Texts that destroy ""scientific" materialism

Forum for discussion of Tibetan Buddhism. Questions specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
Post Reply
User avatar
Wayfarer
Global Moderator
Posts: 4168
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: Texts that destroy ""scientific" materialism

Post by Wayfarer » Sun Jun 19, 2016 1:48 am

fckw wrote:Just look at creationists. There's no way anyone with a modern scientific worldview needs to tolerate that. Creationism and the whole worldview behind is something that the age of enlightenment tried to overcome. Human rights, women's rights to vote, ending slavery - these were all results of a modern, scientific worldview that was an essential constituent of the whole enlightenment movement. Creationists do not want any of that.
I think that religious creationism and scientific materialism - which is not science, incidentally, but an historically-conditioned attitude - are mirror images of each other, and come from a very similar source.

This is actually very well explained in a book published in 2009 by religious studies commentator, Karen Armstrong, called The Case for God. From the NYT review:
modern believers and modern atheists, Armstrong contends, have come to understand religion primarily as a set of propositions to be assented to, or a catalog of specific facts about the nature of God, the world and human life. But this approach to piety would be foreign to many premodern religious thinkers, including the greatest minds of the Christian past, from the early Fathers of the Church to medieval eminences like Thomas Aquinas.

These and other thinkers, she writes, understood faith primarily as a practice, rather than as a system — not as “something that people thought but something they did.” Their God was not a being to be defined or a proposition to be tested, but an ultimate reality to be approached through myth, ritual and “apophatic” theology, which practices “a deliberate and principled reticence about God and/or the sacred” and emphasizes what we can’t know about the divine. And their religion was a set of skills, rather than a list of unalterable teachings — a “knack,” as the Taoists have it, for navigating the mysteries of human existence.

It’s a knack, Armstrong argues, that the Christian West has largely lost, and the rise of modern science is to blame. Not because science and religion are unalterably opposed, but because religious thinkers succumbed to a fatal case of science envy.
So, those who try to 'prove that God exists' by denying or willfully misinterpreting scientific facts tend to be religious creationists. But those, like Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss, who try to 'prove that God doesn't exist' on the basis of science, are reading conclusions into the scientific data that simply aren't there.

And if you've never believed that the Genesis myth was literally true, then the fact that it's not literally true is not the 'devastating blow to religion' that Dawkins appears to believe it is. It is only devastating to literal-minded fundamentalists, whom Dawkins seems to believe represent what religion really means. But from another perspective, both sides of the argument have it wrong, in opposed but very similar ways; meaning that Dawkins is, as some eminent commentators have pointed out, a fundamentalist of another kind.

(And another point is that 'liberal Westerners' also embody a tyranny of kinds, in their imposition of what they consider to be to 'enlightened values' on global culture. Certainly fundamentalist violence is to be shunned, but so too is materialist nihilism, all the more dangerous because it's so insidious, masquerading as 'liberation'.)

It's also interesting to note that there's barely a mention of cosmology in the early Buddhist texts, just as there's barely a mention of Genesis in the New Testament. They're both simply the background worldview of the culture in which the teachings were articulated.
Only practice with no gaining idea ~ Suzuki Roshi

weenid
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 3:33 pm

Re: Texts that destroy ""scientific" materialism

Post by weenid » Sun Jun 19, 2016 4:21 am

Anders wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
tomamundsen wrote: His view is that both heliocentric and disk-world views are delusion.
No, I don't think so.
  • Whoever is a Buddhist must believe in Buddhist cosmology.
-- Pg. 124, A Cascading Waterfall of Nectar.
ouch.
A corollary of not believing in Buddhist cosmology, specifically Mount Meru, must also mean we should believe in only 2 realms of existence (humans and animals) as opposed to the other 4 realms (hells, hungry ghosts, asuras, gods) which are cosmologically located below and above Mount Meru. This was articulated by Donald Lopez in his book, The Scientific Buddha.

Don't worry, it's ok to believe in Buddhist cosmology, ok to trust what teachers have said.

User avatar
Anders
Posts: 1153
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2009 12:39 pm

Re: Texts that destroy ""scientific" materialism

Post by Anders » Sun Jun 19, 2016 7:34 am

weenid wrote:
Anders wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
No, I don't think so.
  • Whoever is a Buddhist must believe in Buddhist cosmology.
-- Pg. 124, A Cascading Waterfall of Nectar.
ouch.
A corollary of not believing in Buddhist cosmology, specifically Mount Meru, must also mean we should believe in only 2 realms of existence (humans and animals) as opposed to the other 4 realms (hells, hungry ghosts, asuras, gods) which are cosmologically located below and above Mount Meru. This was articulated by Donald Lopez in his book, The Scientific Buddha.
This corollary doesn't follow at all. There are plenty of reasons why one might accept most of Buddhist cosmology whilst leaving one element to the side. That one must therefore side with materialism is a bad strawman which most of all reflects how you are digging your own trenches.
Don't worry, it's ok to believe in Buddhist cosmology, ok to trust what teachers have said.
You really shouldn't be so smug about having adopted the same uncritical methodology as Bible thumbers.
"Even if my body should be burnt to death in the fires of hell
I would endure it for myriad lifetimes
As your companion in practice"

--- Gandavyuha Sutra

orgyen jigmed
Posts: 63
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 10:26 pm

Re: Texts that destroy ""scientific" materialism

Post by orgyen jigmed » Sun Jun 19, 2016 10:27 am

Whoever is a Buddhist must believe in Buddhist cosmology.
According to Karl Popper the discrimination criterion that distinguishes a scientific theory from a non-scientific theory is the principle of falsifiability. Strictly speaking Buddhist Cosmology has not been falsified, and thus it cannot be disproved.
"If the aspiration for enlightenment is your motivation in coming to see me, there is no remedy except meditative practice. I, too, will only practice." - Zurpoche Sakya Jungne

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28526
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Texts that destroy ""scientific" materialism

Post by Malcolm » Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:31 pm

weenid wrote:
Anders wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
No, I don't think so.
  • Whoever is a Buddhist must believe in Buddhist cosmology.
-- Pg. 124, A Cascading Waterfall of Nectar.
ouch.
A corollary of not believing in Buddhist cosmology, specifically Mount Meru, must also mean we should believe in only 2 realms of existence (humans and animals) as opposed to the other 4 realms (hells, hungry ghosts, asuras, gods) which are cosmologically located below and above Mount Meru.
This does not follow at all.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28526
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Texts that destroy ""scientific" materialism

Post by Malcolm » Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:49 pm

orgyen jigmed wrote:
Whoever is a Buddhist must believe in Buddhist cosmology.
According to Karl Popper the discrimination criterion that distinguishes a scientific theory from a non-scientific theory is the principle of falsifiability. Strictly speaking Buddhist Cosmology has not been falsified, and thus it cannot be disproved.
Saying something is nonfalsifible is not the same thing as saying something cannot be falsified. For example, where is Mt. Meru on planet Earth?

If you claim that Meru is actually some structure out in space somewhere, where is it? Things that have been falsified in Meru Cosmology are such things as a geocentric orbit, a flat world and so on.

When even the HH Dalai Lama has rhetorically requested Vasubandhu to rewrite the third chapter of the Abhidharmakośa, and masters like Chogyal Namkhai Norbu consistently poke fun at Tibetans who insist on adhering to this outmoded traditional belief, I find it amazing that obtuse westerners insist that literal adherence to this cosmology is somehow something of great value.

If you really believe that the only thing preventing us all from being suffocated by the lethal fumes of the border hells is the ring of iron mountains around the four continents and Meru, honestly I feel a little sorry for you.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
heart
Posts: 4455
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: Texts that destroy ""scientific" materialism

Post by heart » Mon Jun 20, 2016 7:48 pm

Elon Musk is suggesting that there is a very good chance our universe is a computer simulation. Donald Hoffman suggest that whatever we experience with our senses might have very little to do with what reality actually is. An other scientist, his name escapes me, suggest that the universe is a hologram.

I think the Mount Meru Cosmology might still have its day. :smile:

/magnus
"We are all here to help each other go through this thing, whatever it is."
~Kurt Vonnegut

"The principal practice is Guruyoga. But we need to understand that any secondary practice combined with Guruyoga becomes a principal practice." ChNNR (Teachings on Thun and Ganapuja)

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28526
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Texts that destroy ""scientific" materialism

Post by Malcolm » Mon Jun 20, 2016 7:54 pm

heart wrote:Elon Musk is suggesting that there is a very good chance our universe is a computer simulation. Donald Hoffman suggest that whatever we experience with our senses might have very little to do with what reality actually is. An other scientist, his name escapes me, suggest that the universe is a hologram.

I think the Mount Meru Cosmology might still have its day. :smile:
People make a lot of suggestion, but at the end of the day, the sun never has and never will circle the earth (outside of a computer model of course, which would actually show how untenable some naive Buddhists beliefs about this are.)

As I have stated before, and will do so again, Meru Cosmology is, in reality, a mythologized Indo-centric view of the planet, with Jambudvipa being what we today call India.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
heart
Posts: 4455
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: Texts that destroy ""scientific" materialism

Post by heart » Mon Jun 20, 2016 8:06 pm

Malcolm wrote:
heart wrote:Elon Musk is suggesting that there is a very good chance our universe is a computer simulation. Donald Hoffman suggest that whatever we experience with our senses might have very little to do with what reality actually is. An other scientist, his name escapes me, suggest that the universe is a hologram.

I think the Mount Meru Cosmology might still have its day. :smile:
People make a lot of suggestion, but at the end of the day, the sun never has and never will circle the earth (outside of a computer model of course, which would actually show how untenable some naive Buddhists beliefs about this are.)

As I have stated before, and will do so again, Meru Cosmology is, in reality, a mythologized Indo-centric view of the planet, with Jambudvipa being what we today call India.
Could be Malcolm, I don't know. But I really don't think Mount Meru been a visible mountain in India at any time in history.

/magnus
"We are all here to help each other go through this thing, whatever it is."
~Kurt Vonnegut

"The principal practice is Guruyoga. But we need to understand that any secondary practice combined with Guruyoga becomes a principal practice." ChNNR (Teachings on Thun and Ganapuja)

Huseng
Posts: 6337
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 3:19 pm

Re: Texts that destroy ""scientific" materialism

Post by Huseng » Mon Jun 20, 2016 8:08 pm

Malcolm wrote: As a moral and aesthetic cosmolgy, not literally. For example, Edward Henning, probably the worlds leading expert on Kalacakra calculations right now, points out in his lengthy technical book, Kalacakra and the Tibetan Calendar, that the authors of the Kalacakra certainly did not take the Meru cosmology literally because the calculations it offers for calendar making won't work in a Meru Cosmology, though they do work fine in a terra-centric model, just like Ptolmeic astrology (upon which all Indian astrological systems are based).
Are you saying all Indian astrological systems are based on Ptolemy's system? If so, that's not true.

The original Kalacakra authors studied a number of astronomical systems available to them, one of which was most certainly based on a Hellenistic model since it uses a tropical zodiac (in contrast to a sidereal zodiac which was the norm in India -- the Kalacakra sages were quite innovative by the standards of their day). The Kalacakra also describes the corruption of siddhānta-s (astronomical treatises), which the commentary identifies as those of Brahma, Sauram, Yamanakam and Romakam. They took into consideration a number of models with clear foreign sources, so they had to somehow fit the mathematical astronomy they understood (much of Hellenistic in origin) with Meru cosmology.

See some notes here:

http://huayanzang.blogspot.nl/2016/01/z ... ndala.html


However, in earlier periods Buddhists unquestioningly believed in flat earth cosmology. The *Lokasthānābhidharma-śāstra 佛說立世阿毘曇論, for instance, details a flat earth cosmology of Mt. Meru and the four continents, explaining in literal physical terms how these two bodies (which are described as flat drum-shaped deva palaces) orbit above the disc-shaped world at an altitude half that of Mt. Meru, driven by a circuit of wind (vāyu-maṇḍalaka). Solar luminosity is said to be a result of karma of beings. In such a world, the flat earth is stationary while the sun, moon and stars revolve above, not actually dipping below the edge of the world. The apparent arc that the sun follows as it rises and sets as seen from earth is the sun following along its circular path above at an unchanging altitude.

http://huayanzang.blogspot.nl/2015/07/b ... ology.html

This was what Buddhists in India generally believed in.

Really the main reason that Kalacakra writers didn't take Meru cosmology literally was because they were to a large extent literate in the scientific literature of their time. That literature (many extant texts are available and even translated) gives mathematical proofs for round earth cosmology.

In other words, the Kalacakra is a rare example of Buddhist writers embracing a truly scientific system. It is quite atypical.

Huseng
Posts: 6337
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 3:19 pm

Re: Texts that destroy ""scientific" materialism

Post by Huseng » Mon Jun 20, 2016 8:45 pm

Malcolm wrote: Anyway, it is pretty clear that Meru Cosmology is a descendent of Babylonian cosmology, shifted to India.
There's Babylonian numerology throughout Indian cosmologies, but the geography of Mt. Meru is really originally an Indo-European idea. You find it throughout Indo-European civilizations.

Huseng
Posts: 6337
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 3:19 pm

Re: Texts that destroy ""scientific" materialism

Post by Huseng » Mon Jun 20, 2016 8:52 pm

Anders wrote:I don't really see the point of using Buddhist scripture to refute scientific materialism.

I don't see any way it doesn't end up as "ha! foolish scientists. I have taken your false premises and destroyed them... with SCRIPTURE!"

If there is an argument to be made (I think there is) against materialism, I think it has to be formulated within a scientific paradigm to have any impact.
Plenty of Buddhists in India argued against materialism, in particular Dharmakirti.

I think it is a useful mental exercise to challenge the premises of materialism, especially since it is the prevailing worldview of our day and many unconsciously believe in it even if they say otherwise.

Obviously reading and promoting Buddhist refutations of materialism won't have much impact in today's world, but it is worth studying them for personal purposes.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28526
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Texts that destroy ""scientific" materialism

Post by Malcolm » Mon Jun 20, 2016 8:58 pm

heart wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
heart wrote:Elon Musk is suggesting that there is a very good chance our universe is a computer simulation. Donald Hoffman suggest that whatever we experience with our senses might have very little to do with what reality actually is. An other scientist, his name escapes me, suggest that the universe is a hologram.

I think the Mount Meru Cosmology might still have its day. :smile:
People make a lot of suggestion, but at the end of the day, the sun never has and never will circle the earth (outside of a computer model of course, which would actually show how untenable some naive Buddhists beliefs about this are.)

As I have stated before, and will do so again, Meru Cosmology is, in reality, a mythologized Indo-centric view of the planet, with Jambudvipa being what we today call India.
Could be Malcolm, I don't know. But I really don't think Mount Meru been a visible mountain in India at any time in history.

/magnus
If you have read the Mahābharata, it describes people going to the slopes of Meru to picnic. It is not like Buddhists had the sole claim to Meru cosmologies in India.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28526
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Texts that destroy ""scientific" materialism

Post by Malcolm » Mon Jun 20, 2016 9:00 pm

Indrajala wrote:...but the geography of Mt. Meru is really originally an Indo-European idea. You find it throughout Indo-European civilizations.
Maybe so, maybe not.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28526
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Texts that destroy ""scientific" materialism

Post by Malcolm » Mon Jun 20, 2016 9:05 pm

Indrajala wrote:
Malcolm wrote: As a moral and aesthetic cosmolgy, not literally. For example, Edward Henning, probably the worlds leading expert on Kalacakra calculations right now, points out in his lengthy technical book, Kalacakra and the Tibetan Calendar, that the authors of the Kalacakra certainly did not take the Meru cosmology literally because the calculations it offers for calendar making won't work in a Meru Cosmology, though they do work fine in a terra-centric model, just like Ptolmeic astrology (upon which all Indian astrological systems are based).
Are you saying all Indian astrological systems are based on Ptolemy's system? If so, that's not true.
Pretty much, it is true. The language Indians use to describe these things are largely lifted from Greek. I am not suggesting that Indians did not have their own astrological and astronomical ideas prior to the Greeks, for they certainly did, but in terms of calendar making and so on...

The original Kalacakra authors studied a number of astronomical systems available to them, one of which was most certainly based on a Hellenistic model since it uses a tropical zodiac (in contrast to a sidereal zodiac which was the norm in India -- the Kalacakra sages were quite innovative by the standards of their day). The Kalacakra also describes the corruption of siddhānta-s (astronomical treatises), which the commentary identifies as those of Brahma, Sauram, Yamanakam and Romakam. They took into consideration a number of models with clear foreign sources, so they had to somehow fit the mathematical astronomy they understood (much of Hellenistic in origin) with Meru cosmology.

But they didn't really fit it in. You should check out Henning's book, if you have it.

However, in earlier periods Buddhists unquestioningly believed in flat earth cosmology. The *Lokasthānābhidharma-śāstra 佛說立世阿毘曇論, for instance, details a flat earth cosmology of Mt. Meru and the four continents, explaining in literal physical terms how these two bodies (which are described as flat drum-shaped deva palaces) orbit above the disc-shaped world at an altitude half that of Mt. Meru, driven by a circuit of wind (vāyu-maṇḍalaka). Solar luminosity is said to be a result of karma of beings. In such a world, the flat earth is stationary while the sun, moon and stars revolve above, not actually dipping below the edge of the world. The apparent arc that the sun follows as it rises and sets as seen from earth is the sun following along its circular path above at an unchanging altitude.
Yes, it does indeed. But I have doubts that all Buddhists took this literally.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

Huseng
Posts: 6337
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 3:19 pm

Re: Texts that destroy ""scientific" materialism

Post by Huseng » Mon Jun 20, 2016 9:09 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Indrajala wrote:...but the geography of Mt. Meru is really originally an Indo-European idea. You find it throughout Indo-European civilizations.
Maybe so, maybe not.
Norse:

Image

Zoroastrian:

Image

Can't find anything scholarly looking so here's this:

Image

BuddhaFollower
Posts: 602
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:41 pm

Re: Texts that destroy ""scientific" materialism

Post by BuddhaFollower » Mon Jun 20, 2016 9:10 pm

Noone pointed out that Meru cosmology is only valid during lucid dreaming.

Tertons travel the Buddha Fields in lucid dreams using Meru cosmology.
Just recognize the conceptualizing mind.

User avatar
heart
Posts: 4455
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: Texts that destroy ""scientific" materialism

Post by heart » Mon Jun 20, 2016 9:16 pm

Malcolm wrote:
heart wrote:
Could be Malcolm, I don't know. But I really don't think Mount Meru been a visible mountain in India at any time in history.

/magnus
If you have read the Mahābharata, it describes people going to the slopes of Meru to picnic. It is not like Buddhists had the sole claim to Meru cosmologies in India.
The best picnics are on nonexistent mountains. :smile:

/magnus
"We are all here to help each other go through this thing, whatever it is."
~Kurt Vonnegut

"The principal practice is Guruyoga. But we need to understand that any secondary practice combined with Guruyoga becomes a principal practice." ChNNR (Teachings on Thun and Ganapuja)

Huseng
Posts: 6337
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 3:19 pm

Re: Texts that destroy ""scientific" materialism

Post by Huseng » Mon Jun 20, 2016 9:27 pm

Malcolm wrote: Pretty much, it is true. The language Indians use to describe these things are largely lifted from Greek. I am not suggesting that Indians did not have their own astrological and astronomical ideas prior to the Greeks, for they certainly did, but in terms of calendar making and so on...
Ptolemy was not the only Greek astronomer.

There were Greek influences in India from at least the third or fourth centuries CE onward, but that does not mean everything came from Ptolemy. In fact, the Indians generally all used a sidereal zodiac, in contrast to the Hellenistic tropical zodiac, which is why your claim is highly problematic.

Indians in fact did have their own calendar systems (several actually depending on the regions and time periods). They also incorporated these older models into the new systems received from elsewhere throughout the centuries. The naksatra calendar for example was kept intact, though modified in some places to accommodate the twelve zodiac signs. For example, in some instances, instead of being defined unevenly (as was the case in early centuries), they are redefined as all being of equal dimensions. There's also the pakṣa-s and tithi-s, which are indigenous Indian elements.

In the case of mathematical astronomy, much of it was originally Hellenistic in origin, but to claim it goes back to Ptolemy is problematic for a number of reasons. Hipparchus is the more likely figure in this respect. In around the year 400 CE, an unknown figure in India, having access to Greek astronomical texts, often based on the work of Hipparchus and other Hellenistic astronomers, attempted to combine the cosmology and chronology of the Purāṇas with these Greek traditions.

David Pingree, "The Purāṇas and Jyotiḥśāstra Astronomy" in Journal of the American Oriental Society 110/2, 276.


Yes, it does indeed. But I have doubts that all Buddhists took this literally.
Who? What is your evidence for this? Is it just speculation?

Aside from the advanced mathematical astronomy found in the Kalackara, there isn't much in the way of widespread interest in scientific astronomy among Buddhists in India until much later in Buddhist history (such as the eleventh century when the Kalacakra appeared in the world).

The truth of the matter is that Buddhists in India did not really contribute much to objective science: this includes mathematics, astronomy and medicine. Buddhist literature sometimes even forbids monks from studying such subjects.

My opinion is that for most of Buddhist history, almost all Buddhists believed in literal flat earth cosmology and even devised systems to explain the seasons and changes in daylight (they even trace out the circuits of the sun and moon flying around Mt. Meru at a fixed altitude). If you didn't know the earth was spherical in shape, it might seem convincing and it was fair enough that they believed in it in the absence of superior evidence, though you get the impression that Buddhists didn't take scientific astronomy all that seriously until much later in their history, even when it had been available for a few centuries (it really developed in India in the fifth century).

The idea that Buddhism has always been scientific is contrary to the historical evidence that suggests otherwise.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28526
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Texts that destroy ""scientific" materialism

Post by Malcolm » Mon Jun 20, 2016 9:29 pm

Sure, but Babylonian:

Image


Indrajala wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
Indrajala wrote:...but the geography of Mt. Meru is really originally an Indo-European idea. You find it throughout Indo-European civilizations.
Maybe so, maybe not.
Norse:

Image

Zoroastrian:

Image

Can't find anything scholarly looking so here's this:

Image
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

Post Reply

Return to “Tibetan Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: heart, Majestic-12 [Bot], yan kong and 44 guests