I was reading the Sankharupapattisutta earlier and am intrigued by the paragraph ( below) … in particular, ’the gods who control what is imagined by others’.
Is there somewhere I can find specific examples of this to check if the concept in my head is on the right tangent or not.
Also, I’ve done some snooping and it seems these beings are on Lvl 7. I’m wanting to know if it is only the beings here who can do this. If not, which other realms/ lvls have beings who can do this?
Thx
“Furthermore, take a mendicant who has faith, ethics, learning, generosity, and wisdom. And they’ve heard: ‘The gods of the thirty-three … the gods of Yama … the joyful gods … the gods who love to imagine … the gods who control what is imagined by others are long-lived, beautiful, and very happy.’ They think: ‘If only, when my body breaks up, after death, I would be reborn in the company of the gods who control what is imagined by others!’ They settle on that thought, stabilize it, and develop it. Those choices and meditations of theirs, developed and cultivated like this, lead to rebirth there. This is the path and the practice that leads to rebirth there.“
paranirmitavaśavartin (pali: paranimmitavasavattī) means “one who controls (vaśavartin) the creation (nirmita) of others (para)”. Nirmita does not mean imagined.
Bhante @Sujato, this looks like a novel translation. I believe you haven’t done footnotes to the SN yet.~ Could you give us some background on why you went with this?
I’m guessing it is so you move away from the notion of a “creator god”. But it’s hard to imagine what it means to control what is imagined by others.
Maybe I’m in the wrong sutta, but I though it was MN120. Link to passage: SuttaCentral
‘If only, when my body breaks up, after death, I would be reborn in the company of the gods who control what is imagined by others!’
‘aho vatāhaṁ kāyassa bhedā paraṁ maraṇā paranimmitavasavattīnaṁ devānaṁ sahabyataṁ upapajjeyyan’ti.
Omg, I’m such a doofus. I did not read your 3.5.32 properly, dropped the last number, went to 3.5.3, saw it wasn’t too far from the start of the deva section so decided I might as well start at the first deva header.
…. 4 + hours later
I was seriously questioning if I was dense after about 3 hours for not deciphering it from the text … and there it was in plain English all along
I’ll go back and read the rest of the book in the coming days … except for the lower realms. I’m going to choose wilful ignorance and skip that part coz firstly I filter negative content from getting to my mind as much as practical, … and I have reason to think the Nimmanarati Deva’s are not the only ones with the power to create. I believe we all can, and I don’t want ideas in my mind that might manifest unintentionally just by thinking it. I accept tho a Nimmanarati probably manifests in a different / more lasting ( even if still temporary) format.
An artist is one who creates art, an writer a piece of literature, video makers create videos, youtubers, tik tokers are some of the popular job nowadays. Game creators create games. AI helps us to create a lot of these expanding the power of creation to more. Perhaps one way we are similar to the gods who control the creation of others is in directing AI what to create.
Genetic engineering can create lifeforms which are much better in almost everything, stellar engineering can create blackholes for energy usage for advanced civilizations. Simulated universes can be created with the programmers as the god of the simulated universe. Playing the sims basically means one controls the creation of others.
Yes, exactly. What is nimmita is not worlds and beings etc., which is the normal scope of “creation” for gods, but, it seems, rather images and projections. Nowhere is it said that such deities are “creator gods”. My notes:
These deities (nimmānaratī devā) are said to create whatever delights they wish and enjoy them, living in a world of their own projection. They seem to be primarily Buddhist, perhaps influenced by such passages as Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 4.3.9, which says that in dreams one creates a new body that is revealed by one’s inner light. They are, however, mentioned in later texts such as Viṣṇupurāṇa 3.2.30 as one of three groups of thirty, and Mārkaṇḍeyapurāṇa 44, which adds that they preside over the months, seasons, and days.
Deities in this, the highest of the sensual realms, control the visions seen by others (paranimmitavasavattī). Their most famous member is Māra, who uses this skill for wicked ends. Again they seem primarily Buddhist, although we probably hear an echo of them in Mahābhārata 12,325.004E, which lists the parinirmita and vaśavartin as two separate groups.
We can see from Mara’s love of creating manifest images what kind of thing this is thinking of. There’s probably a better translation, but I’m trying to stay away from “creation”. Perhaps “manifest” would work?
Hmm. When it is translated as “gods who love to create” it makes sense that these gods would create x, and then the “gods who control what is created by others” would be controlling x. I mean, it makes sense in a way.
If that is the case then “manifest” makes sense.
But “gods who love to imagine” to me means they are sitting around imagining things, kind of like daydreaming. Ok. But then does “gods who control what is imagined by others” mean that they can make anyone imagine things in a way similar to gods who love to imagine are doing it themselves? Not that the controlling gods are necessarily controlling what those imagining gods imagine? But that they can make people/beings imagine things?
But if this is the case, then “imagine” sounds more accurate, but it’s confusing to me.
The only example we have, so far as I know, is Mara, who does indeed “create” or “project” or “manifest” visions that are seen by those who are here in the human realm.
It is, and the lack of any real canonical (or other) context doesn’t help.
Bhante, perhaps this gets the metaphysics backwards? Lower beings need material objects to experience what is actually sought after, sensory qualites, while these beings can just bypass that and create the sensory experiences directly.
On a tangential note, according to Ajahn Puṇṇadhammo, being born as a Māra is not an unfortunate birth, in fact it’s one that requires great merit and generosity to achieve (as it’s a being of deva/brahma level).
“The Paranimmitavasavatti Devas enjoy the creations of others. The others, having known their mind, create whatever objects of enjoyment they desire. They wield power there. How do the others know their mind? It is in the nature of their service (pakatisevanavasena). Just as a skilful cook knows what the king wants to eat, and so makes lots of it, just so, they know what the Paranimmitavasavatti Devas want. Thus, naturally (pakatiyā) having known what sense objects give pleasure, just these they create.” (DN-a 33)
“Whatever occurs to their mind, the others over whom they wield power, know this and create that object” (Vibh-a 18:6)
SUMMARY
We have now reached the summit of the plane of sense-desire. In the realm below this one, the beings are able to create any desired object by a simple act of will. This might seem to be the furthest limit to which the fulfillment of sense-desire can be taken, but there is something still better. The Paranimmitavasavatti Devas do not even have to be bothered with performing an act of will to satisfy their sensuality. There is an odd paradox here. From one perspective, we can visualize them as all-powerful overlords bending others to their will, as their name implies. However, they can just as easily be seen as completely passive consumers of sense objects: “having known what they want, just these objects which give pleasure they (the servant devas) create.” In the whole of the sense-desire realm, beings strive and suffer to attain their desired objects. Here we see that the final goal, the peak experience of sensuality, is an utterly futile existence of supine luxury.
To me, it seems like a natural extension of Anatta principle - the process that creates/imagines things is not the same process that enjoys (or not) these things. They’re interactive but separate functions (in fractal terms, as above, so below).
Not a bad representation of Māra…