Was Buddha A Prophet?

[huli]

I have made acquaintance with a gentleman of the Bahai faith who is convinced that Buddha was a prophet. It is a tenet of this particular religion that all the major religions have prophets who predicted the coming of yet another great teacher. A man born in the last century claimed to be that teacher and founded the Bahai religion. This is just a bit of background.

In an effort to include Buddha within their world view of prophets, they quote Buddha saying how he is, I think, the 4th Buddha of this era and another one is coming in 5000 years. I don't think they have any other examples of Buddha making a prophesy, but, I suppose once is enough. I have since learned or heard that this particular statement is found only once in the Pali sutras, and this sheds some doubt on the importance and authenticity of the statement in my mind.

However, there is also the matter of Buddha describing his and others past lives in detail, an otherworldly knowledge to the rest of us. If we were to believe such statements we would have to invoke faith, and this inches him towards being a prophet, it seems to me.

I originally resisted the contention that Buddha was a prophet. I guess it depends on the definition of the term. Did he predict the future? Maybe. Did he make some statements we need to just accept on faith? Probably, but they not the core of Buddhism, in my opinion.

I think the Bahia folks are wrong to try to make Buddha into just another prophet from "God."

[Brucenkhamen]

The Hindus take a similar line, as do many new agey type movements I guess, i wonder why they feel the need to fit the Buddha into their worldview as if they needed some kind of endorsement from him.

As you've pointed out there are one or two prophecies within the canon but the fact that there are so few possibly makes their authenticity more doubtful, and compared with other religions that are riddled with prophecy it seems pretty unimportant in Buddhism.

I'd be inclined to ask your friend if he believes the Buddha is a prophet then what practises or techniques that the Buddha taught does he practise? or is just believing that he is a prophet enough?

I suspect it's a case of throwing away the cereal and keeping the box.

[fabianfred]

I would not refer to the Buddha as a prophet. He did speak of past and future Buddhas, the 28 Buddhas relevant to himself since he started upon the Boddhisatta path, and the next Buddha and final one in this aeon (mahakappa).

There seems to be a cycle, like everything in nature, many of which occur during any aeon, which follows the lifespan of those beings in the human realm, from very short to very long.....10 years at the minimum and longer than 100,000 years at the maximum. Small when the lifespan is short and like giants when long.

Buddhas only appear for their final rebirth when the lifespan is decreasing and between the limits of 100,000 years and 100 years.

[huli]

The Hindus take a similar line, as do many new agey type movements I guess, i wonder why they feel the need to fit the Buddha into their worldview as if they needed some kind of endorsement from him.

As you've pointed out there are one or two prophecies within the canon but the fact that there are so few possibly makes their authenticity more doubtful, and compared with other religions that are riddled with prophecy it seems pretty unimportant in Buddhism.

I'd be inclined to ask your friend if he believes the Buddha is a prophet then what practises or techniques that the Buddha taught does he practise? or is just believing that he is a prophet enough?

I suspect it's a case of throwing away the cereal and keeping the box.

To elaborate a bit more, along the lines of your inclination, Brucenkhamen, I believe the critical issues for the Bahai are, first, that the multitude of religions share that they all had prophets and, second, that each of these prophets predicted a "second coming". Since Buddhism is a major world religion, the Bahai need to include it in their grand scheme somehow. Although my friend does profess to have a lot of respect for what he knows about Buddhism, his real focus is only that the Bahai represents the culmination of all other religions.

While Bahai is a moderately interesting phenomena, I don't think it differs quantitatively from the Abrahamic religions, having a God who sent a prophet with a revelation, etc. So, it's just another fear-based tradition that Buddha saw through. I only mentioned it because of the claim they make for Buddha, that he was a prophet, which I reject, but I wondered what others thought.

[Brucenkhamen]

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maitreya

It appears the future Buddha prediction only appears once in the pali canon and in such a way that it may have been a later insertion.

I think the main reason that founders of world religions appear to be given to prophecy is that their followers who recorded their teachings expected it of them.

[ericsamadhi]

I appreciate the thoughtful responses to this question. At this point in history everything is an opinion or belief regarding Buddha. Buddhism became a popular religion and with no copywrite or patent protection has now become an advertising gimmic for new religions, just as Krishna and SaiBaba have become. I think some Japanese religions push the limits of this by making their founder the Buddha, then his wife and kids inherit the Buddha job. It can easily become a joke, if they were not so serious about their business of making money.

[hookedondhamma]

Great information, FabianFred! The comment about the cycle relating to the the human lifespan was new to me - gave me a lot to research and read up on :-)

[huli]

I think the main reason that founders of world religions appear to be given to prophecy is that their followers who recorded their teachings expected it of them.

Predictions about the "next life" might be considered prophesy, and they weren't shy to make those without prompting.

[Brucenkhamen]

Predictions about the "next life" might be considered prophesy, and they weren't shy to make those without prompting.

So are you saying there are instances in the pali canon where the Buddha said something along the lines of "This person will be reborn as an x"?

Do you have some references you can point me to?

[hookedondhamma]

There's a story in the Dhammapada about the Venerable Kaccana who was said to have looked 'like a monkey' from a distance, by Vassakara, and for that the Buddha said that he'd be born as a monkey in the next lifetime (if he didn't retract his statement, or feel remorse of). Supposedly Vassakara planted many banana trees, and sometime after he died, it was said that whenever a person would call out 'Vassakara', there'd be a monkey who'd always show acknowledgment of that name.

Don't think that could be labeled as prophecy, though.

I'm not aware if the Buddha really made any importance of 'prophecy' or not, as his sole purpose was to expound the Dhamma for the purpose of getting rid the kilesas.

Interesting, though.

Edited April 12, 2012 by hookedondhamma

[huli]

Predictions about the "next life" might be considered prophesy, and they weren't shy to make those without prompting.

So are you saying there are instances in the pali canon where the Buddha said something along the lines of "This person will be reborn as an x"?

Do you have some references you can point me to?

There I go using pronouns that are misunderstood, again. By "they", I meant the other founders of religions, primarily the Abrahamic religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. They all predict an afterlife for the "soul", as a core teaching, which could be considered a prophesy.

I do not think that Buddha was a prophet, in essence. Some might say that discussing karma and future births would make him a prophet, but in my mind this is not central to his core teaching.

Got to watch those pronouns, I stand corrected.

[Brucenkhamen]

There's a story in the Dhammapada about the Venerable Kaccana who was said to have looked 'like a monkey' from a distance, by Vassakara, and for that the Buddha said that he'd be born as a monkey in the next lifetime (if he didn't retract his statement, or feel remorse of). Supposedly Vassakara planted many banana trees, and sometime after he died, it was said that whenever a person would call out 'Vassakara', there'd be a monkey who'd always show acknowledgment of that name.

Don't think that could be labeled as prophecy, though.

Sounds a bit like the phrase "if you masturbate you'll go blind", not so much a prophecy as an encouragement to change behaviour.

[bankei]

The Buddha made plenty of predictions - or the suttas have him making predictions. eg. When admitting women as nuns he predicted that this would hasten the disappearance of his teachings.

[Brucenkhamen]

The Buddha made plenty of predictions - or the suttas have him making predictions. eg. When admitting women as nuns he predicted that this would hasten the disappearance of his teachings.

One does not equal plenty.

There is some doubt regarding the authenticity of this one http://dhammawiki.com/index.php?title=Buddhism_and_Misogyny

[hookedondhamma]

When I was a novice a lady came to the temple asking about Buddhism, so we tried our best to provide her with materials she could check out for herself. She became adamant and at that point began to launch a debate about Buddhism vs. Christianity (oh, we'd been cleverly lured into the trap lol). She kept referring to the teachings being 'not credible,' stating by the obvious handing down by oral and other methods (as we had told her earlier). We just told her the best way to find out was to read it and try it out. If it worked then maybe that could attest to it's authenticity. To no avail. Something I just don't understand. I'm sure the ability to ask questions via curiosity is fairly common, but if after asking and one can't find a satisfiable answer, it may be the next best thing to put in the effort to search for an answer that is. If one really wants to know something, sometimes he/she has to go and find it (some questions can't be answered, of course). If it isn't delivered to ones satisfaction, then why should one continue to debate something he/she is pre-dispositioned to/hell-bent on? And the world spins madly on.

Edited April 16, 2012 by hookedondhamma

[huli]

As far as Buddha being a prophet, a cursory answer would be no, because he lacked any revelation from God, or whatever, that is the hallmark of a prophet. We usually consider a prophet someone with a divine connection, the source of his power to prophesy.

Buddha did, however, make predictions, but he specifically denied that he had superhuman powers, insisting he had simply enlightened/awakened himself thru his own efforts. The predictions of a next Buddha, and the demise of Buddhism in 500 years, are suspect as to their authenticity, mainly because they are mentioned only once in the original sutras. In any case, such predictions were not central to his core teachings, as prophesies are in other religions.

Two concepts that confound the present discussion are karma and reincarnation. I don't see how these can be understood by people on the same level as the Noble Truths or Eightfold Path, by seeing their truth directly. However, I sometimes think that they are the inevitable consequences of a world with cause and effect, and so can perhaps be predicted on that basis. If these concepts are considered central to Buddhism (I don't think so), and are believed only because Buddha said so in the sutras, then to some people maybe he was a prophet, at least in part.

In m mind, the main reason why Buddha is not a prophet is because I think his teachings were focused on improvement of this life. Prophets and their revelations concern themselves primarily with either the "next life", after our mortal demise, or the future of the human race.

[rockyysdt]

As far as Buddha being a prophet, a cursory answer would be no, because he lacked any revelation from God, or whatever, that is the hallmark of a prophet. We usually consider a prophet someone with a divine connection, the source of his power to prophesy.

Buddha did, however, make predictions, but he specifically denied that he had superhuman powers, insisting he had simply enlightened/awakened himself thru his own efforts. The predictions of a next Buddha, and the demise of Buddhism in 500 years, are suspect as to their authenticity, mainly because they are mentioned only once in the original sutras. In any case, such predictions were not central to his core teachings, as prophesies are in other religions.

Two concepts that confound the present discussion are karma and reincarnation. I don't see how these can be understood by people on the same level as the Noble Truths or Eightfold Path, by seeing their truth directly. However, I sometimes think that they are the inevitable consequences of a world with cause and effect, and so can perhaps be predicted on that basis. If these concepts are considered central to Buddhism (I don't think so), and are believed only because Buddha said so in the sutras, then to some people maybe he was a prophet, at least in part.

In m mind, the main reason why Buddha is not a prophet is because I think his teachings were focused on improvement of this life. Prophets and their revelations concern themselves primarily with either the "next life", after our mortal demise, or the future of the human race.

Well said.

I'm of the same understanding.

[Xangsamhua]

Well, I don't think the Buddha was or claimed to be a prophet like those in the Semitic tradition - Moses, Amos, Isaiah, Muhammad, etc - but he did have a chat at his Enlightenment with Brahma Sahampati, the most senior of the Gods - not the Big God, the God behind the gods, etc, but pretty deific nonetheless - and as a result agreed, despite his earlier doubts, to teach Dhamma to the world. Was this a revelation of sorts? Not really; it was more like a tete-a-tete between equals

As Huli said, a prophet (in the Semitic tradition) was one who heard the voice of God in some manner and spoke on his behalf, usually warning, exhorting, reprimanding (Amos 5:21 "I hate, I despise your religious feasts; I cannot stand your assemblies"), and sometimes foretelling (Leviticus 23:31 "I will turn your cities into ruins and lay waste your sanctuaries"). The Buddha doesn't appear to have gone in for this sort of thing, so I don't think he was a prophet in that sense.

The Baha'i speak of "prophets" in two senses. Universal or Independent Prophets, otherwise known as "manifestations of God" are those who, like Moses, Jesus, Muhammad, the Buddha and Baha'u'llah, have founded great religious traditions. Prophets like Amos, Isaiah, John the Baptist, the Bab, etc are "dependent" or "minor" prophets. (I'm not sure where founders of lesser religions, like Guru Nanak or Joseph Smith fit in.) So, when Huli's Baha'i acquaintance speaks of the Buddha as a "prophet" it is as a "manifestation of God". This is rather like an Avatar, as in the Hindu belief that the Buddha was the ninth avatar of Vishnu, than as one of a number (there were schools of prophets in ancient Israel) who convey God's message to his people and foretell what will happen if they disobey.

http://info.bahai.or...le-1-4-0-3.html

[lungmi]

For further information the attachment.Scharlipp-Naylor-Lind-2007_dawn-of-education.pdf

My daughter studied there for special education of handicapped children.

She practised already two times in Thailand with orphans and hill tribe kids.

Now she is teacher in a model school with handicapped and "normal" children.

Edited April 17, 2012 by lungmi

[fabianfred]

The Buddha certainly did seem to have some superhuman powers and there are cases in the suttas where he used them as a means to help someone reach a higher state of understanding. Even gods in some of the higher realms like the Great Brahma do have some creational abilities, but they are still 'worldly' beings which have not yet made the change to one of the four Ariya states and therefore still stuck in the cycle of rebirth.

One who attains the higher Jhanas in concentration meditation also can attain 'superhuman' powers..... such as the ability to fly, read minds, see beings in other realms, see past lives etc. and the Buddhas and even 'wordly' beings can get to these states.

As has been said, the prophets of other religions are making some 'divine' revelations. Buddhas can certainly predict future events but that isn't really the same as being a prophet.

[rockyysdt]

The Buddha certainly did seem to have some superhuman powers and there are cases in the suttas where he used them as a means to help someone reach a higher state of understanding. Even gods in some of the higher realms like the Great Brahma do have some creational abilities, but they are still 'worldly' beings which have not yet made the change to one of the four Ariya states and therefore still stuck in the cycle of rebirth.

One who attains the higher Jhanas in concentration meditation also can attain 'superhuman' powers..... such as the ability to fly, read minds, see beings in other realms, see past lives etc. and the Buddhas and even 'wordly' beings can get to these states.

As has been said, the prophets of other religions are making some 'divine' revelations. Buddhas can certainly predict future events but that isn't really the same as being a prophet.

Hi Fred.

You speak of the Great Brahman God as though he is real.

Isn't the God Brahman part of the Hindu religion, with no basis in fact?

Isn't Hinduism a religion founded in mythology?

The Buddha, lived in a time and place where life revolved around Brahman belief.

To deny or speak out against it was to invite punishment by death.

The Buddha cleverly packaged his teachings by speaking of Brahman by relegating him below the level of "awakening".

By mentioning him the ruling Brahmans were catered for, while at the same time the Buddha was cleverly mocking the existence of Brahman by relegating him to below the level of the Buddha himself.

Edited April 18, 2012 by rockyysdt

[fabianfred]

The Great Brahma exists in the 14th realm (counting up from the lowest to the full 31 realms of Samsara)

We call some of these beings gods...but that does not mean they are the kind of almighty creator GOD which other religions refer to. They do often possess creative abilities, however, but they are still stuck in Samsara like all 'worldly' beings which have yet to escape to the state of Ariya (the four Noble states from Sottapanna to Arahant).

[rockyysdt]

The Great Brahma exists in the 14th realm (counting up from the lowest to the full 31 realms of Samsara)

We call some of these beings gods...but that does not mean they are the kind of almighty creator GOD which other religions refer to. They do often possess creative abilities, however, but they are still stuck in Samsara like all 'worldly' beings which have yet to escape to the state of Ariya (the four Noble states from Sottapanna to Arahant).

I think this is referred to as Buddhist Cosmology.

As with later schools of Buddhism, l thought such teaching was added and has nothing to do with the Buddhas core teaching.

Just as Mara is a concept and not an actual demon, the planes of existence are an unprovable construct.

Edited April 19, 2012 by rockyysdt

[fabianfred]

The Great Brahma exists in the 14th realm (counting up from the lowest to the full 31 realms of Samsara)

We call some of these beings gods...but that does not mean they are the kind of almighty creator GOD which other religions refer to. They do often possess creative abilities, however, but they are still stuck in Samsara like all 'worldly' beings which have yet to escape to the state of Ariya (the four Noble states from Sottapanna to Arahant).

I think this is referred to as Buddhist Cosmology.

As with later schools of Buddhism, l thought such teaching was added and has nothing to do with the Buddhas core teaching.

Just as Mara is a concept and not an actual demon, the planes of existence are an unprovable construct.

assumptions on your part because you choose not to believe in them.....not facts.

I choose to believe the Buddha when he refers to these things as real...they make sense to me and I therefore as his follower have confidence that he wasn't trying to confuse us....

you choose the more modern scientific view because it suits your need for concrete proof before you will allow yourself to believe anything...

neither of us can prove or disprove the others theories...and even if we had positive personal; proof from our practice we couldn't show it to anyone else... nor convince them.... we all have to convince ourselves.

[sparebox2]

Buddha is not a prophet.

He is just a man like you and me, but he realize that there is nothing before us, and nothing after us.

So it is best to keep simple.

And we are not in a Matrix.

[huli]

On first glance, it seems that Buddha's teachings can be either accepted on faith, or seen directly to be true. Surely the Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path have a cohesive beauty that seem almost obvious with ample reflection. It doesn't take a lot of faith to believe in them. The meditation as taught by Buddha is also very beneficial if given a chance to develop, and so again, we don't need to just take his word for it. However, some of Buddha's descriptions of the different levels of consciousness, for example, will forever be beyond most of us. Do we just take his word for these things by faith in him, as we believe he is a proven genius?

It occurs to me that it is possible to have an "inkling" regarding some of the further teachings of the Buddha, even if we don't fully realize them. Having a good foundational experiential knowledge, and pondering his further teachings, it is possible to have an inkling of the next level, as it were. Our relationship to Buddhism is not only either faith-based, or fully understood. There is a third factor, our inklings. It is rational and reasonable to follow our inklings, and they can not be undermined by someone else.

This can all get very interesting, and can explain why people have different views.

an "inkling" - a slight suspicion about something that is happening

[Xangsamhua]

Isn't the God Brahman part of the Hindu religion, with no basis in fact?

Isn't Hinduism a religion founded in mythology?

Hi Rocky

Hope this clarifies. Pinched directly from Wikipedia:

In Hinduism, Brahman is the one supreme, universal Spirit that is the origin and support of the phenomenal universe.^[1] Brahman is sometimes referred to as the Absolute or Godhead^[2] which is the Divine Ground^[3] of all being. Brahman is conceived as personal ("with qualities"), impersonal ("without qualities") and/or supreme depending on the philosophical school.

The sages of the Upanishads teach that Brahman is the ultimate essence of material phenomena (including the original identity of the human self) that cannot be seen or heard but whose nature can be known through the development of self-knowledge (atma jnana).^[4] According to Advaita, a liberated human being (jivanmukta) has realised Brahman as his or her own true self (see atman).

The Mundaka Upanishad says:

Auṃ - That supreme Brahman is infinite, and this conditioned Brahman is infinite. The infinite proceeds from infinite. If you subtract the infinite from the infinite, the infinite remains alone.

Brahmā is the Hindu god (deva) of creation and one of the Trimūrti, the others being Viṣņu and Śiva. According to the Brahmā Purāņa, he is the father of Manu, and from Manu all human beings are descended. In the Rāmāyaņa and the Mahābhārata, he is often referred to as the progenitor or great grandsire of all human beings. He is not to be confused with the Supreme Cosmic Spirit in Hindu Vedānta philosophy known as Brahmān, which is genderless.

This is my understanding:

Hinduism has evolved from the ancient Vedic texts, especially the Upanishads and the Puranas. The former are philosophical; the latter are mythic narratives. Popular Hinduism is influenced greatly by the Puranas. Philosophical Hinduism, including Advaita Vedanta, rests on the Upanishads. Brahman is the ground of being as understood in philosophical Hinduism. Brahma is the creator-God as understood in popular Hinduism. At the time of the Buddha, ritual was central and essential to the religion of the Brahmins, and included horse-sacrifice. The pantheon of Hindu gods was in place. In reaction to the popularity of Buddhism, especially in the period during and for some centuries after Ashoka's rule, Hinduism was reformed and the horse sacrifices abolished. A major reform occurred following the mission of Adi Shankarachya in the 8th century.

Edited April 19, 2012 by Xangsamhua

[rockyysdt]

On first glance, it seems that Buddha's teachings can be either accepted on faith, or seen directly to be true. Surely the Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path have a cohesive beauty that seem almost obvious with ample reflection. It doesn't take a lot of faith to believe in them. The meditation as taught by Buddha is also very beneficial if given a chance to develop, and so again, we don't need to just take his word for it. However, some of Buddha's descriptions of the different levels of consciousness, for example, will forever be beyond most of us. Do we just take his word for these things by faith in him, as we believe he is a proven genius?

It occurs to me that it is possible to have an "inkling" regarding some of the further teachings of the Buddha, even if we don't fully realize them. Having a good foundational experiential knowledge, and pondering his further teachings, it is possible to have an inkling of the next level, as it were. Our relationship to Buddhism is not only either faith-based, or fully understood. There is a third factor, our inklings. It is rational and reasonable to follow our inklings, and they can not be undermined by someone else.

This can all get very interesting, and can explain why people have different views.

an "inkling" - a slight suspicion about something that is happening

Yes.

My inkling revolves around interpretation.

Even so, as the Buddha taught, I will remain open and flexible until I have first hand experience.

Either:

• all the Buddhist cosmology is true including Mara being a real demon, or
  
• 
  
• the Buddhas "teaching" revolved around the times, which involved an elaborate and inflexible belief in a metaphysical reality, including Devas, God relms, caste system, reincarnation and "that's the way things were", as developed and prophesied by the religious caste over a long period. A world from which the Buddha offered an escape, by subtly steering travelers towards awakening from delusion (religion amongst other things), greed and aversion, through a path involving practice of an ever increasing depth/level of awareness, capable of unveiling reality (the way things really are).
  

Edited April 19, 2012 by rockyysdt

[rockyysdt]

Hi Rocky

Hope this clarifies. Pinched directly from Wikipedia:

In Hinduism, Brahman is the one supreme, universal Spirit that is the origin and support of the phenomenal universe.^[1] Brahman is sometimes referred to as the Absolute or Godhead^[2] which is the Divine Ground^[3] of all being. Brahman is conceived as personal ("with qualities"), impersonal ("without qualities") and/or supreme depending on the philosophical school.

The sages of the Upanishads teach that Brahman is the ultimate essence of material phenomena (including the original identity of the human self) that cannot be seen or heard but whose nature can be known through the development of self-knowledge (atma jnana).^[4] According to Advaita, a liberated human being (jivanmukta) has realised Brahman as his or her own true self (see atman).

The Mundaka Upanishad says:

Auṃ - That supreme Brahman is infinite, and this conditioned Brahman is infinite. The infinite proceeds from infinite. If you subtract the infinite from the infinite, the infinite remains alone.

Brahmā is the Hindu god (deva) of creation and one of the Trimūrti, the others being Viṣņu and Śiva. According to the Brahmā Purāņa, he is the father of Manu, and from Manu all human beings are descended. In the Rāmāyaņa and the Mahābhārata, he is often referred to as the progenitor or great grandsire of all human beings. He is not to be confused with the Supreme Cosmic Spirit in Hindu Vedānta philosophy known as Brahmān, which is genderless.

This is my understanding:

Hinduism has evolved from the ancient Vedic texts, especially the Upanishads and the Puranas. The former are philosophical; the latter are mythic narratives. Popular Hinduism is influenced greatly by the Puranas. Philosophical Hinduism, including Advaita Vedanta, rests on the Upanishads. Brahman is the ground of being as understood in philosophical Hinduism. Brahma is the creator-God as understood in popular Hinduism. At the time of the Buddha, ritual was central and essential to the religion of the Brahmins, and included horse-sacrifice. The pantheon of Hindu gods was in place. In reaction to the popularity of Buddhism, especially in the period during and for some centuries after Ashoka's rule, Hinduism was reformed and the horse sacrifices abolished. A major reform occurred following the mission of Adi Shankarachya in the 8th century.

Hi Adrian.

Thank you for the clarification of the Hindu religion.

It further confirms for me that it is an ancient man made belief system created over a very long period, but with nothing linking it to reality.

The Buddha had to deal with this entrenched religion, ever so subtly in his quest to teach awakening.

I'm still very much drawn to these words expressed by the Buddha:

Thus have I heard:

The end of the world can never

Be reached by walking. However,

Without having reached the world’s end

There is no release from suffering.

I declare that it is in this fathom—

long carcass, with its perceptions

and thoughts, that there is the world, the

origin of the world, the cessation of the

world, and the path leading to the cessation of the world.

[Brucenkhamen]

[i think this is referred to as Buddhist Cosmology.

From Access to Insight;

It is pointless to debate whether these realms are real or simply fanciful metaphors that describe the various mind-states we might experience in this lifetime. The real message of this cosmology is this: unless we take steps to break free of the iron grip of kamma, we are doomed to wander aimlessly from one state to another, with true peace and satisfaction forever out of reach. The Buddha's revolutionary discovery came in finding that there is a way to break free: the

Noble Eightfold Path

, which equips us with precisely the tools we need to escape from this wearisome wandering, once and for all, to a

true and unshakeable freedom

.