docu - A War On Science

sinweiy SG

channelnewsasia
Sunday 11 June 2006
7:32 PM -- A War On Science
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/cna/showtime/index.htm

i heard the preview on radio, seems like a very interesting documentry.
a must watch. hope i don't forget.

/\

sinweiy SG

more info:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/war.shtml

A War on Science
The theory of evolution is under attack from a controversial new idea called intelligent design. But is it science?

k. seems like it's more for Christian. Razz
but see if we got 'explaination' for it. Cool

/\

neutral_onliner SG

interesting Cool

Simply put, Intelligent Design(Christian) posits that the universe needs a cause, but that the cause is a creature who designs and plans like a limited human being (but with supernatural powers), and this creature appeared from nowhere (by accident?) and needs no cause or creator of its own (the first cause idea). Infinite Causes(Buddhist), on the other hand, is so named because of the belief that there are an infinite number of causes and conditions that made the world the way it is. There is no first cause or one cause because all things are intertwined in an endless web of causality with no beginning and no end.

An Eternal Now SG

Here is my humble views.

Both evolution and intelligent designs cannot fully explain how things are going. Evolution suggests that we are all ever improving and evolving, if that is the case then how come every other animal in the world does not evolve to have the kind of intelligence that mankind possess. And since there is 'evolution' there might also be 'de-evolution'. It's like you cannot have Yin without Yang. Wink In Buddhism humanity will go through both stages in cycles and in different ages. And intelligent design cannot really explain our universe in a sense because it usually means a personal God who designs and creates the universe in his own will - and that will bring a lot of problems and contradictions and a lot of questions will be raised.

However, we can also say, both evolution and intelligent design can in a sense explain how things are going about. Evolution posits that humanity and the world of consciousness - including animals, is ever changing and adapting to different situations. That is also known as Impermency. On a deeper level our evolutionary path is determined by our mind, as Ajahn Brahmavamso spoke of how it is observed that cats 'evolved' when they are thrown in a place of total darkness for generations (of the cats), the cats grew much longer and bigger ears because they desired so to be able to strengthen their listening powers to survive in substitution of their visual senses.

Then how about intelligent design? As seen in my current signature,
The whole universe is Intelligence in its essence. The underlying intelligence is the Source of the universe, from longchen's website (although he's not a Buddhist but I'm posting here): What we thought of as this spacious void of pure Awareness may not be a void but, in fact, is filled with information, intelligence and knowledge. This is depicted as the light source in the diagram below. It is the Source which holds within itself all the experiences and wisdom. It can be liken to a light source. The ray depicts informations emanating from the Source. - http://www.closing-gaps.org/eternal-watcher.htm

----

A.H Almaas (taken from the interview):

44:55 onwards:

"...It's the intelligence of true nature or the brilliance and the luminosity of true nature. And true nature is really the nature of everything. Nature of our consciousness, of soul, of who we are, is also its nature. The Earth, the universe, all the animals, thats the meaning. The moment we recognise the '??' of true nature. The moment we see that, we see it's beyond time and space. The fact that it is beyond time and space, it means it pervades all time and space ; time-space not restricted. So anything that is in space is pervaded by it and really it is the underlying Truth. That's why really, I usually think of the universe as intelligent. In a sense it has the potential for intelligence. The moment we recognise that the universe has an underlying spiritual nature - Consciousness, or Awareness; Luminosity. The moment we recognise that, it makes sense, the universe would have intelligence. Because intelligence unveil that characteristic of that spiritual nature; ground luminosity. So because of that it's very clear that the universe is developing in some kind of intelligent way; has intelligence in its development. And now the scientific community has come up with this concept of intelligent design, seeing that there is intelligence in the universe, meaning that the theory of evolution, the things have changed, the universe - the way they change, and transforms, doesn't really fit with the belief that all are results by accident or chance. So there is some kind of pattern '??' as well, they call it intelligent design and different people have different explanations for it. But for somebody who is aware of the spiritual ground.. already known.. how it is there and manifesting but its manifesting in human beings most intensely because there is an intelligence underlying thing that manifests everything and it is also moving in an intelligent way. If we look at the evolution, we see that it is moving towards greater revelation with that inherent intelligence. And human beings at the present time as far as we know are the ones who can reveal it most '..?'..."

---
Taken from a post from Recycled Universe: Theory Could Solve Cosmic Mystery

Exerpt from Article:
The Eternal Buddha Nature
by Venerable Master Hsuan Hua

....Where do all of those four kinds of beings come from? What is their origin? Their origin is the Buddhanature. If there was no Buddhanature, everything would be annihilated. The Buddhanature is the only thing that passes through ten thousand generations and all time without being destroyed. From the Buddhanature comes Bodhisattvas, Sound Hearers, Those Enlightened to Conditions, gods, asuras, people, animals, ghosts, and hell beings. Those are the beings of the Ten Dharma Realms, and the Ten Dharma Realms are not apart from a single thought of the mind. This single thought of the mind is just the seed of the Buddhanature. It's just another name for the Buddhanaturethe one true thought.....

...Well, ultimately, everything comes from the Buddhanature. Everything comes into being naturally: from nothing something manifests and that something transforms once more into nothing. This happens without end, over and over again; an infinite on-going series of production and transformation...

An Eternal Now SG

Also according to the Buddha our original human ancestors, the first conscious beings on this Earth originated from other worlds. In particular the 2nd Jhana plane, in the 'Abhasvara' plane where beings communicate not by sound but by light/emitting auras, they do not have sexual differences and the plane is a very blissful 'celestial' (jhanic planes) realm.

See: Nu Wah

So in a way, there is also some level of similarities with the third kind of theory, Interventionism which explains that humans were originally derived from extraterrestrial sources. Laughing

paperflower SG

if one says that, a house is built by man, an idea is created by man, it is logical make sense and it is evidently an intelligent design to make an existence.

if one says a whole universe is created by a single power, man trees animals nature are created by a single power, then if it is called an intelligent design; then i would say the design doesn't look intelligent at all.

here one has become naive in overlooking the depth and has become very limited.

to add on,

the complexity of the universe is ever changing. when there are changes, how can there be a program to control such changes? even programs need to be updated or improved or upgraded or even, discarded.

it is not a toy.

evolution,
when it is there since from beginless time, it is easy to be replaced with new ideas.

its nature of beings to replace old with new. but what is there is always there.

justdoit77 SG

Actually, I still believe evolution than anything else. But my definition of evolution is a bit different from darwin and the rest of scientists.

I totally agree what buddhism sutras explain, although I still trying to experience the underlying truth. It says that human are actually sort of like fallen deva that when they come to the earth, they feel the desire to eat and drink the food on earth. Gradually, their auras diminished and they begin to have worldly attachment and so on.

Isn't it a kind of evolvement from a state to another state.
People who practise meditation will also know that, if they practise meditation in the right way diligently, their 5 senses or even 6 senses become more sensitive and clear over time, they can see light of diff wavelength, their look will also appear more energetic and calm. It means the changes is not just spiritually but also physically.

I think we should not just limit our perception on evolution to darwin's concept. In fact, Buddha never reject the idea of evolution also.

Pls criticize. Smile

neutral_onliner SG

The teachings of the Buddha make it very clear that the world and ourselves--and we are not separate from the world--have evolved because of the arising and passing away of various causes and conditions and that we and the world as it is are not the products of any designing god or demiurge--nor for that matter the products of any design.

As the Buddha's teachings are directed to what we should do in the future, the details of how we and the world evolved are not significant from the point of view of a would-be follower of the Buddha Dharma. Whether or not Mother Nature plays hopscotch or information can escape from black holes may be interesting but are not likely to have any bearing on whether we can live our lives so that we and all beings will be happy.

There is no conflict between the Buddha's teachings and the scientific view of how the world has evolved. On the other hand, there is a blatant conflict between the doctrine of ``creationism'' that is espoused by some Christian sects that fear to be exposed to scientific truth, on the one hand, and the teachings of the Buddha, on the other. A basic teaching of the Buddha is that one should not rely on any teaching as a matter of faith but rather only because one truly recognizes for oneself that it is true.

Cool

sinweiy SG

aya, label, label, label....intelligent design/creation/God/Dao/Luminosity/Thusness/Oneness/Original mindDharmakaya/Buddhanature/Pure Consciouness is One not two. no big deal for me really. no duality. just level of understanding of it differ from individually to individually only. eventually Will Thus come back to the same thing...aya.

ref: True Mind is all doable:
http://sg.search.yahoo.com/search?p=%E8%87%AA%E6%80%A7+%E6%97%A0%E6%89%80%E4%B8%8D%E8%83%BD&y=All+the+Web&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-tab-web-t&x=wrt

(note: all doable is not exactly "all powerful")

/\

An Eternal Now SG

Thats right.. anyway to conclude my stance, Each theory in some way is flawed, bound to have controversies but in another way each theory also does point to certain levels of truths. But theories often does not contain the whole truth, it keeps on changing according to times.

But ultimately Buddhism teaches one to go beyond the theories and to SEE the way it is...

sinweiy SG

Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
A.H Almaas (taken from the interview):

44:55 onwards:

"...It's the intelligence of true nature or the brilliance and the luminosity of true nature. ...[/i][/b]

Amituofo=Infinity Life & Light. Wink

Q: You have said that according to Buddhist philosophy there is no Creator, no God of creation, and this may initially put off many people who believe in a divine principle. Can you explain the difference between the Vajrayana Primordial Buddha and a Creator God?

A: I understand the Primordial Buddha, also known as Buddha Samantabhadra, to be the ultimate reality, the realm of the Dharmakaya-- the space of emptiness--where all phenomena, pure and impure, are dissolved. This is the explanation taught by the Sutras and Tantras. However, in the context of your question, the tantric tradition is the only one which explains the Dharmakaya in terms of Inherent clear light, the essential nature of the mind; this would seem imply that all phenomena, samsara and nirvana, arise from this clear and luminous source. Even the New School of Translation came to the conclusion that the "state of rest" of a practitioner of the Great Yoga--Great Yoga implies here the state of the practitioner who has reached a stage in meditation where the most subtle experience of clear light has been realized--that for as long as the practitioner remains in this ultimate sphere he or she remains totally free of any sort of veil obscuring the mind, and is immersed in a state of great bliss.

We can say, therefore, that this ultimate source, clear light, is close to the notion of a Creator, since all phenomena, whether they belong to samsara or nirvana, originate therein. But we must be careful in speaking of this source, we must not be led into error. I do not mean chat there exists somewhere, there, a sort of collective clear light, analogous to the non-Buddhist concept of Brahma as a substratum. We must not be inclined to deify this luminous space. We must understand that when we speak of ultimate or inherent clear light, we are speaking on an individual level.

Likewise, when we speak of karma as the cause of the universe we eliminate the notion of a unique entity called karma existing totally independently. Rather, collective karmic impressions, accumulated individually, are at the origin of the creation of a world. When, in the tantric context, we say that all worlds appear out of clear light, we do not visualize this source as a unique entity, but as the ultimate clear light of each being. We can also, on the basis of its pure essence, understand this clear light to be the Primordial Buddha. All the stages which make up the life of each living being--death, the intermediate state, and rebirth--represent nothing more than the various manifestations of the potential of clear light. It is both the most subtle consciousness and energy. The more clear light loses its subtlety, the more your experiences take shape.

In this way, death and the intermediate state are moments where the gross manifestations emanating from clear light are reabsorbed. At death we return to that original source, and from there a slightly more gross state emerges to form the intermediate state preceding rebirth. At the stage of rebirth, clear light is apparent in a physical incarnation. At death we return to this source. And so on. The ability to recognize subtle clear light, also called the Primordial Buddha, is equivalent to realizing nirvana, whereas ignorance of the nature of clear light leaves us to wander in the different realms of samsaric existence.

This is how I understand the concept of the Primordial Buddha. It would be a grave error to conceive of it as an independent and autonomous existence from beginningless time. If we had to accept the idea of an independent creator, the explanations given in the Pramanavartika, the "Compendium of Valid Knowledge" written by Dharmakirti, and in the ninth chapter of the text by Shantideva, which completely refutes the existence per se of all phenomena, would be negated. This, in turn, would refute the notion of the Primordial Buddha. The Buddhist point of view does not accept the validity of affirmations which do not stand up to logical examination. If a sutra describes the Primordial Buddha as an autonomous entity, we must be able to interpret this assertion without taking it literally. We call this type of sutra an "interpretable" sutra.

http://hhdl.dharmakara.net/hhdlquotes22.html

/\

neutral_onliner SG

Intelligent Design: There is only one universe, and since it was designed by Jehovah, a great and powerful god, the universe we are in must be the BEST UNIVERSE POSSIBLE for physical human life. A divinely Designed universe by definition cannot fall apart or decay for any reason. (This means that entropy, not evolution, is the real threat to the Creationist ideology. )

Infinite Causes: There are many universes, of many possible types. We happen to be in one. There may be both natural and supernatural causes that set the physical conditions of our universe the way they are and allowed life of our type to come into being. However, there is no need to believe that this is the best possible universe, since the Buddha does not design or build worlds. (In Buddhism the Savior is not the Creator.)

Evaluation: Although there is no way to travel between universes or prove they exist, we can prove that the universe we are in now is not the BEST UNIVERSE POSSIBLE for our form of life. Even creationists admit this, and all say the universe WAS perfect and then fell apart due to the imperfections of beings within it (who were also Perfectly Designed).

plo30360 SG

ID is not to be confused with Christianity even though it may sound or borrow terms from Christianity.

Even creationists admit this, and all say the universe WAS perfect and then fell apart due to the imperfections of beings within it (who were also Perfectly Designed).

This is false. In Gen, God created things to be good NOT perfect. Perfection will only come when all things have come to pass.

I wonder why recently this onslaught of programs to make theists look like they have a war on science. 1st, it was national geographic and now channel newsasia. I seriously wonder what's their agenda?

neutral_onliner SG

Originally posted by plo30360:
ID This is false. In Gen, God created things to be [b]good NOT perfect. Perfection will only come when all things have come to pass.

[/b]

The Creationist view that humans were created in the image of God often went along with the belief that some humans were closer to the image God intended and others were degenerate forms or otherwise cursed with inferiority for Biblical reasons. There were pseudoscientific theories about how races formed and changed long before evolution was discovered--the change being down from a perfect creation not up from the apes.

God 'creation' concept fail when faced with reality (the 99% similarity between human and chimp DNA is harsh)

plo30360 SG

Misinterpretation, quite similar to how SOKKA Gai Gai has misnterpreted Buddhist teachings.

There were pseudoscientific theories about how races formed and changed long before evolution was discovered--the change being down from a perfect creation not up from the apes.

The BIble was not meant to a scince textbook. It is infalliable and inerrant in all that it intends to convey. Of course, I understand as a Buddhist you don't belive that

God 'creation' concept fail when faced with reality (the 99% similarity between human and chimp DNA is harsh)

I do not see how it fails. You have the misconception that all Christians reject evolution. Howvever, I would like to clarify Christians reject Darwin's (and neo-darwin's) theory of evolution.

neutral_onliner SG

Originally posted by plo30360:
[b]The BIble was not meant to a scince textbook. It is infalliable and inerrant in all that it intends to convey.
b]

GE 1:3-5 On the first day, God created light, then separated light and darkness.
GE 1:14-19 The sun (which separates night and day) wasn't created until the fourth day.

GE 1:11-12, 26-27 Trees were created before man was created.
GE 2:4-9 Man was created before trees were created.

GE 1:20-21, 26-27 Birds were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before birds were created.

GE 1:24-27 Animals were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before animals were created.

GE 1:26-27 Man and woman were created at the same time.
GE 2:7, 21-22 Man was created first, woman sometime later.

GE 1:28 God encourages reproduction.
LE 12:1-8 God requires purification rites following childbirth which, in effect, makes childbirth a sin. (Note: The period for purification following the birth of a daughter is twice that for a son.)

GE 1:31 God was pleased with his creation.
GE 6:5-6 God was not pleased with his creation.
(Note: That God should be displeased is inconsistent with the concept of omniscience.)

GE 2:4, 4:26, 12:8, 22:14-16, 26:25 God was already known as "the Lord" (Jahveh or Jehovah) much earlier than the time of Moses.
EX 6:2-3 God was first known as "the Lord" (Jahveh or Jehovah) at the time of the Egyptian Bondage, during the life of Moses.

GE 2:17 Adam was to die the very day that he ate the forbidden fruit.
GE 5:5 Adam lived 930 years.

GE 2:15-17, 3:4-6 It is wrong to want to be able to tell good from evil.
HE 5:13-14 It is immature to be unable to tell good from evil.

GE 4:4-5 God prefers Abel's offering and has no regard for Cain's.
2CH 19:7, AC 10:34, RO 2:11 God shows no partiality. He treats all alike.

GE 4:9 God asks Cain where his brother Able is.
PR 15:3, JE 16:17, 23:24-25, HE 4:13 God is everywhere. He sees everything. Nothing is hidden from his view.

GE 4:15, DT 32:4, IS 34:8 God is a vengeful god.
EX 15:3, IS 42:13, HE 12:29 God is a warrior. God is a consuming fire.
EX 20:5, 34:14, DT 4:24, 5:9, 6:15, 29:20, 32:21 God is a jealous god.
LE 26:7-8, NU 31:17-18, DT 20:16-17, JS 10:40, JG 14:19, EZ 9:5-7 The Spirit of God is (sometimes) murder and killing.
NU 25:3-4, DT 6:15, 9:7-8, 29:20, 32:21, PS 7:11, 78:49, JE 4:8, 17:4, 32:30-31, ZP 2:2 God is angry. His anger is sometimes fierce.
2SA 22:7-8 (KJV) "I called to the Lord; ... he heard my voice; ... The earth trembled and quaked, ... because he was angry. Smoke came from his nostrils. Consuming fire came from his mouth, burning coals blazed out of it."
EZ 6:12, NA 1:2, 6 God is jealous and furious. He reserves wrath for, and takes revenge on, his enemies. "... who can abide in the fierceness of his anger? His fury is poured out like fire, and rocks are thrown down by him."
2CO 13:11, 14, 1JN 4:8, 16 God is love.
GA 5:22-23 The fruit of the Spirit of God is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.

GE 4:16 Cain went away (or out) from the presence of the Lord.
JE 23:23-24 A man cannot hide from God. God fills heaven and earth.

GE 6:4 There were Nephilim (giants) before the Flood.
GE 7:21 All creatures other than Noah and his clan were annihilated by the Flood.
NU 13:33 There were Nephilim after the Flood.

GE 6:6. EX 32:14, NU 14:20, 1SA 15:35, 2SA 24:16 God does change his mind.
NU 23:19-20, IS 15:29, JA 1:17 God does not change his mind.

GE 6:19-22, 7:8-9, 7:14-16 Two of each kind are to be taken, and are taken, aboard Noah's Ark.
GE 7:2-5 Seven pairs of some kinds are to be taken (and are taken) aboard the Ark.

GE 7:1 Noah was righteous.
JB 1:1,8, JB 2:3 Job was righteous.
LK 1:6 Zechariah and Elizabeth were righteous.
JA 5:16 Some men are righteous, (which makes their prayers effective).
1JN 3:6-9 Christians become righteous (or else they are not really Christians).
RO 3:10, 3:23, 1JN 1:8-10 No one was or is righteous.

Scriptures, no matter how holy, are after all, the work of human beings.Very often the scriptures give stories and practices which are outdated and do not apply to our present way of life. As such, we should not simply follow such ideas and practices.

The early Buddhist Scripture or Tripitaka has been estimated to be about eleven times the Christian Bible, and the Chinese Tripitaka or the Tibetan Canon is many times larger than that. Despite this fact, the Buddha does not insist that we follow the Scripture blindly

DO NOT BELIEVE ANYTHING BECAUSE IT ACCORDS WITH THE HOLY SCRIPTURES

-Buddha

neutral_onliner SG

ok thnks for the info Cool

Btw i never have the misconception that all Christians reject evolution. Cool

plo30360 SG

You know when you take verses out of context, its easy to show that your points are valid. However as I've stated before we all know how such distorions can seem convincing. Just like Sokka Gai Gai

Scriptures, no matter how holy, are after all, the work of human beings.Very often the scriptures give stories and practices which are outdated and do not apply to our present way of life. As such, we should not simply follow such ideas and practices.

Again, as I stated as a Buddhist you believe that every thing is subject to change and nothing is ever the same. However from our point of view, there are certain things which will remain true for eternity.

The early Buddhist Scripture or Tripitaka has been estimated to be about eleven times the Christian Bible, and the Chinese Tripitaka or the Tibetan Canon is many times larger than that. Despite this fact, the Buddha does not insist that we follow the Scripture blindly

DO NOT BELIEVE ANYTHING BECAUSE IT ACCORDS WITH THE HOLY SCRIPTURES

-Buddha

Well informed Christians do not follow Scripture blindly, we follow Scripture because we examined it for ourselves and found it to be true.

Test everything. Hold on to the good. (Thessalonians 5:21)

When I replied here, I was interested to know, why does it seem that 2 mods of this forum make it look like theism is having a war on science?

sinweiy SG

The BIble was not meant to a scince textbook. It is infalliable and inerrant in all that it intends to convey. Of course, I understand as a Buddhist you don't belive that ]

i also understand this 'Jesuitically cunning logic'.

http://home.btclick.com/scimah/argumentsagainstbuddhism.htm

quote:

The Pope is against Buddhism because it is a negative soteriology and the Pope is infallible.
Whatever the Pope says must be true. We know whatever He says is true because he's infallible. We know he's infallible because he says so and whatever he says must be true.We know whatever He says is true because he's infallible. We know he's infallible because he says so and whatever he says must be true....... Alright you've got me beat! I can't argue against such Jesuitically cunning logic.

no offense.
Smile
/\

sinweiy SG

Originally posted by plo30360:
When I replied here, I was interested to know, why does it seem that 2 mods of this forum make it look like theism is having ?

3 mods? think it's more like creationists.
i don't know why they name the title of the show "a war on science". u have to ask them.

theism
n : the doctrine or belief in the existence of a God or gods

actually Buddhism also can belong to monotheism or polytheism. Very Happy
as we stress on mind. if there's no u, there's no mind, then there's no god oso. mind is the originate of all phenomona. one god is our mind. many god is also our mind; no god is also our mind.

btw Buddhism also don't think human come from apes, by evolutionist.

/\