My ideas and comments on Buddhism - Page 23

 Psychic Phenomena and Quantum Mechanics | Dean Radin, Ph.D.

 These Animals Don't Have A Brain. How do they survive?

 The Future of Global Buddhism: Sangha Night | B. R. Ambedkar

 Dr. Bruce Greyson Shares How an Unconscious Patient Introduced Him to Near-Death Experiences

 Jampa Dorje describes his experiences with Dharma Sangha in Nepal

 बोधिसत्व की अधिष्ठान पारमिता ( एक छोठे राजकुमार की कथा )

 The 3 Best Explanations for the Havana Syndrome

 Real-life story: how innocent Hindu girls are manipulated into Islam l Sruthi O


#Blashmey #Pakistan #SrilankanManager #Sialkot


A Stadium Sized Asteroid Is Approaching Us

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
විශ්වය හැදුන විදිය ගැන මං ලියපු පොතක් researchgate වෙබ් අඩවියේ Verifying The Origin Of Everything නමින් පල කරල තියනවා. ඒක Download කරගෙන ඒ ගැන අදහස් ඉදිරිපත් කරන්න හෝ ඒකෙ අඩුපාඩු පෙන්වන්න උත්සහ කරන්න. 💥🔥

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gravitas: UAE scraps 5-day work week, weekend to begin after Friday noon

 Gravitas: New Zealand bans smoking for next generation

Consciousness, Split-Brain Experiments, and Combining Minds | Documentary

Buddhism in Pakistan | Religious Tourism In Pakistan

 Gravitas: New Zealand to phase out cigarettes

Gravitas: India dismantles Pak's fake news network

इस्लाम की दावत देने वाले इमाम को नास्तिकता की दावत || Atheism is on the Rise Around the World

 Ambedkar vs Gandhi | Who was right about Casteism? | Dhruv Rathee

Walter Sinnott-Armstrong - Does Philosophy Inform Religion?

 Fa Xian's Spiritual Journey EP.03 Obtaining the Buddhist Sutras | Buddhism Documentary

  The Shocking Truth About Colonial Crimes Against Native Americans


Michael Shermer - Does Evolutionary Psychology Undermine Religion?

The Vietnam War Explained In 25 Minutes | Vietnam War Documentary

Suresh Wanayalae:
The Vietnam War was another horrible output of Abrahamic religions.

Nam Nguyen:
The war had nothing to do with religion.

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @Nam Nguyen , If Abrahamic Religions didn't cause that, they didn't prevent that. If a religion can't change minds of people to prevent violence, then violence would be a cause of an useless religion. The organizations like the United Nations later eshtablished a consistant peace between countries. Not their religion. The Old Testiment and the God in Abrahamic religions and some prophets taught and practiced violence. According to some teachings and examples in those religions, their God did a lot of murders like that, and said that it was fair because they were faithless and not following his orders. Those teachings destroy the values of humanity. And those religions don't teach about the value of lives of Animals too. They say that animals don't have a soul. Abrahamic religions started with political reasons. And they are still doing politics to gain powers. The dedicated followers of those religions usually don't tell the truth to their followers about the real nature of reality.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Heavenly beings (Devas, Brahmas) can attain enlightenment. Not only humans. But Mara heaven is a very enjoyable heaven, so maybe they don't like to give up those things to attain Nirvana. So perhaps, that is why it is difficult for some Devas (demi-gods) to achieve enlightenment. According to Quantum Physics and Wave function, there is a possibilty to exist heavenly worlds and other worlds. According to Paramartha Dharma in Buddhism, there are paramount matter zones and immaterial fields that work with the mind (Chitta) moments that make thoughts and send people to those worlds after the death as a reconnection of those paramount facts in nature. Buddhism is completely a scientific explanation about the nature of life.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 How a Mysterious Event Killed 95% of All Living Things

-----------------------------------------
Cosmoknowledge10 hours ago
In case you didn't know, here's your home address: Earth, Solar System, Orion Spiral Arm, Milky Way Galaxy, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster, Laniakea Supercluster, Universe.

Suresh Wanayalae:
Perhaps we should give a name for the observable universe too (in case we are living in a multiverse). The largest known Black Hole called Ton 618 is around 1.32×10^41 kg massive. So, I like to suggest a name like this: "1.32×10^41 kg Black Hole owned Universe"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Gravitas Plus: 75 years since Independence, time for India to reclaim its rich heritage


 WOTM: RMPS Evidence, Part III

Suresh Wanayalae:
I showed evidence in my last video.

misterdeity:
Is that Tamil? Telugu? Kanada? In your pdf, I mean.

Totally Not A Spy:
It must have been a show stopper. Did you write a paper and submit it for peer review? Why not refer us to the video. Please post. My heart is racing!

C. Guy Dubois:
 @Totally Not A Spy  I'm with you. Can't bloody wait...

Janice Holz:
Suresh, are you referring to the video on your channel uploaded 1 month ago that is just a pdf with music background?

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @misterdeity , It is in English. I updated the PDF with more details and better grammer on 2th February 2022. It is a game changer. I hope you will consider reading it. I love your videos so much MisterDeity. Thank you so much.

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @Totally Not A Spy , It is already available for public. But I hope to publish it on a science journal in February (22th) 2022 to get peer reviews. Thanks.

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @Janice Holz , Yes. But I updated the PDF yesturday. It's better if you can read the updated PDF from the researchgate website.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 How Many Jhanas Were There in Early Buddhist Meditation?

Suresh Wanayalae:
Abhidhamma teachings are the best scientific teachings in Buddhism. Sadly some people ignore Abhidhamma a lot saying that it was a later development. There are fundamental immaterial (quantum) fields in the universe that made 52 mental factors. And Abhidhamma mentions about 28 material (Rupa) forms too. If some people think some other people could explain the quantum nature of the universe like that better than Buddha, why can't accept that the Buddha could do it too? I don't know why some people don't like to accept a science like modern quantum physics. Maybe they don't trust that teaching. But according to quantum physics, there are 9 unique matter particles with 19 anomalies in the standard model of particles. So perhaps those 19 anomalies are 19 hidden particles in the 28 material forms. I think we can trust the Tripitaka more than the ideas of some people.

Logan Green:
Sir can you please tell me that how does rebirth take place in Buddhism

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @Logan Green , Abhidhamma explains the process of Mental factors, Many worlds, Jhana, Rebirth, the status of mind, etc. The mind moments continue as 3 moments. And a stream of mind (Pali: Chitta Vithi) has a maximum of 17 mind moments. And during that process, the mind continues as many rebirths every 3 moments, and also every 17 mind moments conditionally. The normal death is a conditional death, and it can continue to the next 17 mind moments of the conditioned life until the mind moment stops continuing as a result of that 17 conditioned mind moments. I need to learn Abhidhamma more to explain it to someone with confidence. I started to study Abhidhamma recently. But if we know Abhidhamma well we can explain the Sutta teachings of the Buddha easily without misunderstandings and struggles.

Logan Green:
 @Suresh Wanayalae  the mind which moves during rebirth is some form of soul or not ?? And if the aggregates get destroyed during death then how can mind exist ??

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @Logan Green , The mind is not a permanent soul, but it is a process like a soul that continues with the five aggregates of clinging. There are no fixed five aggregates in the mind to be destroyed. It is a stream of continuation of the mind between Matter (Rupa) and Nama (immaterial) fields. The mind doesn't need to carry Matter or Nama with it to make another birth. The Buddha said that it takes only a very small amount of time (the time it takes for a strong person to make his hand straight) to move to another body. So perhaps, after death, a normal mind travels less than the speed of light to be attached to another body. But if the mind is based on quantum processes, then the mind can get information about the previous birth using very fast quantum interactions like quantum entanglements, quantum tunneling, etc. According to Abhidhamma, there is a Rupa (particle) called Jivithaidriya (Life Faculty) which is almost similar to the Higgs particles in quantum physics. So if the mind is based on the Higgs fields that give mass to elementary particles, then the mind can get or receive mass (Rupa) from it to make the Rupa (matter) aggregate, even if the mind is traveling to any other location to find a body. So the Rupa (Matter) density in the space can help the mind to travel causing to continue the five aggregates. Maybe, if we can disconnect our mind moment from the mass/matter (Rupa), then we would not have a rebirth or we would have a rebirth in an immaterial world.  However, Abhidhamma explains a quantum process between a set of elements. If we can understand those explanations clearly, then we can understand the logical science of rebirth too. I'm still learning Abhidhamma as a beginner. It's difficult for me to explain more about that.

Logan Green:
 @Suresh Wanayalae  if mind travels after death then does that mean that it is considered as a type of 'self' ?? But self doesn't exist in Buddhism ...

Suresh Wanayalae:
​ @Logan Green, The 5 aggregates are not a self, and they are just a process like a self. Disconnecting those aggregates by removing clinging from them destroys that fake self. I'm busy with my work, and I think you should find any other teacher. Bye.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Buddha - How To Deal With Suffering In Life (Buddhism)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Shuraik Kader:
Time travel - A "possibility" or not ??
Human dynasty in its millennium era. We have identified fire from the friction of stones and now we are interacting with Nano robots. Once it was a dream to fly but today all the Premier league, La liga and Serie A players travel in airplane at least twice in a week due to the unprecedented growth of human science. BUT ONE THING IS STILL ELUDING IN THE GLITTERING PROFILE OF HUMAN DYNASTY.
Although we have the gravitation theory, Maxwell's theory of electromagnetism, Max Planck's Quantum mechanics, Einstein's relativity theory and in most recently the Stephen Hawking's Big bang concepts...… Why can't we still revert back and forth into our life?
Any possibilities in future?
if not..
Why? in terms of mathematics, physics and theology??
Suresh Wanayalaege:
If some people said that any powerful being or scientist could reverse or stop time, I'm sure something is wrong with them or their source of that information. Some questions and answers remove common sense from some people. Just focus on possible and impossible things first. Making a universe by someone is also impossible. Our imaginations should be based on strong evidence or strong logic.

Sergey Shevchenko: 
“… Making a universe by someone is also impossible …”
- has a sense only if it has some strong enough evidence or strong enough logic. Which [evidences] really now fundamentally don’t exist; and, besides, in this case it would be quite natural, if there would be some grounds, which have some strong enough evidence or strong enough logic, and from which it would follow – if wasn’t made by someone, so how does this universe appear and exist? – as that humans well observe in this universe.
Such grounds also really now fundamentally don’t exist; and so the hypothesis that at least Matter was created by a very smart conscious Someone is quite scientific. Moreover it looks as quite rational – in contrast to rather numerous theories and models in official cosmology, which are really only some transcendent fantasies; more see the cosmological model in the Shevchenko-Tokarevsky’s informational physical model
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/355361749_The_informational_physical_model_and_fundamental_problems_in_physics , doi: 10.20944/preprints202110.0453.v1, section “Cosmology”; where, including the fundamental “matter-antimatter asymmetry” problem is practically for sure solved.
In the model the [absolutely] fundamental phenomena/notions “Space” and “Time” are rigorously scientifically defined; and it is rigorously proven that Matter’s spacetime is the fundamentally absolute, fundamentally flat, and fundamentally “Cartesian”, [5]4D spacetime with metrics (cτ,X,Y,Z,ct), which fundamentally cannot be “contracted”, “dilated”, “curved”, “warped”, in which no any “holes” can appear, etc.; and, besides, there cannot be fundamentally no real “time travels” etc.; more see the link. To read a couple of recent SS posts in https://www.researchgate.net/post/Can-science-prove-the-existence-of-God#view=609150b191491957fa613b35it is useful as well.
Cheers

Suresh Wanayalaege:
Sergey Shevchenko, if the edge of the entire universe expands faster than light without reversing, from point 0 to infinity, then the same beginnings at the edge of the whole universe can make density (matter) in some areas (in island universes). If so, space is a stable form of mass. And the matter is a continuation of mass/energy as a process.
The scientific method is about causes and effects, and the creator of the universe is not science. Don't try to ignore the science behind the origin of everything, and a creator god is not the source of science. The concept of creator God is just an impossible imagination that ignores the scientific method, and it is just a political solution to ignore reality.
The origin of energy/matter etc.:
Best of luck.
Sergey Shevchenko:
Dear Suresh Wanayalaege
- a scientific claim has a scientific sense only if the main terms in the claim are scientifically defined, say, in
“…if the edge of the entire universe expands faster than light without reversing, from point 0 to infinity, then the same beginnings at the edge of the whole universe can make density (matter) in some areas (in island universes). If so, space is a stable form of mass. And the matter is a continuation of mass/energy as a process.……”
- that should be defined at least “universe” , “edge of the entire universe”, “matter”, “mass”, “energy”. All these phenomena/notions are fundamentally transcendent in mainstream philosophy and official science, including physics, and, as that follows from the quote, for you.
All these phenomena can be, and are scientifically defined only in the Shevchenko-Tokarevsky’s “The Information as Absolute” conception https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260930711_the_Information_as_Absolute DOI 10.5281/zenodo.268904, and the definitions are given, e.g., in the introductory sections in informational physical model, which is based on the conception
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354418793_The_Informational_Conception_and_the_Base_of_Physics ; https://arxiv.org/abs/0707.4657 ; more see the links, here note only that, say, “space is a stable form of mass. And the matter is a continuation of mass/energy as a process” is a senseless transcendent wording, which has no relation to what are “space”, “matter” “mass/energy”, etc., really.
Correspondingly that
“…the creator of the universe is not science….”, etc.
- is also a transcendent – you have no any non-transcendent knowledge about any god - and so at least principally questionable, claim.
More see the SS post above, and links in the post.
Cheers

Suresh Wanayalaege:
Sergey Shevchenko, I have explained the origin of energy and mass in my research book. I guess you didn't read it. I'm sure that there is no way that the universe could create a creator God from nothing. The universe evolved from 0 to 0.0 and so on. And that process must make dimensions on the superposition of the 0.0 around 0 making both 0.0 and 1 and the same time. The universe is expanding into an infinite number of zero points while making more dimensions to balance them. We are living in a universe that has a radius like this: 0 to 0.0000000000000x0^n unlimited expansion. I'm saying it using the solution in my binary equation. Just because some people believe something that doesn't make it logical. But you can trust equations more than the beliefs of some people. Today I had an argument with an old person who believe in a creator god in the bible and he didn't care whether the earth is round or flat. He doesn't trust science and doesn't like to accept science just because of his belief. And that is what some Religions (Abrahamic religions and some Hindu beliefs) have done to some people. So the concept of the creator God is harmful to society. And that is the reason why some people stop searching for the truth of life and ignore reality.

Volodymyr Durmanov:
Dear Suresh Wanayalaege, I agree with you. Knowledge has nothing to do with what people believe or imagine. Scientists don't do theories (that's a favourite subject in pseudoscience). They look for what is needed now and what will be needed forever. "Truth is what stands the test of time" (Einstein). We should not forget this great role of non-physical time.

Suresh Wanayalaege:

Volodymyr Durmanov, I'm glad about your understanding. Using unrealistic solutions to reject or ignore reality is not good.


Sergey Shevchenko:

Suresh Wanayalaege
- sorry, but as a rule I comment only official science, including in this thread case mainstream philosophy and physics; and don't comment alternative approaches, besides some cases when some post is addressed to me, and in the posts comment only some claims, which aren't correct, but if I don't comment, somebody can think that I agree. In this case
"….. I'm saying it using the solution in my binary equation. Just because some people believe something that doesn't make it logical. But you can trust equations more than the beliefs of some people. ……"
- mathematics isn't physics; and, though mathematics is extremely effective tool at description and analysis of objects/events/processes in Matter, it again, is nothing else/more than a tool. Really no any of objects/events/processes in Matter existed/exist as some purely mathematical objects, before when these objects/events/processes were discovered in physics - and at application of mathematics so become to be in certain sense, and in certain points, mathematical objects.
Though yeah, in mainstream physics in last more 100 years many physicists appeared, who quite frankly trust equations having no physical grounds, and in this time - and till now, innumerous theories, etc., appeared – and exist as standard theories - in mainstream physics, which are based only on the saint belief that everything what is in mathematics is in physics,
- but really are nothing else than some full stop unphysical mental constructions; see also SS comment to "The Relation between Mathematics and Physics" [Dirac's lecture]
https://www.researchgate.net/project/Creative-Particles-of-Higgs-or-CPH-Theory/update/61fd3890f5675b211b231348
And to that
"….So the concept of the creator God is harmful to society. And that is the reason why some people stop searching for the truth of life and ignore reality ."
- again, the hypothesis that Matter was created by some conscious and very smart Creator is uniquely rational – in contrast to existent numerous really fantastic, though rather complex and mathematically completely perfect, theories in mainstream cosmology. More see SS posts in
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Can-science-prove-the-existence-of-God#view=609150b191491957fa613b35
Cheers

Suresh Wanayalaege:
Sergey Shevchenko mainstream scientists don't know how to find the origin of matter. But you shouldn't use western mainstream philosophy called creationism to discuss science because there is nothing like science. Mathematical fundamental physics is the origin of emerged physics. So trying to use that philosophy with science/physics and trying to ignore fundamental physics like binary physics shows the consistent old nature of the follower of the church. They tried to reject the evolution of life and the shape of the earth, etc. Those followers tried to reject new scientific discoveries that went against their religious teachings. And punished some people to protect their faith with wrong beliefs that were made by their religion. E.g., "Galileo was sentenced to life imprisonment by the Roman Catholic Church in 1633."
Don't forget about the garbage in some religious books that comes with the concept of creator God. The earth is not the only planet in this universe, and there are a lot of useless planets and horrible natural causes too. Your common sense must argue that everything in this universe can't be magic. Calling the universe a magical product is sensibly the craziest concept in this world. No one can imagine how a creator God can come from nothing. Trying to make matter using a creator God is not rational. It is a political trick to control people's minds giving a fake solution that the scientific community can't accept. But some scientists do religious politics based on their ignorance about reality and religious background. Some scientists like to involve God in their books to sell their books. Scientists are humans, and they need money to live. There were many scientists like that. Don't expect good science from only one particular group of scientists. My static shows that you didn't read my research book yet.
However, fundamentally the universe is just a moment. Even the flow of time is a period in the universe that is also a moment in the end. The universe grows its moments each moment, making it different after each moment. Moments increase with the expansion of the entire universe. And the relativeness and relative time is just an emergence. It is a simple physics that a universe can naturally own and use to make the universe. And that simple fundamental physics can be easily represented using linear dimensional binary numbers. Dimensions are directional moments. I don't like to waste my time if you don't have time or are afraid to read my research book. Don't be afraid to challenge your faith. And don't try to bend the truth to fit your faith. Some religious organizations are funding some science projects. So be careful about those science projects too. Some people can't bend their faith to fit the truth. But don't try to bend science.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Suresh Wanayalae added a new photo to the album: Existence of the Universe and Life.

4m 
Verifying the Origin of Everything with Binary Mathematical Physics and Buddhism: (ගණිතමය බයිනරි භෞතික විද්‍යාව සහ බුදු දහම මගින් සෑම දෙයකම ආරම්භය තහවුරු කිරීම) https://www.researchpublish.com/pdfviewer/Verifying%20the%20Origin-22022022-2.pdf
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 What is Wrong with Mindfulness? | John Cianciosi

 Christianity's Fatal Error

Holy Koolaid:
Here are just a few of the MANY historical inaccuracies in the Bible: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iep4gnmJeRE&list=PLCTNr4WPOQ97bwf-ylpCDR9kxrsEpp0kl

Suresh Wanayalae:
Buddhism teaches about smallest matter zones, smallest time, smallest mind moment, smallest thought processing time. Quantum physics teaches about a smallest time called Planck time. Abhidhamma mentions about 28 matter elements and 52 immaterial paramount emotions. Abhidamma teachings in Buddhism are like quantum physics. It is a mathematically provable explanation about the fundamental nature of the universe. The way to prove them is simple.

Winnie Puuh:
 @Suresh Wanayalae  😂🤣 

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @Winnie Puuh , There are videos about it. You can check them. It is an outstanding theory.

Winnie Puuh:
 @Suresh Wanayalae   "There are videos about it"  There are videos claiming the earth is flat. Are you a flat earther? I hope not.
But I am open to read peer reviewed articles on this topic. Please name one.

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @Winnie Puuh , It is Verifying the Origin of Everything with Binary Mathematical Physics and Buddhism. It is already available for anyone. But it is difficult to understand.

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @Winnie Puuh , You can find videos if you can check the uploads. There is a recent upload about it.

Winnie Puuh:
 @Suresh Wanayalae  That is nice, that "it" is available for everyone. The less I understand why you again forget to tell me the requested article. 🤷🏼 What is the problem?

Winnie Puuh:
 @Suresh Wanayalae  "You can find videos"  There are videos claiming the earth is flat. Are you a flat earther?

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @Winnie Puuh , I already named (mentioned) the article to you. It starts from Verifying.

Winnie Puuh:
 @Suresh Wanayalae  You spoke about a "theory". Do you know what the term theory means? 
Furthermore, the article you gave me is not peer reviewed and stands completely isolated. Where is this "theory" discussed? Where are the publications in scientific journals?

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @Winnie Puuh , It is a published article. There are two versions of it. Full and short. I guess you found the full version which is not published, but it is also good and colourful. Published version is in mostly black and white and without a lot of images. I can't mention details because youtube delete replies that have some links.

Winnie Puuh:
 @Suresh Wanayalae  Ok. Of course, I knew you were a troll from the first second. However, the fact that you neither know what a theory is, nor that you know what peer reviewed means, is really more than pathetic, even for a troll. I feel sorry for you.

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @Winnie Puuh , I can understand that you are a swollen-headed person.  It was reviewed by the publisher. And it is entirely a new theory about the fundamental laws and processes of nature. However, It is a crazy thing if you want everything to be peer reviewed. It was published in February. And still, there are not a lot of readers. And open publishing is available to copy and edit, and share without restrictions, so the author should pay the money to publish it. It costs a lot to publish it on popular platforms. Intelligent people can understand mathematical calculations. I can understand your problem. Bye

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @Winnie Puuh , I'm a Buddhist atheist. Buddhism is all about natural causes and effects like science. But Buddhism focuses on the process of the mind a lot. Bye

Ariella Lima:
 @Suresh Wanayalae  I think that's exactly what Holy Koolaid calls "wild guesses" in the video. Take ideas from any religion, post-rationalize them with our CURRENT knowledge and you can always come up with "See, the Kuran taught about this thousands of year ago", "The Torah taught this thousands of years ago", "the Bahavad Ghita taught this thousands of years ago". However, NONE of those religions were able to actually explain and use such knowledge in any meaningful way. 
Anyway, I would like to see any Buddhist scientist apply for a Nobel Prize by explaining the "fundamental nature of the universe" in the "mathematically provable explanation" you mention. That would surely be fun.

Suresh Wanayalae:
​ @Ariella Lima , Science hasn't reached the fundamental level in the universe. The smallest elements in the universe are 4 great elements (4 Maha Bhuta). They made the 4 fermions and 4 bosons in atoms. They are particles and forces like the 8 pure elements (Suddhattaka) mentioned in Buddhism. Those 8 elements stay with each element but show only one element. The Strongness of elements make give them their character, but each emerged element stays with the pure 8 elements as a unit. And there are 24 emerged elements that are merged with the 4 great elements. I just have to say most people don't know about those things. And that is why they don't talk about those things much yet. But there is a way to prove it. I just feel upset about the ignorance of people. I guess, the influence of Abrahamic religions doesn't make scientists talk about those explanations in Buddhism. But it is a shame for them if they are hiding it intentionally. Tell scientists to study Theravada Abhidhamma first and then try to challenge Buddhism. Scientists don't even know about the wave function well. So don't be confident about modern science. The wave function suggests the existence of many hidden or distant worlds just like the many-worlds mentioned in Buddhism. That theory can mathematically prove the existence of those worlds too. Usually, Sri Lankan Buddhists call modern science a baby when we compare modern science with Buddhism. I don't like to waste my time. Best of luck. Bye.


Winnie Puuh:
 @Suresh Wanayalae  "Science hasn't reached the fundamental level in the universe."   God of the gaps? Wow! That's new ... 
"I just have to say most people don't know about those things"  True. Most people do not know your private fantasies.
"I guess, the influence of Abrahamic religions doesn't make scientists talk about those explanations in Buddhism"  Sure. Scientist do not talk about "mAHa BHutA" because they are afraid about loosing their religion they do not have, and not because science today doesn't deal with archaic concepts as "earth, water, fire and air" anymore. After all, alchemy is somewhat out of fashion since some centuries.
"But it is a shame for them if they are hiding it intentionally." And we all know full well that all scientists are part of a global, centuries-old conspiracy theory to hide your hypothesis.
"Tell scientists to study Theravada Abhidhamma first and then try to challenge Buddhism."  No scientist is challenging Buddhism. 
"Scientists don't even know about the wave function well."  More gods are filling more gaps? Becoming redundant within a redundancy is unfortunately not very convincing either.
"So don't be confident about modern science." Then why do you try to use science to argue for your magical worldview? 
"That theory can mathematically prove the existence of those worlds too." I have already explained to you what the term "theory" means in a scientific context. But you prefer to dream on and stick your fingers in your ears to be able to be "offended" then. There is not this "theory" claimed by you, not even a hypothesis. Again: read Karl Popper.
"The wave function suggests the existence of many hidden or distant worlds just like the many-worlds mentioned in Buddhism."  This is the thinking of a toddler. "Oh, this cardboard tube looks like a rocket. Surely I can fly to Mars with it."
"That theory can mathematically prove the existence of those worlds too." But unfortunately we will never know this, because the whole global science community has agreed, as already demonstrated by you, to hide this "theory". Otherwise, the foundation of all science, the abrahamic magic, which all scientists have to follow obligatorily, would be shattered. 
"Usually, Sri Lankan Buddhists call modern science a baby when we compare modern science with Buddhism."  Usually, scientist laughed out loud, when science is compared with irrational and supernatural babble. 
"I don't like to waste my time."  But that is what trolls do. So maybe you should change your profession?

Suresh Wanayalae:
​ @Winnie Puuh , Why don't you read it first. It is better than String Theory. Tell scientists to stop calling it a theory first. I can understand your ignorant culture. Just because you reject Abrahamic religions that don't make you intelligent. Modern science doesn't know the origin of energy. The four great elements are the smallest elements of earth, water, fire, and air. Abhidhamma explains it in that way, but ignorant people don't try to investigate the definition mentioned in those texts. I'm not making interpretations. The 4 Great elements (Maha Bhutha) are mentioned as an ultimate reality that cannot be divided more. If you can't understand that, it shows your level of intelligence. And that is a big problem inside you. It is not a problem with Abhidhamma. If you look at the description you can see that it says it is about the laws in nature. You can call it a theory until you can understand those laws of nature. I'm sure you are wasting my time, but I reply for sake of other readers, who read comments, etc. But I don't think there are good thinkers here who can understand them. Some people are just followers of science and verified reviews. So they are like robots who can't think about something new to verify it. And they are not confident about themselves. If you don't know, find out why scientists try to study string theory. Scientists don't know anything about the origin and foundation of elementary particles. If you can't understand that theory (laws of nature) you can ignore it. I can understand that robots can't think. I didn't tell you to believe anything. Don't believe social media and peer reviews that don't provide enough facts to prove their arguments. Wars and greed developed western science. And it made Abrahamic religions speechless about the process of nature. Everything is natural and no need for a creator to make any process. But still, they couldn't combine gravity with quantum physics. I'm sure I'm talking with babies here. I feel sorry about that. If you don't know quantum mechanics, it is useless talking about those things more. Western education system makes people like you in our countries too. It is a problem. They think they know everything. But they don't know that scientists don't know about reality. But some scientists try to make people believe speculative findings without a doubt. Unfortunately, they are just like robots who read science books and try to call them scientists. Prof. Albert Einstein was a good thinker. And he could see that the followers of Abrahamic religions and some non-religious people made a lot of disasters in this world. So that is why he said that he is not sure about the limit of ignorance of humans. Science doesn't make humans good. Fundamentally there are good and bad things in the universe. Abhidhamma teachings explain how those ultimate realities cause to bring good and bad results. Don't think that you own your body. Your body and nature are controlling you. And you are just an output. Scientists talk about the conservation of energy, but they are ignorant about the conservation of consciousness. Abhidhamma explains how it works. You don't want to believe it, but you can't verify it using experiments. There is a mathematical technique to reach that level to imagine the process of it. The Buddha reached that level using his special power of the mind. Scientists will never reach the Planck scale to observe the time in the Planck time. But the Buddha said that there are 51 moments in the smallest matter zone. That theory discovered that possibility. Bye.

Winnie Puuh:
 @Suresh Wanayalae  "It is better than String Theory, "
God of the gaps No. 245. (I doubt very much that you know what string theory entails, nor that you can judge its place in the contemporary discourse.)
"Just because you reject Abrahamic religions that doesn't make you intelligent."
Unlike you, who feels compelled to claim his intelligence in every other sentence, I have never once done so in any of my comments. Intelligent people do not claim to be intelligent, they simply are.
"Modern science doesn't know the origin of energy."
God of the gaps No. 246.
" The four great elements are the smallest elements of earth, water, fire, and air."
Alchemy again. May I call you Alessandro Cagliostro?
" If you can't understand it it shows your level of intelligence."
Reductio ad ridiculum No. 67.
"You can call it a theory until you can understand those laws of nature."
That may be the case in your rural magical circle, but for the real world, the answer is NO.
The scientific definition of a theory is in contrast to the definition most people use in common speech. A scientific theory is a structured explanation of a group of facts or phenomena in the natural world that includes scientific hypotheses and scientific laws. 
"But I don't think there are good thinkers who can understand them."
Reductio ad ridiculum No. 68.
"... who can't think about something new to verify it."
Alchemy and magic aren't new.
"And they are not confident about themselves."
Doubting is the core business of science. Once again, you prove that you don't even know the most rudimentary basics. I assume with a high degree of certainty that you are unfamiliar with academia.
"Scientists don't know anything about the origin and foundation of elementary particles."
Not true & no surprise, this is the god of the gaps No. 247.
"But still, they couldn't combine gravity with quantum physics."
God of the gaps No. 248.
"Western education system make people like you in our countries too."
Now we sprinkle a little fascism on top of the salad. No surprise there either. So far, every cult member has shown these tendencies after a certain time.
"Don't think that you own your body."
And even more fascism on top of your salad: Negation of human rights.
"Scinetist will never teach the Planck scale to observe the time in the Planck time."
God of the gaps No. 249.
"That theory discovered that possibility."
Your private fantasies are still no theory.

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @Winnie Puuh , You are crazy enough to ignore the published PDF and answer to the comments only. It shows your ignorance well. There are explanations about the origin of energy, Planck scale, elementary particles, and a lot of things like that in that article. But I can understand that I was replying to a joker who talk about God of gaps without looking at how it has filled those gaps. Bye.

Molly Malone:
 @Suresh Wanayalae  published by "research gate" which is a social media site. So, sorry, not science

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @Molly Malone , Not that. remove the word 'gate', and use 'publish' without using space. I feel sorry about your craving to find a way to ignore it. I guess it is a problem with your culture or arrogant educational background. Bye.

Benji:
 @Suresh Wanayalae  I became a Buddhist during my long stay in Thailand. I lived there for about a year. But, I've never heard about the things that you are saying. Maybe it's because you are having difficulty getting your thoughts out since English isn't your first language. I noticed that you are Indian. What I know about Buddhism are the 8fold path, and the truth about suffering. I don't think the Buddha made grand claims about the universe. The Hindus made grand claims on god, what happens after death, and the universe. The Buddha rejected the Brahman priest during his time. That is how Buddhism came to be.  🙏

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @Benji , I'm a Sri Lankan. Sutta is only 50% from Buddhism. You have missed the Paramartha Dhamma teachings in Buddhism. 42000 teachings from 84000 Theravada teachings are Paramartha Dhamma teachings.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Understanding Kamma – cultivating the causes to realize nibbana

Suresh Wanayalae:
Time makes mind (Citta) and Kamma. Time changes everything, and it is dangerous. I think, attaining Nibbana is like bringing the mind into a relatively timeless state, making the mind (Citta moment) stop making relative time. Thanks for the wonderful dhamma talk.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Who can understand Binary Physics about the origin of everything that I discovered? Can you think about how quantum mechanics works?
The following Binary Physics project challenges your knowledge about quantum mechanics, quantum field theory, gravity, astronomy, Dark Matter, Dark Energy, Elementary Particles, forces, etc:
Published version:
Verifying the Origin of Everything with Binary Mathematical Physics and Buddhism https://www.researchgate.net/.../358797855_Verifying_the...
If you can't understand it, do you really think that you are a good thinker who can think outside the box to verify the reality of something?
- Suresh
Bob Bosch
Why is it that idiots always bring up quantum mechanics?
  • Suresh Ran Rahas
    Author
    Bob Bosch, Creating a God from nothing is not scientific. That research shows the origin of energy/universe, quantum mechanics, etc.
    • Bob Bosch
      Suresh Ran Rahas I agree. Why mention quantum mechanics?
    • Suresh Ran Rahas
      Author
      Bob Bosch, it is about the origin of quantum mechanics.
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 9h
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 9h
    • E.L. Martin
      Suresh Ran Rahas Excuse me? Various scientific disciplines, from molecular biochemistry to quantum mechanics do not involve theism, theology or the disrespect of adherents of any religious doctrines.
      They are science, not prejudice.
      If you want to encourage hateful intolerance of others religious beliefs, this is not the forum for you.
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 4h
    • Suresh Ran Rahas
      Author
      E.L. Martin, I didn't talk about modern science. It is about Binary Physics that explains the origin of the universe without help from a creator God. If idiots don't like to accept them, they can block me.
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1h
    • E.L. Martin
      Suresh Ran Rahas This forum is dedicated to an intelligent and lively discussion about the disciplines of Science, Philosophy, and Psychology. Everyone is respectful with their points of view. Calling others idiots proves your own stupidity.
      Since you were not likely present to witness the origin of the universe, do you have a video of the event? Perhaps god used binary physics to make it all.
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1h
    • Suresh Ran Rahas
      Author
      E.L. Martin, Why didn't you tell it to Bob Bosch first you idiot. I can clearly see discrimination here. Idiots don't like to call them idiots But they call others idiots. I have seen how some so-called respectful people like you disrespect a lot of people. Maybe it is a sort of stupid nature of some westerners..
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 1h
    • Suresh Ran Rahas
      Author
      E.L. Martin, Natural causes are not God. Binary Physics makes all the elements and forces in this universe. No need for anyone to make Binary Physics, and they are just simple and individual causes that connect everything mathematically. That universe started from nothing. So there was nothing in the universe in the beginning. Trying to use a fake argument to make the universe makes a lot of idiots.
    • E.L. Martin
      Suresh Ran Rahas Which proves, mathematically, your hypothesis:
      0 + 0=1
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 51m
      • Edited
    • Suresh Ran Rahas
      Author
      E.L. Martin, According to this mathematical formula:(a+b)^2=a^2+2ab+b^2
      This: (+0-0)^2 = 0^2 - (+1-(-1)) x 0 x 0 + 0^2
    • E.L. Martin
      Suresh Ran Rahas This is high school algebra..
      2(a+b) = 2a+2ab+2b....
      Let us substitute your original numerical premise that nothing existed....
      So...nothing when added to nothing making something ( the universe) is the equation: .
      0+0 = 1......or 0.1
      0(a+b) = 0a+0ab+0b
      Therefore the religious folks are correct when they say that from nothing, god created the universe.
    • Suresh Ran Rahas
      Author
      E.L. Martin, It is not 2(a+b). It is (a+b)(a+b) = (a+b)^2.
      And made the 0.0 in the universe. And then 0.00 and so on. It's a superposition of 0.0 and 1. It is like not 0.0 and not 1, but both 0.0 and 1 at the same time.

    • Suresh Ran Rahas
      Author
      E.L. Martin, I used directions and the virtual gaps in the infinite nothingness to start the calculation to figure out the dimensional symmetry.
      E.g.:
      The virtual gap in a linear zero (0) direction (E.g.: between left and right) = (+0-0) AND/OR (-0+0)
      The virtual gaps in the universal zero (0) that had linear 6 directions = (+0-0)^6 AND/OR (-0+0)^6
      I don't have time to teach you about it. If you want, you can try to study it yourself. I had to spend a lot of time developing it and understanding it. So I don't know how much time someone would need to understand it.
Rob Turner
Admin
so, i had to remove the one comment which had around 20 replies mostly they were name calling. as admin i cannot abide adults behaving as children. they give children a bad name as they dont tend to call each other names. i hope you all got it out of your systems and will reflect that name calling is not allowed here even is you think the person deserves it. lets try to have an adult discussion please.
1
  • Like
  • Reply
  • 4h

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Understanding Kamma – cultivating the causes to realize nibbana

Muslim Scholar EXPOSES Slavery in Islam

 WOTM: Religion Makes People Stupid, Evidence, Addendum II

Suresh Wanayalae:
If there is a gap between two zeros, then there is 1 between them. So, 0 plus 0 can be equal to 1 in some special cases.

jipersson:
So two wallets with $0 in them, when spaced out have $1 between them, then?

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @jipersson , It is a binary method. There is a gap between 0 and 0.0 mathematically. We can call that gap 1. A video that was uploaded in the video section explains the existence of the universe using that binary mathematical method.

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @Peter Coo , I have answered that question in the previous reply.

jipersson:
 @Suresh Wanayalae  Given the binary 0 and 1 means "off" and "on", can you then have an off.off (0.0)? And what is the point? (Not the point of the point between the two zeros but the point of the argument if the binary method never came up?)


Suresh Wanayalae:
 @jipersson , That is a continuation of 0 from 0 to 0.0 in all the directions, and then to 0.00 point. That is a special binary method that we can use to calculate the growth of the universe. When the universe was 0, there were no 0.0. The universe continued from 0 to many zeros making dimensions between them. The universe can't be infinite. And the universe continues making zeros, increasing infinity.

Thomas Dowe:
Zero (0) is a Concept without any material reality. The Concept of Nothingness can be taken to being the concept of Deity before the 'Creation of One (1) Universe!?!
Are you trying to sneak in a 'god' with your 'calculations'? :)

jipersson:
 @Suresh Wanayalae  The universe never were 0 though. The singularity at the start of the universe contained exactly the amount of energy that exists today of where 5% are matter (transformed energy). nothingness or zero is a human concept that never were real, a mere representation of absence! You can have 0 apples but you cannot have nothing.

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @Thomas Dowe , Reality didn't come from matter. The matter came from the continuation of nothingness from minus time to plus time. I have proved the existence of the universe. Creating a creator from nothing is not science. So forget about God. Creator God is the craziest concept in this world. And don't only look at the finger when someone trying to show you the moon.

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @jipersson , I was talking about the first universe. It is the birth of the Planck scale (the smallest energy/space unit). The energy could increase later with the expansion. And the Big Bang is just a Big Bounce. There were many Big Bounces.

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @Thomas Dowe , We are living in mathematical reality. Related zeros could make dimensions between them. I made a calculation that can predict the existence of elementary particles and structures. So you have to look at the predictions and verifications first. If a theory is wrong it can't make the right predictions. So, stop worrying about concepts. I could confirm the accuracy of the calculation using modern science.

jipersson:
 @Suresh Wanayalae  There are no "first universe" there only is this universe that started at T=0! Energy are defined as not being able to be destroyed nor created and as such the singularity from which the universe sprang into existence, contained all the energy that still exist in the universe and forever will be! That there are other universes are purely hypothetical! And the idea that the universe bounced is also purely hypothetical!

Thomas Dowe:
 @Suresh Wanayalae  'Math' is a measurement, a tool to assist understanding of reality's material objects and processes, and our limits and capabilities in that effort at 'Knowing', that is 'godlike' since we created that concept :)
It isn't a Science, per se, but a tool of science. Zero means no material object to measure and simply separates numbers not the 'concepts' for which they are 'Placeholders' for the numbers used to measure that thesis or theory's observations of the material universe.

Thomas Dowe:
 @Suresh Wanayalae  Come on! What is 'Nothingness'? Please provide its definition in reality, if you can.
Time is a concept and not anything material in this universe. It can't be stirred into nothingness to created itself...as 'empty' space/nothingness.
Try again.

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @jipersson , I was not talking modern science. If you know about the origin of the universe, that is good. Singularity is also a concept. I don't want to argue with you. I was talking about the origin of energy and everything. I can't explain it to a person who doesn't study my theory. So bye.

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @Thomas Dowe , Nothing was the first thing in the thing called nothing universe. The universe was a thing even if it was nothing. And nothingness continues making symmetries. There was an infinite zero that couldn't be static on the duration (time flow) and the 6 directions of the universe. I was talking about the origin of matter. So you shouldn't talk about measuring material things. Quantum physics is very different from classical physics. There are superpositions and probabilities that make processes called matter and energy. Scientists don't know about the foundation of quantum mechanics. They don't know about the process of wave function too. So, you should study the calculation first to understand the reality. I didn't tell you to believe anything. The calculation shows the origin of all the things in the universe.

jipersson:
@Suresh Wanayalae  Your theory? LOL! You do know what a scientific theory is, right! until you have any peer-reviewed backing, all you have is a hypothesis!
And the origin of energy can only become a hypothesis since that would have come about before the impenetrable wall of knowledge that is the trillions of degrees hot "big Bang" or T = -0 where no elementary particles could exist and every bit of math breaks down!
You claimed you made a calculation that predict the existence of elementary particles, NOT where energy came from, I'm not a mathematician even though I did develop an online geometric calculator use by thousands each month, after I had a Mensa test that showed that I should be able to easily teach myself geometry and programming while learning about how the universe works! But if you really have made a theory of all things you should present it to someone capable of finding possible flaws in it and then accept the result like any other honest scientist would do, realizing his idea didn't match reality, not a machinist like me regardless how many mechanical things I've invented, that are not an Astrophysicist or theoretical physicist!

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @jipersson , A few professors and people from many universities recommended my work and a few people follow my work. Scientists don't know about the origin of time to talk about singularity or density before the CMB radiation. The first atoms formed 37000 years after the Big Bang making the CMB radiation. So using modern science to argue with me about the origin of the universe is useless. All the Matter didn't originate with the start of our universe. Some scientists tried to say that our universe started from 0. But they ignore the possible Big Bounce that could bring all the matter to make a Big Bang. However, I could verify my work using modern science and another set of knowledge. Don't forget that the so-called peer reviewers ignored the theory of General Relativity until it was experimentally verified. So don't think that peer reviewers can understand a different set of knowledge easily. Binary Physics is a different set of knowledge and there are no peers to review that knowledge. But anyone who knows modern science and reality can see the similarity between the calculation and the universe. I don't want to waste my time with someone who didn't study my work.

jipersson:
 @Suresh Wanayalae  Firstly, your paper that on ResearchGate seems to have 0 citations, spells your name Suresh Wanayalaege while your youtube name 
is Suresh Wanayalae! Why the discrepancy?
Secondly a paper that supposedly delivers the answer to a unification theory of everything shouldn't contain references to a religion or anything "supernatural" like a heaven or hell or references to rebirth and meditation.
Thirdly,  the paper contains an awful lot of numbers that are not related to anything or have no explanations
Fourthly,  what does a sentence like this even mean "If the first universe was A THING with nothings (nulls), then the direction of a nothing (0) thing = +0-0"

fifthly, This sounds like complete babble, like taken out of a  Deepak Chopra quote generator (ii.) Down /Up {When six dimensions entangle from point to point while making the 0 to 0.00000 range, they can interact only within that range until the universe continues to the next point (0.000000), increasing it (decimals).}(+0.0000000-0.0000000) /(-0.0000000+0.0000000) =1........x(7/7) OR 1........ but it was not in the first universe.1....x(3/3) x 1_../(1/1) = 1......x(5/5) x 1_/(0/0)/2 | dimensional potential = 2AND1_..../(3/3) x 1..x(1/1) = 1_/(0/0)/4x1......x(5/5) | dimensional potential = 4
Conclusion; perhaps you should limit your paper to explaining your equations instead of just rattling off equations like a Deepak Chopra quote generator unrelated to any actual meaning!

Suresh Wanayalae:
​ @jipersson , I'm the same person who wrote the paper. So, don't worry about the name. As I told you before, I was not talking about modern science. And I'm not affiliated with the people in those science or mathematics fields. And, sometimes people can't cite detail in a totally new field of mathematics to explain their work. Modern science use a different set of knowledge. So don't worry about that too.

I involved religion because of the explanations in religions about the nature of reality. I was trying to help people to understand the purpose of life when they live in a natural universe. And I could use some teachings to verify my calculation. So I couldn't ignore religion.

I have talked about the birth of plus and minus possibilities that arise from the continuation of nothingness. And I have used dimensional potential to continue the calculation to get the final results. I was trying to continue the calculation using the most possible interactions. Also, there could be more possible reasons to continue the same process. The most important thing is the final result. And seemingly, the final results answer a lot of questions.

Christa Simon:
 @Suresh Wanayalae  "If there is a gap between two zeros, then there is 1 between them. So, 0 plus 0 can be equal to 1 in some special cases."
"using modern science to argue with me about the origin of the universe is useless."
"don't think that peer reviews can understand a different set of knowledge easily."

So you are SO smart that you don't even have the ability to explain yourself, that your intellect is simply beyond comprehension.  That is very impressive.

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @Christa Simon , I didn't try to show and explain my discovery personally to anyone in the quantum physics field yet. So, I don't know whether they can understand it or not. I just continue my work publicly until I can explain it to them simply. But, I feel like I'm trying to teach babies when I talk with some people. Because they want to learn about those things in detail to understand those new things. So I know that I should be prepared more to teach those babies.

Thomas Dowe:
 @Suresh Wanayalae  'Math' is a measurement, a tool to assist understanding of reality's material objects and processes, and our limits and capabilities in that effort at 'Knowing', that is 'godlike' since we created that concept :)
It isn't a Science, per se, but a tool of science. Zero means no material object to measure and simply separates numbers not the 'concepts' for which they are 'Placeholders' for the numbers used to measure that thesis or theory's observations of the material universe.

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @Thomas Dowe , The numbers in the math represent directional moments called dimensions. So, math is not only about numbers. According to General relativity and Quantum physics, time is a dimension. According to my understanding, all the dimensions are time dimensions.

Thomas Dowe:
 @Suresh Wanayalae  What is 'Space' without material objects in that nothingness, no distance to measure mathematically and no 'Time' to measure it with?
Isn't that Timeless condition of Space the beginning of the Universe?
How did it Begin with just Nothingness as a start?

Einstein put one object back into that calculation :)
The Creator created a Singularity by doing so, Suresh...and he then warped Space with Time and still no distance to measure with Time. What a Miracle to be the Creator of Space and Time and bending that Space with No Time with which to begin the Universe!!!

Suresh Wanayalae:
 @Thomas Dowe , First of all, you should try to study more about the research paper. I don't like to waste my time with someone who doesn't like to study it. And especially I don't like to discuss it with creationists. It is difficult to explain logical and scientific things to some creationists.

Thomas Dowe:
 @Suresh Wanayalae  Hi again, Suresh.
Well, I'm an old dog and not into new tricks :)
I don't demand your time or comments, Suresh, you can certainly stop whenever you care to do so. I'll also say that you could do the math (already done) to see that those calculations for Gravity, also apply to the Magnetodielectric force used to investigate the 'foundation' of atoms as particles.
I'm sure you are quite proud of your study, but you won't find any 'Scientists' in this forum who might bother to study your thesis. I'm not an accredited scientist, and certainly not into speculative mathematics. I did study Einstein's calculations for the Space/Time Continuum, though. I was surprised by the circular logic that was used! That got me interested in other explanations for the putative 'Curvature' created by mass.
You should also, Suresh :)

Suresh Wanayalae:
​ @Thomas Dowe , I can understand. I don't try to explain the calculation to some people. But sometimes, I have to reply when they ask questions. Galileo Galilei couldn't explain his experimental results about the position of the sun to some educated people who followed the Catholic Church. So it is difficult to say that some educated people like to accept reality quickly when reality goes against their religious beliefs. However, I don't like to waste my time. Bye.

Differences Between Early Buddhism and Theravada: an Essay By Bhante Sujato: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQ832y7n1bc

Suresh Wanayalae:
The Buddha went to heaven to teach Abhidhamma to his mother and others. Sariputta Thero listened to it from the Buddha to teach it to humans. Abhidhamma is the fundamental science of almost everything. It is a teaching about Matter, Mental Factors, Mind, and Nibbana. Scientists didn't discover all the elements in the universe yet. Abhidhamma is the only oldest teaching about the existence of the smallest elements. We can't find those teachings from Buddhist Suttas. According to Abhidhamma, there are 24 material forms (Rupa) derived from 4 main elements. Mental factors are immaterial forms (Cetasika) that fundamentally exist in the universe. Fortunately, I could discover the existence of those elements. So, I'm sure that the Buddha could discover those elements.

Ramaraksha:
The Buddha was just a man & yet people like you can't stop trying to make him a God, responsible for everything

Suresh Wanayalae:
​ @Ramaraksha , The Buddha could discover heavenly and Brahma worlds. And he and some of his disciples could visit the heavens. Rama-Panditha was a previous life of the Buddha. And Sita was his sister. But some Indians rewrote the Buddhist Jataka Tale (461) to convert Rama from a human to an Avatar of Vishnu to make Buddha an Avatar of Vishnu. Buddhists don't try to make him a God, but seemingly some Hindus tried (and still try) to make him a God. And Hinduism misguides westerners a lot introducing many Gods and wrong spiritual practices. And some westerners are confused about spiritual development and ignore spiritual development because of weak teachings in Hinduism. Most original Hindu books are not older than 500 BCE. And Hindu books changed in a better way with the help of Buddhist teachings. And seemingly, some Indians tried to make stories about Rama and Krishna to reject the caste system to challenge Buddhism. Buddhism is much more perfect and well preserved than Hinduism. So try to learn Buddhism first. I personally think that Hinduism was developed during the time of King Ashoka to reduce his influence and people's support for Buddhism. The influence of Hinduism could cause the development of many other spiritually corrupted religions. People can learn to make a religion if they learn Hinduism. Try to find the right Hinduism. Don't make intelligent westerners disappointed about spirituality by teaching Hinduism. A God or Gods didn't make the nature of reality. So, try to find the best teachings about reality. The best teachings about reality are in Abhidhamma.

 James Webb Telescope Discovery Before The Big Bang Will Change Everything!

Suresh Wanayalae:
I made a theory that can explain almost every basic function in the universe. My research about Binary dimensions is the easiest way to explore the ultimate truth. According to my theory, a mind is likely a function like the functions in particles that behaves like waves and particles. But the mind wave emerged first, and then wave particles emerged around it depending on the mind wave.

Daniel Goodner:
I've also had a thought similar, like consciousness is like everything else.. particles on small scale.. but what if say an evolved consciousness is alive.. is God. Like we are part of God n in turn God is part of us.. maybe it implies our consciousness is connected. Would love to hear you elaborate on your theory

Suresh Wanayalae:
​ @Daniel Goodner, The theory is about functions of dimensions. I could verify most parts of the theory using Buddhist teachings about mind and matter. Seemingly, the mind wave has a relationship with many worlds like heavenly, hell, ghost, and Brahma worlds. And probably, the first expansion of the universe could make many consciousnesses with the relative matter for each consciousness. I'm still investigating that theory using Buddhist teachings. So, I need more time to verify those things. But the theory matches modern science and functions in the universe.

 The Basic Characteristics of Life (#7 Buddhism for Beginners) by Jack Kornfield

 Sri Lanka's day of violence, death toll rises to five | World Latest News | WION

Suresh Wanayalae:

 Sri Lanka's day of violence, death toll rises to five | World Latest News | WION

Suresh Wanayalae:
UNP (opposition) destroyed Sri Lanka. Rajapaksa's government stopped getting huge loans and paid debts, and couldn't save dollars to pay for oil and gas. Muslims destroyed hotels and churches, and then Coronavirus caused reducing tourists. The war in Sri Lanka caused to loss of a lot of dollars and business. The war with Tamils was started by the opposition (JR Jayawardhana), and they (Premadasa) gave weapons and money to Tamil mobs. Also, the UNP government opened the economy to destroy the economy. Opposition sold government properties and increased salaries rapidly in their last year (2019). The opposition used unions and protesters to start conflicts and reduce the government's income. Protests reduced tourists more. Opposition tries to destroy Sri Lana to support minorities and foreign powers (some multinational companies, Christian, and Muslim powers act against Sri Lanka). Most people started to protest to get support from the government, but the opposition tried to remove the government using that protest. Most people are ignorant about it. Prabhakaran was a Christian LTTE leader who didn't want to stop the war in Sri Lanka. They wanted to maintain conflicts to destroy the Sri Lankan culture to insult Buddhists in Sri Lanka to insult Buddhism. Mahinda Rajapaksa did his best to protect Sri Lanka.

Russian Foreign Ministry summons Sri Lankan envoy over detained plane (English)

Suresh Wanayalae:
Seemingly, some hidden invaders try to use illegal and legal methods to hinder the progress of Sri Lanka. Perhaps, they don't like Sri Lanka to be the Rome of Theravada Buddhism. Sri Lanka is a challenge for Abrahamic religions. It is the real issue here.






No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)