Buddhism and Science article
Excerpts only, pls see entire website on URL above:
Originally posted by concerned_man:
Science and Buddhism
When a Buddhist looks through a telescope, they are not scared by
what they might find. They are not scared of science. Science is an
essential part of Buddhism. If science can disprove rebirth, then
Buddhists should give up the idea of rebirth. If science disproves
non-self, and shows there is a self, then all Buddhists should
abandon non-self. If science proves there is no such thing as
kamma, but instead there is a big God up in the sky, then all
Buddhists should believe in God. That is, if it's provable science.
Buddhism has no sacred cows. However, I encourage you to do those
experiments for yourselves. I'll bet you will find out that there
is no one 'in there'. You will find out about kamma. You will find
out you've been here before, that this is not your first
life. If you don't behave yourselves in this life,
you'll have another life to come yet. Do you think you are finished
with nappies, with school? Do you really want to go through all
that again? If not be careful.
So, here is my thinking about science and Buddhism. I think that
Buddhism is pure science, a science that doesn't stop 'out there',
but also investigates the mind, the 'being', the 'ghost in the
machine'. And it doesn't disregard any anomalies. Buddhism takes
everything as its data, especially experience, and looks at it
scientifically. It is incredibly successful.
One of the reasons why people celebrate science is because of all
of its achievements in technology. One of the reasons why Buddhism
is growing these days is because of all of its achievements in the
'technology of the mind'. It solves problems. It explains mental
difficulties. Buddhism succeeds in solving those inner problems
because it has all these strategies, these ancient 'gizmos', which
actually work. If you try some of these Buddhist gizmos, you will
find out for yourself that they produce the goods, they solve your
inner suffering and pain. That is why Buddhism is growing. I think
that Buddhism will supplant science!
Thank you very much.
[/b]
Originally posted by concerned_man:
Come and See for Yourself
If you had just one person who had been confirmed as medically dead
who could describe to the doctors, as soon as they were revived,
what had been said, and done during that period of death, wouldn't
that be pretty convincing? When I was doing elementary particle
physics there was a theory that required for its proof the
existence of what was called the 'W' particle. At the cyclotron in
Geneva, CERN funded a huge research project, smashing atoms
together with an enormous particle accelerator, to try and find one
of these 'W' particles. They spent literally hundreds of millions
of pounds on this project. They found one, just one 'W' particle. I
don't think they have found another since. But once they found one
'W' particle, the researchers involved in that project were given
Nobel prizes for physics. They had proved the theory by just
finding the one 'W' particle. That's good science. Just one is
enough to prove the theory.
When it comes to things we don't like to believe, they call just
one experience, one clear factual undeniable experience, an
anomaly. Anomaly is a word in science for disconcerting evidence
that we can put in the back of a filing cabinet and not look at
again, because it's threatens our worldview. It undermines what we
want to believe. It is threatening to our dogma. However, an
essential part of the scientific method is that theories have to be
abandoned in favour of the evidence, in respect of the facts. The
point is that the evidence for a mind independent of the brain is
there. But once we admit that evidence, and follow the scientific
method, then many cherished theories, what we call 'sacred cows'
will have to be abandoned.
When we see something that challenges any theory, in science or in
religion, we should not ignore the evidence. We have to change the
theory to fit the facts. That is what we do in Buddhism. All the
Dhamma of the Buddha, everything that he taught, if it does not fit
the experience, then we should not accept it. We should not accept
the Buddha's words in contradiction of experience. That is clearly
stated in the Kālāma Sutta. (AN III, 65) The Buddha said do not
believe because it is written in the books, or even if I say it.
Don't just believe because it is tradition, or because it sounds
right, or because it's comforting to you. Make sure it fits your
experience. The existence of mind, independent of the brain, fits
experience. The facts are there.
Sometimes, however, we cannot trust the experts. You cannot trust
Ajahn Brahm. You cannot trust the scientific journals. Because
people are often biased. Buddhism gives you a scientific method for
your practice. Buddhism says, do the experiment and find out for
your self if what the Buddha said is true or not. Check out your
experience. For example, develop the method to test the truth of
past lives, rebirth and reincarnation. Don't just believe it with
faith, find out for yourself. The Buddha has given a scientific
experiment that you can repeat.
Until you understand the law of kamma, which is part of Buddhism,
kamma is just a theory. Do you believe that there is a God 'up
there' who decides when you can be happy or unhappy? Or is
everything that happens to you just chance? Your happiness and your
suffering in life, your joy, your pain and disappointments, are
they deserved? Are you responsible or is it someone else's fault?
Is it mere chance that we are rich or poor? Is it bad luck when we
are sick and die at a young age? Why? You can find the true answer
for yourself. You can experience the law of kamma through deep
meditation. When the Buddha sat under the Bodhi tree at Bodhgaya,
the two knowledge's he realized just before his Enlightenment were
the knowledge from experience of the truth of rebirth, and the
knowledge from experience of the Law of kamma. This was not theory,
not just more thinking, not something worked out from discussions
around the coffee table this was realization from deep experience
of the nature of mind. You too can have that same experience.
All religions in the world except Buddhism maintain the existence
of a soul. They affirm a real 'self', an 'essence of all being', a
'person', a 'me'. Buddhism says there is no self! Who is right?
What is this 'ghost in the machine'? Is it a soul, is it a being,
or is it a process? What is it? When the Buddha said that there is
no one in here, he never meant that to be just believed, he meant
that to be experienced. The Buddha said, as a scientific fact, that
there is no 'self'. But like any scientific fact, it has to be
experienced each one for themselves, paccattam veditabbo viññūhī.
Many of you chant those Pāli words every day. It is basic
scientific Buddhism. You have to keep an open mind. You don't
believe there is 'no self', you don't believe there is a 'self'
both beliefs are dogmatism. Keep an open mind until you complete
the experiment. The experiment is the practice of sila, samādhi and
pañña, (virtue, meditation and insight). The experiment is Buddhist
practice. Do the same experimental procedures that the Buddha did
under the Bodhi tree. Repeat it and see if you get the same
results. The result is called Enlightenment.
Men and women have repeated that experiment many times over the
centuries. It is in the laboratory of Buddhist practice that the
Enlightened Ones, the Arahants, arise. The Arahants are the ones
who have done the experiment and found the result. That's why
Buddhism always has been the scientific way. It is the way of
finding out for your self the truth of Enlightenment.
