Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu | What to accept and what not to accept | 17 NOV 2024

[@AutumnalMountains]

Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu really embodied such deep truth and wisdom and it permeated to all those who listened. I saw him live for this talk. One of the best Dhamma talks I've ever been to. 🙏

[@FilipinaVegana]

dhamma: the Pāli cognate of “dharma”. However, in most uses, it invariably refers to the teachings of Siddhārtha Gautama (almost invariably, wrongly referred to as “the” Buddha, despite the fact that he is but one of many MILLIONS of humans to have experienced a spiritual awakening), rather than the eternal law (“Sanātana Dharma”, in Sanskrit). In this book, it is used in its original sense, that is, of “holy and righteous concepts and deeds”. Therefore, the term “Buddhist dhamma”, and likewise, “Hindu dharma”, is somewhat inept or nonsensical, since dhamma/dharma is fundamentally non-sectarian. Cf. the following Glossary entry, “dharma”, for the etymology. Despite being the most atheistic human being to have ever existed, I often PRAY that I am not in the process of consuming a meal, whenever I hear a Buddhist monk or lay teacher, referring to his or her lecture as being a “dhamma talk”. If you have carefully read the entirety of this Holy Scripture, “F.I.S.H”, and you have listened to many Buddhist sermons, you may have already guessed the reason for my fervent prayer. This is because the assertion that the overwhelming majority of Buddhist monks are teaching authentic dharma is so excruciatingly cringe-worthy and laughable, I am genuinely fearful of choking on my food upon hearing such silly claims! First of all, the founder of Buddhism himself, Siddhārtha Gautama, was hardly a paragon of virtue, having abandoned his family, in order to become a mendicant monk, being an animal-abusing carnist, and encouraging females to become loose women (so-called “nuns”). In my half a century of life, I have only ever encountered one or two Buddhists who adhered to (actual) dharma, so in this sense, they were factually SUPERIOR to Gautama himself! For instance, the abbot of the largest Buddhist society in my homeland, Australia, believes that it is dharmic (legitimate) for men to insert their reproductive organs inside the faeces holes of other men, and of course, like his idol, Gautama, he is a murderer of poor, innocent, defenceless animals, and a feminist. Furthermore, despite being an indigenous Englishman, and a graduate of one of the most prestigious universities on earth, University of Cambridge, he is entirely unable to coherently speak his native tongue! Should not a supposed “spiritual leader” be an exemplar in at least his own language? Definitely, a genuine brāhmaṇa (that is, a member of the priestly class of society, as defined in Chapter 20 of this most exigent work of all literature, “A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity”) is required to be a master of at least one language (though preferably, more than one tongue), because he is required to communicate extremely advanced metaphysical, religious, and philosophical concepts to the ruler of his society (that is, a genuine, patriarchal monarch), as well as to his own disciples (i.e. male seminarians). Of course, no individual who has ever lived, including a so-called “Avatāra”, was morally perfect, but those who claim to be spiritual masters, ought to be beyond reproach in respect to their own ethical practices. In the aforementioned case, Gautama should have returned to his family as soon as he understood the immorality of his actions, just as I, when I began adhering to dharma, repaid two persons from whom I had stolen goods and cash. Even my first wife, who was a typical miserable, nasty, wicked, evil, dog-eating Filipina, apologized to her owner, for all her demonic actions towards me, after she experienced a religious conversion, decades after divorcing her lord, god and master, and vowed to desist from murdering pigs and gorging on their bloody carcasses in response to my request that she become a vegan. Furthermore, assuming that Gautama was factually a carnist (and knowing the typical diet of Bhārata, it would be safe to assume that he was at LEAST a lacto-vegetarian, and therefore, an animal-abusing criminal), he was certainly sufficiently intelligent to understand that it is unnatural for an adult human to suckle on the teats of a cow or a goat, and that human beings are fully herbivorous. Otherwise, how could he possibly be considered a member of the priestly class of society (“brāhmaṇa”, in Sanskrit) if he was not able to even comprehend some of the most basic facts of life? Make no mistake, carnism (see that entry in this Glossary) is a truly abominable, horrendous, wicked, hateful, evil, immoral, sinful, demonic ideology, as is feminism and unlawful divorce (in the case of Prince Gautama, the abandonment of his wife and son would be considered an act of divorce). The twelfth chapter of this Solitary Holy Scripture clearly explicates proper law/ethics/morality. See also “divorce”, in this Glossary. When a so-called Zen Buddhist “priest”, asks another MALE so-called Zen Buddhist “priest” (as occurred in a video interview I just watched on the Internet), "Do you and your husband have any kids?”, one can be fully assured that the lowest point in the history of humanity has been reached. The fact that both the aforementioned so-called “priests”, are American men, is not coincidental, since the most decadent religionists seem to be of Western/first-world origin. I don't believe I have come across a single Western Buddhist monastic who is not at least slightly left-leaning (“leftism”, being a common term in the English-speaking world for “adharma”). The Glossary entry, “leftism”, fully explains the meaning of this term, and cites the main causes of this particularly-pernicious mindset. If even 0.00001% of all Buddhists who have ever lived, were strict adherents to the teachings of the so-called “Buddha”, this would engender serious doubts regarding the holiness of Gautama’s precepts, because truth be told, hardly a SINGLE soul in human history has adhered to proper dharma/dhamma (assuming the term is defined as it is in the following Glossary entry). In order to put it more succinctly, if even one hundred persons were attracted to the teachings of Mister Gautama (or any other spiritual preceptor, for that matter), it would strongly suggest that his teachings were either grossly flawed, or at least less than perfect, because as I believe that have proven beyond any semblance of a doubt, within the pages of this Singular Holy Scripture (as well as in my personal life), there is hardly a SINGLE human being who is even remotely interested in discovering the ultimate religio-dharmic path. Satyam eva jayate! dharma: a Sanskrit term, from the root, “dhr-”, which means, “to uphold”, or “to support”. In the context of human society, “dharma”, refers to any social convention, function, rule, concept, or discrete action, that supports or UPHOLDS society, enabling it to operate in a manner in which each individual member may live a satisfactory existence, free of undue harm from any other member of society, and grounded on a small number of axioms, particularly on the fact of a natural social hierarchy, as explicated in various chapters of the most exigent work of literature ever conceived, this “A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity”. Thus, in order to translate the term, “dharma”, into English, the word favoured by this author is “law”, or possibly, “ethics”, because dharma is based on the noble maxim, “non-harm is the greatest law”, or else, “non-violence is the epitome of religion” (“ahiṃsā paramo dharmaḥ”, in Sanskrit). The only real caveat in this respect, is that any harm that is enacted, ought to be justified, and so, the far wiser translation of the aforementioned Sanskrit saying, would be the latter one, since the term, “violence”, is by definition, any volitional act that causes unjustified harm. See the entry, “violence”, in this Glossary. The term “(moral) law” simply refers to how any voluntary, intentional action, contravenes the principle of avoiding unjustified harm to oneself, to another living creature, or to even the environment. So, for example, since unnecessarily consuming any animal product, is harmful to both the consumer and to the exploited animal, it is considered to be unlawful (“adharma”, in Sanskrit). Therefore, it is a moral imperative for every human being to become VEGAN. Dharma also refers to societal duties. For example, as the current World Teacher Himself, it is the sacred duty of this author to teach the world how to live according to dharma itself (see Chapter 20), whereas the dharma of any (human) female, for example, is to serve her masters (that is, any adult male in her nuclear family, as well as any adult male within her extended family, clan or tribe). Dharma is undoubtedly the most important concept of all, for a peaceful, successful and thriving society, depends on adherence to the law. There is no assurance that anybody will become a self-realized sage by studying this “Dharmaśāstra” (law book), but at least one will understand life as it is, and be able to distinguish between holiness and wickedness, even if one refuses to accept the truths explicated here. That is the main reason why the lengthiest chapter of “A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity”, deals with morality. “Dharma eva hato hanti dharmo rakṣati rakṣitaḥ । tasmād dharmo na hantavyo mā no dharmo hato’vadhīt” (Manusmṛiti 8:15) states that, when righteousness is destroyed, it destroys, but when righteousness is protected, it protects. Therefore, morality ought not be destroyed, lest its absence destroys us. Unfortunately, most persons (that is, leftists) are unable to comprehend this obvious truism.

[@niccinoonar]

So blessed to hear him 🙏🙏🙏

[@KimPham-t6i]

Sadhu Sadhu Sadhu 🙏🙏🙏

[@janebaker6595]

Thank you so much for this wonderful talk, so full of useful, pain relieving advice, very kind !!

[@tanapornstephen4715]

Sadhu, thank you, BSV to bring Taan Ajahn dhamma teaching on U tube. Great dhamma teaching with a sense of humour .😊

[@FilipinaVegana]

dhamma: the Pāli cognate of “dharma”. However, in most uses, it invariably refers to the teachings of Siddhārtha Gautama (almost invariably, wrongly referred to as “the” Buddha, despite the fact that he is but one of many MILLIONS of humans to have experienced a spiritual awakening), rather than the eternal law (“Sanātana Dharma”, in Sanskrit). In this book, it is used in its original sense, that is, of “holy and righteous concepts and deeds”. Therefore, the term “Buddhist dhamma”, and likewise, “Hindu dharma”, is somewhat inept or nonsensical, since dhamma/dharma is fundamentally non-sectarian. Cf. the following Glossary entry, “dharma”, for the etymology. Despite being the most atheistic human being to have ever existed, I often PRAY that I am not in the process of consuming a meal, whenever I hear a Buddhist monk or lay teacher, referring to his or her lecture as being a “dhamma talk”. If you have carefully read the entirety of this Holy Scripture, “F.I.S.H”, and you have listened to many Buddhist sermons, you may have already guessed the reason for my fervent prayer. This is because the assertion that the overwhelming majority of Buddhist monks are teaching authentic dharma is so excruciatingly cringe-worthy and laughable, I am genuinely fearful of choking on my food upon hearing such silly claims! First of all, the founder of Buddhism himself, Siddhārtha Gautama, was hardly a paragon of virtue, having abandoned his family, in order to become a mendicant monk, being an animal-abusing carnist, and encouraging females to become loose women (so-called “nuns”). In my half a century of life, I have only ever encountered one or two Buddhists who adhered to (actual) dharma, so in this sense, they were factually SUPERIOR to Gautama himself! For instance, the abbot of the largest Buddhist society in my homeland, Australia, believes that it is dharmic (legitimate) for men to insert their reproductive organs inside the faeces holes of other men, and of course, like his idol, Gautama, he is a murderer of poor, innocent, defenceless animals, and a feminist. Furthermore, despite being an indigenous Englishman, and a graduate of one of the most prestigious universities on earth, University of Cambridge, he is entirely unable to coherently speak his native tongue! Should not a supposed “spiritual leader” be an exemplar in at least his own language? Definitely, a genuine brāhmaṇa (that is, a member of the priestly class of society, as defined in Chapter 20 of this most exigent work of all literature, “A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity”) is required to be a master of at least one language (though preferably, more than one tongue), because he is required to communicate extremely advanced metaphysical, religious, and philosophical concepts to the ruler of his society (that is, a genuine, patriarchal monarch), as well as to his own disciples (i.e. male seminarians). Of course, no individual who has ever lived, including a so-called “Avatāra”, was morally perfect, but those who claim to be spiritual masters, ought to be beyond reproach in respect to their own ethical practices. In the aforementioned case, Gautama should have returned to his family as soon as he understood the immorality of his actions, just as I, when I began adhering to dharma, repaid two persons from whom I had stolen goods and cash. Even my first wife, who was a typical miserable, nasty, wicked, evil, dog-eating Filipina, apologized to her owner, for all her demonic actions towards me, after she experienced a religious conversion, decades after divorcing her lord, god and master, and vowed to desist from murdering pigs and gorging on their bloody carcasses in response to my request that she become a vegan. Furthermore, assuming that Gautama was factually a carnist (and knowing the typical diet of Bhārata, it would be safe to assume that he was at LEAST a lacto-vegetarian, and therefore, an animal-abusing criminal), he was certainly sufficiently intelligent to understand that it is unnatural for an adult human to suckle on the teats of a cow or a goat, and that human beings are fully herbivorous. Otherwise, how could he possibly be considered a member of the priestly class of society (“brāhmaṇa”, in Sanskrit) if he was not able to even comprehend some of the most basic facts of life? Make no mistake, carnism (see that entry in this Glossary) is a truly abominable, horrendous, wicked, hateful, evil, immoral, sinful, demonic ideology, as is feminism and unlawful divorce (in the case of Prince Gautama, the abandonment of his wife and son would be considered an act of divorce). The twelfth chapter of this Solitary Holy Scripture clearly explicates proper law/ethics/morality. See also “divorce”, in this Glossary. When a so-called Zen Buddhist “priest”, asks another MALE so-called Zen Buddhist “priest” (as occurred in a video interview I just watched on the Internet), "Do you and your husband have any kids?”, one can be fully assured that the lowest point in the history of humanity has been reached. The fact that both the aforementioned so-called “priests”, are American men, is not coincidental, since the most decadent religionists seem to be of Western/first-world origin. I don't believe I have come across a single Western Buddhist monastic who is not at least slightly left-leaning (“leftism”, being a common term in the English-speaking world for “adharma”). The Glossary entry, “leftism”, fully explains the meaning of this term, and cites the main causes of this particularly-pernicious mindset. If even 0.00001% of all Buddhists who have ever lived, were strict adherents to the teachings of the so-called “Buddha”, this would engender serious doubts regarding the holiness of Gautama’s precepts, because truth be told, hardly a SINGLE soul in human history has adhered to proper dharma/dhamma (assuming the term is defined as it is in the following Glossary entry). In order to put it more succinctly, if even one hundred persons were attracted to the teachings of Mister Gautama (or any other spiritual preceptor, for that matter), it would strongly suggest that his teachings were either grossly flawed, or at least less than perfect, because as I believe that have proven beyond any semblance of a doubt, within the pages of this Singular Holy Scripture (as well as in my personal life), there is hardly a SINGLE human being who is even remotely interested in discovering the ultimate religio-dharmic path. Satyam eva jayate! dharma: a Sanskrit term, from the root, “dhr-”, which means, “to uphold”, or “to support”. In the context of human society, “dharma”, refers to any social convention, function, rule, concept, or discrete action, that supports or UPHOLDS society, enabling it to operate in a manner in which each individual member may live a satisfactory existence, free of undue harm from any other member of society, and grounded on a small number of axioms, particularly on the fact of a natural social hierarchy, as explicated in various chapters of the most exigent work of literature ever conceived, this “A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity”. Thus, in order to translate the term, “dharma”, into English, the word favoured by this author is “law”, or possibly, “ethics”, because dharma is based on the noble maxim, “non-harm is the greatest law”, or else, “non-violence is the epitome of religion” (“ahiṃsā paramo dharmaḥ”, in Sanskrit). The only real caveat in this respect, is that any harm that is enacted, ought to be justified, and so, the far wiser translation of the aforementioned Sanskrit saying, would be the latter one, since the term, “violence”, is by definition, any volitional act that causes unjustified harm. See the entry, “violence”, in this Glossary. The term “(moral) law” simply refers to how any voluntary, intentional action, contravenes the principle of avoiding unjustified harm to oneself, to another living creature, or to even the environment. So, for example, since unnecessarily consuming any animal product, is harmful to both the consumer and to the exploited animal, it is considered to be unlawful (“adharma”, in Sanskrit). Therefore, it is a moral imperative for every human being to become VEGAN. Dharma also refers to societal duties. For example, as the current World Teacher Himself, it is the sacred duty of this author to teach the world how to live according to dharma itself (see Chapter 20), whereas the dharma of any (human) female, for example, is to serve her masters (that is, any adult male in her nuclear family, as well as any adult male within her extended family, clan or tribe). Dharma is undoubtedly the most important concept of all, for a peaceful, successful and thriving society, depends on adherence to the law. There is no assurance that anybody will become a self-realized sage by studying this “Dharmaśāstra” (law book), but at least one will understand life as it is, and be able to distinguish between holiness and wickedness, even if one refuses to accept the truths explicated here. That is the main reason why the lengthiest chapter of “A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity”, deals with morality. “Dharma eva hato hanti dharmo rakṣati rakṣitaḥ । tasmād dharmo na hantavyo mā no dharmo hato’vadhīt” (Manusmṛiti 8:15) states that, when righteousness is destroyed, it destroys, but when righteousness is protected, it protects. Therefore, morality ought not be destroyed, lest its absence destroys us. Unfortunately, most persons (that is, leftists) are unable to comprehend this obvious truism.

[@wei-wei1620]

Thank you

[@bell10877]

Great work BSV to invite Ajahn Geoff..please may he return. 🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼

[@vagaboots]

Sending you my gratitude for all this wisdom and love shared through this lecture. Thanks

[@smgoh7257]

Sadhu, sadhu, sadhu 🙏

[@noonespecial4171]

Sadhu what a treat to have Bhante in Australia 🙏🙏🙏

[@Dhammaonthesidewalk108]

sharp speech with compassionate focus... brilliant ajahn Geoff... thank you

[@tanapornstephen4715]

Sadhu, sadhu, sadhu 🙏 🙏 🙏.

[@siewpoh1319]

Sadhu sadhu sadhu 🙏🙏🙏

[@pradnyashakya3751]

32:00

[@certifiedhedgehog8394]

😊💛🙏🙏🙏

[@dhammadiipa]

May I translate this video into vietnamese and reup on my channel?

[@ZenPepperClub]

Only if Ho chi Minh approves😂😂😂

[@ZenPepperClub]

Unfortunately I have to go to the fridge and get a slice of pizza

[@walkergoff3127]

Lmao

[@stevenbelzer9768]

Lay stream enterer in Laguna Beach . Gratitude ..I do nit have a wise spiritual adviser but I find it virtually in you . Thank you for saying “The Suta themselves can be wise advisor “ Much merit and virtue by putting Dhamma onto KZbin .and demonstrating CHAN and METTA❤

[@GrishaKrivchenia]

Dear Friend on the Path, We have never met, so I will not speculate on your level of spiritual attainment. If you have realized all eight factors of the path and obtained the fruit of stream-entry, then I rejoice in your success! 🙏🏼 That said, every time someone declares themselves a stream-enterer (or even an arahant) in an online forum, it raises serious questions. We are left to wonder: what is the motivation of the person saying this? If they really have achieved noble attainments, then why tell the whole world? Is it necessary to tell anyone at all?

[@stevenbelzer9768]

@ Grisha , my comment was a declaration of GRATITUDE for a “virtual wise spiritual advisor “ and the statement that SUTRA can also be a “wise spiritual advisor “ NOT an “on line declaration of “hey I am a stream enterer “ Having said that , Shariputra m thus I have heard that : having “experienced/ encountered the DAMMA” (which I HAVE) one is a “stream enterer “ Just as ALL the “auspicious group of FIVE “ upon hearing “Do not call me friend ,for that will not be for your benefit for a very long times. Listen intently , give an ear and I will instruct you , for I am one who has Cooled Off experienced the Deathless” Dude , All,of the Auspicious Group of Five in that day , upon hearing Gautama words , became “stream enterers” according to Pali Cannon .NONE had “realized all eight factors “ at all. This was the FIRST reference to the Four Noble Truths and indeed The Eight Fold Path Each of the five directly experienced the Dhamma , which is the only thing NOT impermanence nor arising from “causes and conditions” Therefore “Dear Friend Grisha , I kindly suggest that you revisit the original Pali Cannon , the Sutras , the Buddha initial talk in the Deer Park to the Group of Five ..to educate yourself that “attainment realization of “all eightfold factors “of the “N8FP Is NOT a prerequisite for “stream entry “ Lastly you’ve misinterpreted my intention which was a “thank you “ NOT an “internet declaration “:where you mildly place your own “prerequisites for stream entry “ and end your comment “well if you have really achieved that then i salute you . Bear in mind making judgemental comments falls into the Reno if RIGHT SPEECH , which is of itself a specific requirement of the Nobel Eightfold Path Each, Shariputra . LOL❤️

[@stevenbelzer9768]

@ ps Shariputra , who the FUCK in their right mind would “Declare themselves to be an ARAHANT ) in an online forum?? But to judge my thank you comment in THAT category is just ….silly …and misinformed . Lastly to “question my motivation “ for my expression of gratitude m AGAIN falls into RIGHT SPEECH , and I would gently suggest that you examine you OWN judgmental and somewhat arrogant “questioning of motivation “:to SEE upon “further investigation” if your comments are SKILLFUL , or UNSKILLFUL , or fall into the practice of RIGHT SPEECH m Shariputra

[@stevenbelzer9768]

Dear Grisha I would suggest that you reflect on your OWN comments , if they are “skillful for unskillful “ and if they fall into the realm of RIGHT SPEECH I would ALSO suggest that you educate yourself on the original Pali Cannon to observe that the Auspicious Group of Five , ALL became “stream enterers “ WITHOUT ever following or attaining the Noble Eight Fold Path In the Deer Park 😅. “Listen intently and give an ear, I will instruct you “ Thus was the first day the Four Noble Truth had been revealed , NONE had followed Noble Eight Fild Path NONE had become stream enterers Lastly your comments are rather judgemental and come from a place of arrogance . I would suggest reflection. To determine if your comments are SKILLFUL or UNSKILLED, and if they conform to RIGHT SPEACH My message was one of thanks, to,lump this into someone who “declares themselves an ARAHANT on line ..that’s silly ..who the FUCK would say that ????❤

[@FilipinaVegana]

@@GrishaKrivchenia dhamma: the Pāli cognate of “dharma”. However, in most uses, it invariably refers to the teachings of Siddhārtha Gautama (almost invariably, wrongly referred to as “the” Buddha, despite the fact that he is but one of many MILLIONS of humans to have experienced a spiritual awakening), rather than the eternal law (“Sanātana Dharma”, in Sanskrit). In this book, it is used in its original sense, that is, of “holy and righteous concepts and deeds”. Therefore, the term “Buddhist dhamma”, and likewise, “Hindu dharma”, is somewhat inept or nonsensical, since dhamma/dharma is fundamentally non-sectarian. Cf. the following Glossary entry, “dharma”, for the etymology. Despite being the most atheistic human being to have ever existed, I often PRAY that I am not in the process of consuming a meal, whenever I hear a Buddhist monk or lay teacher, referring to his or her lecture as being a “dhamma talk”. If you have carefully read the entirety of this Holy Scripture, “F.I.S.H”, and you have listened to many Buddhist sermons, you may have already guessed the reason for my fervent prayer. This is because the assertion that the overwhelming majority of Buddhist monks are teaching authentic dharma is so excruciatingly cringe-worthy and laughable, I am genuinely fearful of choking on my food upon hearing such silly claims! First of all, the founder of Buddhism himself, Siddhārtha Gautama, was hardly a paragon of virtue, having abandoned his family, in order to become a mendicant monk, being an animal-abusing carnist, and encouraging females to become loose women (so-called “nuns”). In my half a century of life, I have only ever encountered one or two Buddhists who adhered to (actual) dharma, so in this sense, they were factually SUPERIOR to Gautama himself! For instance, the abbot of the largest Buddhist society in my homeland, Australia, believes that it is dharmic (legitimate) for men to insert their reproductive organs inside the faeces holes of other men, and of course, like his idol, Gautama, he is a murderer of poor, innocent, defenceless animals, and a feminist. Furthermore, despite being an indigenous Englishman, and a graduate of one of the most prestigious universities on earth, University of Cambridge, he is entirely unable to coherently speak his native tongue! Should not a supposed “spiritual leader” be an exemplar in at least his own language? Definitely, a genuine brāhmaṇa (that is, a member of the priestly class of society, as defined in Chapter 20 of this most exigent work of all literature, “A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity”) is required to be a master of at least one language (though preferably, more than one tongue), because he is required to communicate extremely advanced metaphysical, religious, and philosophical concepts to the ruler of his society (that is, a genuine, patriarchal monarch), as well as to his own disciples (i.e. male seminarians). Of course, no individual who has ever lived, including a so-called “Avatāra”, was morally perfect, but those who claim to be spiritual masters, ought to be beyond reproach in respect to their own ethical practices. In the aforementioned case, Gautama should have returned to his family as soon as he understood the immorality of his actions, just as I, when I began adhering to dharma, repaid two persons from whom I had stolen goods and cash. Even my first wife, who was a typical miserable, nasty, wicked, evil, dog-eating Filipina, apologized to her owner, for all her demonic actions towards me, after she experienced a religious conversion, decades after divorcing her lord, god and master, and vowed to desist from murdering pigs and gorging on their bloody carcasses in response to my request that she become a vegan. Furthermore, assuming that Gautama was factually a carnist (and knowing the typical diet of Bhārata, it would be safe to assume that he was at LEAST a lacto-vegetarian, and therefore, an animal-abusing criminal), he was certainly sufficiently intelligent to understand that it is unnatural for an adult human to suckle on the teats of a cow or a goat, and that human beings are fully herbivorous. Otherwise, how could he possibly be considered a member of the priestly class of society (“brāhmaṇa”, in Sanskrit) if he was not able to even comprehend some of the most basic facts of life? Make no mistake, carnism (see that entry in this Glossary) is a truly abominable, horrendous, wicked, hateful, evil, immoral, sinful, demonic ideology, as is feminism and unlawful divorce (in the case of Prince Gautama, the abandonment of his wife and son would be considered an act of divorce). The twelfth chapter of this Solitary Holy Scripture clearly explicates proper law/ethics/morality. See also “divorce”, in this Glossary. When a so-called Zen Buddhist “priest”, asks another MALE so-called Zen Buddhist “priest” (as occurred in a video interview I just watched on the Internet), "Do you and your husband have any kids?”, one can be fully assured that the lowest point in the history of humanity has been reached. The fact that both the aforementioned so-called “priests”, are American men, is not coincidental, since the most decadent religionists seem to be of Western/first-world origin. I don't believe I have come across a single Western Buddhist monastic who is not at least slightly left-leaning (“leftism”, being a common term in the English-speaking world for “adharma”). The Glossary entry, “leftism”, fully explains the meaning of this term, and cites the main causes of this particularly-pernicious mindset. If even 0.00001% of all Buddhists who have ever lived, were strict adherents to the teachings of the so-called “Buddha”, this would engender serious doubts regarding the holiness of Gautama’s precepts, because truth be told, hardly a SINGLE soul in human history has adhered to proper dharma/dhamma (assuming the term is defined as it is in the following Glossary entry). In order to put it more succinctly, if even one hundred persons were attracted to the teachings of Mister Gautama (or any other spiritual preceptor, for that matter), it would strongly suggest that his teachings were either grossly flawed, or at least less than perfect, because as I believe that have proven beyond any semblance of a doubt, within the pages of this Singular Holy Scripture (as well as in my personal life), there is hardly a SINGLE human being who is even remotely interested in discovering the ultimate religio-dharmic path. Satyam eva jayate! dharma: a Sanskrit term, from the root, “dhr-”, which means, “to uphold”, or “to support”. In the context of human society, “dharma”, refers to any social convention, function, rule, concept, or discrete action, that supports or UPHOLDS society, enabling it to operate in a manner in which each individual member may live a satisfactory existence, free of undue harm from any other member of society, and grounded on a small number of axioms, particularly on the fact of a natural social hierarchy, as explicated in various chapters of the most exigent work of literature ever conceived, this “A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity”. Thus, in order to translate the term, “dharma”, into English, the word favoured by this author is “law”, or possibly, “ethics”, because dharma is based on the noble maxim, “non-harm is the greatest law”, or else, “non-violence is the epitome of religion” (“ahiṃsā paramo dharmaḥ”, in Sanskrit). The only real caveat in this respect, is that any harm that is enacted, ought to be justified, and so, the far wiser translation of the aforementioned Sanskrit saying, would be the latter one, since the term, “violence”, is by definition, any volitional act that causes unjustified harm. See the entry, “violence”, in this Glossary. The term “(moral) law” simply refers to how any voluntary, intentional action, contravenes the principle of avoiding unjustified harm to oneself, to another living creature, or to even the environment. So, for example, since unnecessarily consuming any animal product, is harmful to both the consumer and to the exploited animal, it is considered to be unlawful (“adharma”, in Sanskrit). Therefore, it is a moral imperative for every human being to become VEGAN. Dharma also refers to societal duties. For example, as the current World Teacher Himself, it is the sacred duty of this author to teach the world how to live according to dharma itself (see Chapter 20), whereas the dharma of any (human) female, for example, is to serve her masters (that is, any adult male in her nuclear family, as well as any adult male within her extended family, clan or tribe). Dharma is undoubtedly the most important concept of all, for a peaceful, successful and thriving society, depends on adherence to the law. There is no assurance that anybody will become a self-realized sage by studying this “Dharmaśāstra” (law book), but at least one will understand life as it is, and be able to distinguish between holiness and wickedness, even if one refuses to accept the truths explicated here. That is the main reason why the lengthiest chapter of “A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity”, deals with morality. “Dharma eva hato hanti dharmo rakṣati rakṣitaḥ । tasmād dharmo na hantavyo mā no dharmo hato’vadhīt” (Manusmṛiti 8:15) states that, when righteousness is destroyed, it destroys, but when righteousness is protected, it protects. Therefore, morality ought not be destroyed, lest its absence destroys us. Unfortunately, most persons (that is, leftists) are unable to comprehend this obvious truism.

[@ЛейФа-щ5ж]

❤