideration since it is very pleasurable there, luminous form realms even more so and the formless absolute bliss and with an immense lifespan in all these different realms.

In DN1 the Buddha teaches us why some ascetics (other religious founders) have the views they have. The Buddha’s insights are superior and he can therefore say that all these realms are in fact Anicca Dukkha Anattā.

But that doesn’t mean buddhists should walk around like they were superior and start calling, a Brahma (who can expand through countless solar systems) or the Devas who are far more ethical and wise than humans, things like egotistical and delusional.

Only a Buddha can point out the three characteristics.

That’s why it is almost laughable to see some people acting like they too have a full grasp of these amazing and unique insights, when in reality they are only repeating what’s in the Buddha’s teaching. And by doing so making it seem like Anicca, Dukkha, Anattā are crystal clear and ought to be so for all beings in the entire universe. When in reality only one certain being that is extremely rare, a Buddha, teaches about it.

The only reason we can even read about partial-eternalism and why the Buddha refuted it, is because of these incredible insights that only a Buddha has. :pray:

1 Like

Yes, it is good to understand that on existential level certain statements are true or not, depending on who makes it. For example one can say that conceit “I am” is a delusion. According to Suttas it is definitely true, but if one is a puthujjana who is not only certain about his own being but also supports it by sakkayaditthi, he simply doesn’t know what he is talking about…

About God creator, Buddha in fact does not exclude his existence, but only in certain context:

“If the pleasure and pain that beings feel are caused by the creative act of a Supreme God, then the Tathāgata surely must have been created by a good Supreme God, since he now feels such taintless pleasant feelings.

MN 101

As someone that went alot in suttas. I noticed what your point is and I agree actually partly.

The other point of Buddha has is that you supposed to understand that things written about all types of creators is just actually each explaining mostly qualities of creation. The one that is actually the Guiding Light of the universe he used another name. Its not Brahma Sahampati. Which probably present the Positive Inner Guide in our Mind. The chatter that always talk to us. But the is Light that you actually can talk too. Nowadays few people experience. More in recreation

But I believe all these names doesn’t matter. It couldn’t have come from a Buddha with all respect. He probably used them only out of campassion to teach others. But everything is just Brahma.

And the Beyond. Which called Brahman. That is what Buddha used the be equal to what is called God. Because God truly means something beyond creation. Creation is made. Everthing we can see with our eyes in creation is made. And what is Nirvana or Brahman. Is what is the experience that you only see not with your two eyes, but your seeing things beyond your two eyes. Seeing how things truly is. And it breaks up all beliefs system about God itself. It break up all your concepts made with language. But at same time it makes you understand others more. That truly they all seeking one truth. Because there is only one truth like Buddha said in suttanipata.

This his Middle Way to attain Brahman. Like he mentioned one place in Sumyutta Nikaya. He will compare Nirvana to the word that he knew has close meaning to what he experienced. Like another place he said Nirvana is like to what you call it, the Absolute. He was talking to other sect.

Nirvana is the Highest way you can experience life.

Its not about using left brain. Imagination. But without using imagination. We can’t make others understand.

The compassioned heart is what you are trying to use. But you have to see a bit beyond writing. And comparison. And language. Tradition.

Which will reguire you to sit in full surrender.

I admit that encountering Buddhism helped me to rethink the religion of my birth, that is, Islam. For example, i no longer think of Islam as monotheistic religion in the literal sense, but that to declare there is only one God, Allah, and that Muhammad is his messenger is to think of this particular Brahma as of the highest echelon, and that prophet Muhammad was contacted by him through a deva (Gabriel). If we assume that Baka is the god thought to be the greatest by the three monotheistic religions of today, then prophet Muhammad was not lying, but was simply contacted by a deluded god.

Also to raise the question: who is truly Maha-Brahma is to turn the limitations of creationism upon itself: a Brahma can fall down from Grace, begins to talk to himself and believe that he is all powerful, until you present a Brahma who is higher (Sahampati) and who formally requested the Buddha to teach after much hesitation, which makes the Buddha a messenger of some sort.

DN11 sheds some light on what creationism could possibly mean through the use of element in both sequence and meaning. Baka seems to be the highest in a conditional sense - hence to consider him the highest is inline with our modern age of democracy, where the majority decides the truth and where puthujjana-ship can be standardized. The fact that Baka and his assembly dwell on the seventh heaven above the human realm is another striking similarity with Islam and monotheism in general. Also Mara’s admiration of Baka thinking of him as truly the highest, and his influence on his assembly confirm that Mara’s rejection of human supremacy is out of his excessive love for Baka, as some sufis and esoteric Muslims have alluded.

Buddhist practice also sheds light on how Islam emerged - by the example of prophet Muhammad - and how it came to be through our modern age. Prophet Muhammad was a meditator of some sort in a cave near Mecca, and his first encounter with deva Gabriel asked him to recite (which became translated as to read, portraying prophet Muhammad as illiterate and that his recitation of the Quran is a miraculous act proving that authenticity of his insights/encountering genuine deva. Maybe prophet Muhammad was a sotapanna? hearing (sota) the words of wisdom (panna) from a deva?

Taoism can also shed lights about Islam and its origin, which goes back to pre-islam. There was a tribal conflict between the tribe of prophet Muhammad - Banū Hāshim, and the rivalry tribe (their cousins) Banu Umayya, where the two tribes are traced back to two twin brothers who were born stuck by the back and had to be separated by the sword. This rivalry came to shape subsequent Islamic history where Banu Hashim were skilled in religious and theological matters, and Banu Umayya were skilled in worldly affairs. This whole saga sounds similar to the rivalry between the Buddha and his cousin (Devadatta) who caused schism in the sangha.

Quranism is a reactionary movement to relying on Hadith, akin to “sutta only” movement that rejects commentaries in Buddhism. It is interesting that the spreading of Hadith was during the ummayad dynasty. In one Hadith, the Buddha’s Miracle at Savatthi is a description of the fake messiah. The whole saga before the judgement day is expected to take place in the Middle East (surprise!) where some people (akin to the chinese - dwelling behind a great wall) are expected to invade the area and drink the water of the sea of Galilee :open_mouth: which is akin to how the Chinese government is treating the people of Tibet. :smiley:

One thing i liked about Quranism is their exposure of some myths that held Muslim captive in relation to dogs. Many Hadiths were narrated by a guy who had soft spots for cats (Abu Hurayra) and who spent one year with prophet Muhammad. There is no evidence in the Quran that dogs are impure, apart from the empirical evidence that cats bury their faeces after defecation, which is used by some Muslim scholars in an attempt to justify aversion towards dogs, bridging the gap between science and religion, and make sense of Hadith all at once :ok_hand:

No this can’t be. We have enough evidence in suttas for that. S.N. 55.2 titled The culmination of the spiritual life defines sotapanna as

** "Mendicants, a noble disciple who has four things is a stream-enterer, not liable to be reborn in the underworld, bound for awakening.

What four? It’s when a noble disciple has experiential confidence in the Buddha … the teaching … the Saṅgha … And they have the ethical conduct loved by the noble ones … leading to immersion. A noble disciple who has these four things is a stream-enterer, not liable to be reborn in the underworld, bound for awakening." **

Here’s link for that - SuttaCentral

1 Like

Hello sir.

I think you are wrong here. Its not that beings in the luminous form realms could create a universe below them with this earth and various heaven. It better makes sense when you say that beings in the form realm have control over realms below including earth and heavens. Its sort of like ruler of all realms below. They may not literally create realms of below but they essentially rule the realms below. Don’t you think this sounds more accurate?

Yes exactly. Its just like president/government rules us/our country, but it doesn’t mean everything has to go according to will of government. We have our own sphere where we can exert our own will although very small compared to government(rulers above).

Abrahamics have their own lineage of prophets, of which Muslims believe that Muhammad was the last before the judgement day (i.e before the end of this kalpa). This could shed some light on why the sotapanna can be reborn up to seven more times (matching the number of the seven sensual heavens). It is also unclear why bodhisatta Maitreya dwells as Tusita Deva before his last rebirth as a human instead of dwelling in the fourth Jhana along with other Buddhas and ariyas.

If we were to contemplate the four unconjecturables as taught in AN 4.77:

1- The Buddha-range of the Buddhas: all realms seem accessable to Buddhas and their noble disciples.

2- The jhana-range of a person in jhana: while Baka is said to be dwelling in the first Jhana, his range is distinguishable from other Brahmas.

3- The [precise working out of the] results of kamma: sages who had knowledge of higher realms might act in incomprehensible ways to the ordinary person.

4- The origin of the world where Maha-Brahma or a creator god is outside of time, akin to the unconditioned where the only difference is that one emphasizes an abstract beginning, and one emphasizing an abstract end.

Who knows! Maybe because prophet Muhammad and his lineage came to preach against paganism, emphasizing Baka (or Allah) as the highest was the most skillful mean to bring people closer to the truth. In our modern age of materialism, a Buddha statue might serve as a reminder of the human habit of creating things and worshiping them, of which identity view comes to resemble.

It goes without saying that comparing religions is mainly speculative, but in my case, i grew more sympathetic towards Islam than before encountering the teachings of the Buddha.

This actually seem right to me. I mean no offence but Islam is the reason many many people are united(muslims)…just as other religious people. Maybe they are better United under religion than alternative.

I will share my opinion here. How are you so sure that metteya dwells as tusita deva instead of dwelling in 4th jhana? Yes he is said to be residing in tushita but just as it is possible to enter 4th jhana in human realm…don’t you think such possibility exist in tushita realms also? Off course it has to exist and moreover tushita god’s should have more possibilities than humans.

Why are you so sure that he does not dwell along with other Buddhas and aryas? I don’t think it’s right to assume any such thing. I think he is nearer to buddha than even all the remaining Bodhisattvas of tushita realms. See when there is rule of wheel turning monarch on complete earth, do you think he is all alone with exception of all humans under him? No! He is kind of citizen of higher realms and he can also see other realms and can also visit them if he desired. Heavenly kings treat him as their equivalent or atleast definitely acknowledge him.

Based on what I have read and heard from my teacher, tushita realm(heaven of joy) has 2 parts/courts… one is inner court where Bodhisattvas reside and other is outer court where all other inhabitants of tushita reside. It is also said that inner court does not get destroyed at the end of kalpa/aeon but outer court does. We can connect this to the pure abodes where it is said that destruction does not reach. So inner court of tushita has similar characteristics of pure abodes. This also gives impression that inner court of tushita realm is more nearer to pure abodes of anagamis than nimmirati and parinimmirati heavens.

Another thing metteya is said to be away from buddhahood by one last birth only, so do you really think that state of his mind can be compared to a normal residing god in the realm of tushita? Off course not. We can understand it like this. Lord buddha walks on this earth in this human realm still he is above and beyond of all the heavenly and Brahma realms. Just as lord buddha in his final life walks on earth among human beings before passing into parinibbana…metteya in tushita lives among Bodhisattvas before taking last birth in human realm to attain buddhahood and it is also said that Bodhisattvas in tushita realm are actually capable of travelling on universal scale and learn from Buddhas of another buddha lands of 10 directions.

Islam had a unifying effect between tribes and nomads at the outset, but its relationship to language caused schism along the line between arab and non-arab (Ajam). As with most major religions (Hinduism - Sanskrit, Buddhism - Pali, Christianity - Latin, Judaism - Hebrew) the post colonial era had two competing doctrines as providers of identity: Islam and Pan-Arabism. When both failed, modern movement tried to utilize Quranism to present the Quran as a historical text, dividing it into: Madani (post Muhammad’s migration to Mecca where the Islamic state was established) and makki (pre Muhammad’s migration to Mecca where the religion focused on spiritual affairs and beliefs). This division aims at considering Makki Quran as timeless, and Madani Quran as historical, allowing Muslims to simultaneously maintain their faith and modernize the religion without holding it hostage to politics.

I will share my opinion here. How are you so sure that metteya dwells as tusita deva instead of dwelling in 4th jhana? Yes he is said to be residing in tushita but just as it is possible to enter 4th jhana in human realm…don’t you think such possibility exist in tushita realms also? Off course it has to exist and moreover tushita god’s should have more possibilities than humans.

The human realm is often described as “ideal” for the purposes of liberation due to the balance between pleasure and pain. While devas are presented as more capable, they might not have the same motivation to meditate, especially when they are described as “contended”.

Also MN49 indicate that Baka already possess pubbe-nivāsanussati and dibba-cakkhu, but not āsavakkhaya which is peculiar to Buddhas and Arahants. If Baka survives the end of Kalpa, then he must have broke away from the first five fetters, so Sotāpannas and Sakadāgāmies still have things to learn from Baka. Bodhisatta Maitreya is an ariya by virtue of being prophesied to become the upcoming Samma Sambuddha, when the sangha of Gautama Buddha no longer exists.

The above brings an interesting parallel between Buddhism, Abrahamic religions, and Bodhisatta Maitreya as the last Samma Sambuddha who will perform The Great Miracle at Savatthi as one of the ten Indispensable Duties of a Buddha. The three Abrahamic religions prophesize the resurrection of Jesus before the end of time, where a fake Messiah will also emerge and perform some miracles very similar to the Great Miracle at Savatthi according to Muslim Hadith. The details include:

The Dajjaal would have with him water and fire and his fire would have the effect of cold water and his water would have the effect of fire, so don’t put yourself to ruin.

He would also make a path made of jewels, lets gold and sliver grow from the ground. His mark is that he is “one-eyed”, and with a stretch of imagination, this might be in reference to his dhamma eye or divine eye.

The end of time (apocalypse) is the collectivist version of death on the individual level. If Bodhisatta Maitreya is the last Samma SamBuddha in this Kalpa, then his performance of this Miracle would take a special meaning.

Yes and we can say that it might be the activity of skillful means of higher deities/Brahmas in some way or other but essentially to preserve goodness as much as is possible.

Yes some of them might have lesser motivation or some of them might even have higher motivation than humans because it also said that teachings of all the past Buddhas is preserved in tushita realm. When metteya leaves Tushita to come human realm, he will put his crown on next Bodhisattva who will be next buddha after metteya. Bodhisattvas from there actually fulfill perfections by coming in human realm regularly or irregularly. Tushita realm is also safe in one other way, as lifespan in tushita more or less corresponds to buddhantar(large time span between dispensation of two buddhas). Nonetheless human realm is offcourse ideal for liberation.

Yes. All religions in the world are mixed representations of dhamma. It is also said that all the good things from any religion in the world essentially come from the mouth of lord buddha or his followers who may be humans, gods or Brahma’s.
Do you know ‘Mahabharata’? The text which describes war between Kauravas and Pandavas on ground known as kurukshetra. I have actually heard that on that ground buddha preached abhidhamma teachings. 100 Kauravas are kind of 100 defilements of our mind. 5 pandavas + 3 commanders of kaurava army(bhishma, drona & karna) kind of representatives of 8 states of awakening…4 of attainment of sotapatti magga, sakrutagami magga…so on and 4 of sotapatti phala, sakrutagami phala …so on. There are some who say even Jesus was buddhist monk.(I am not claiming anything). Like that. So all the religions represent some part of dhamma, it maybe in different form, it maybe misrepresentation but it is offshoot from dhamma only.

Yes exactly it should be like this! I am sure very few see apocalypse (acc to Islam) as actually death on individual level.

According to SN 6.1, just after the Buddha becomes fully enlightened, he considers whether it would be better for him not to teach others the Dhamma he has discovered.

Brahma Sahampati, one of the Brahmas in Buddhist tradition, at that time, knowing the thoughts of the Buddha, comes to request him to teach the Dhamma to the world. The Buddha accepts the Brahma’s request, out of compassion for the world.

The name, Brahmā, originates in the late Vedic tradition, in which Brahmā (also identified as Puruṣa, the cosmic Man or primal Person) is one way of referring to the highest-ranking god. He is conceived of as the creator of the universe and is venerated with sacrifices and rituals by the Brahmins (Brāhmaṇas).

By contrast, in the Brahma Samyutta of SN/SA there are in the universe several individual Brahmās.

They are not undying, everlasting beings but are regarded as exalted gods dwelling within the continuous cycle of death and rebirth (saṃsāra).

Their functions, myths and characteristics described in the Brahma Saṃyutta of SN/SA are entirely absent from the Vedic tradition.

See Choong Mun-keat, “A Comparison of the Pāli and Chinese Versions of the Brahma Saṃyutta , a Collection of Early Buddhist Discourses on Brahmās, the Exalted Gods”, Buddhist Studies Review, vol. 31.2, pp. 179-194 (2014)

1 Like

Today (5th May) is Vesak day. We may also say thanks to Brahma Sahampati for asking the Buddha teaching the Dhamma to the world!

1 Like