I've read through the link you've provided and frankly, with all
due respect, I find several doubts about it. Is the explanation of
human's origin and the numbers given directly by the Buddha
Himself? The story about the "tasty fluid" suggests that humans
were the first creatures on Earth, which is not the case according
to existing evidence.
Only a few centuries ago, people thought that the world was
flat. The Kalachakra tantra, a buddhist tantra from Buddha
Sakyamuni, already stated that the world was round. It was so much
later that explorers found out that indeed, the world was round.
There are so much things in Buddhism that was only prooven
recently.
Buddhism certainly supports evolution within the animal kingdom.
Evolutions in the animal kingdoms, changes in geographical
situation on Earth. Buddha said that throughout ages, land can turn
into sea, sea can turn into land, land can turn into mountains, and
so on. There will even be a time when all the oceans dry up and
there are just plain land.
However, the Human realm did not originated from the Animal realm,
instead, it's another way round. The Human realm is a good
transition point to all the other realms, because in the human
world, all sorts of karma can be created. I also personally do not
believe that humans are an evolution from the animal kingdom, like
what the website has said, I believe that it's a fallacy.
Modern science has yet to proove ghosts, rebirth, and definitely
astronomers can't find the Heavens in their telescope, so they
can't see the Jhanic planes nor do they believe in existence of
Devas.
My point to you is - there is a lot of things in the world that has
yet been prooven by science.
Throughout history, devas (heavenly beings) have visited human
world, but think about it, why would they want to visit an
unpleasant world like us to them? The Earth is probably like a very
smelly and dirty toilet that you can find in third world countries
or if you lived in the Kampong days. It's unpleasant, but those who
lived there has gotten used to it. If we visit some countries the
toilets, we will want to get the business done quickly, we will not
stay long. This is an analogy given by my dharma teacher.
http://www.gbm-online.com/dharma/Science.html -
Science & Light-Sound heaven
As for the so-called science,
there is no real thing called science. People just made up the name
"science" and called it that. It's actually just a body of
theories. Is this kind of reasoning perfect or not? It depends on
each person's perspective and faculty of understanding. Some people
understand it. Others have not studied science before, and do not
understand science. Does that mean the people who haven't studied
science before lack that kind of reasoning in their own nature? No.
Regardless of whether you've studied science or not, that kind of
reasoning exists in your nature. You cannot say that if someone has
studied science, then he has the ability to understand science, and
if he hasn't studied science, then he doesn't have the ability to
understand science. It's the same with the Buddha-nature; everyone
has it in his own nature.
Science is only a small part of the Buddha-nature, and it is not a
very complete kind of reasoning. You may say people are doing such
and such research in science, and writing about such and such
theories, but actually, those are just the upside-down attachments
of people. They are as if "adding a head on top of a head." Having
nothing to do, they look for something to keep them busy. Busily
doing this and that, they never discover anything. They study
science, investigating back and forth, but they never reach any
real conclusions.
People become attached to science, thinking it's something special.
In fact, it is all inherent in our nature, and you don't need to
look outside. If you seek outside, you'll never find it. You may
say it's real, but that's just the superficial. The real thing can
neither be found nor spoken of. Basically, science doesn't exist.
It's just called science because that's what we call
it.
This article by Venerable Hsuan Hua is similar to Ajahn
Brahmavamso's (the monk who was once a scientist) observation of
many scientists, during his years in the science career, as being
very "dogmatic". Ajahn Brahmavamso has written an article: Buddhism - The Only Real Science
My advise to you is, do not take Buddhist time calculation
literally, there are many variations, but Buddha never gave exact
numbers, but only a rough idea to the level of what he was talking
about. You will read later on.
- The universe is estimated to be about 11+ to 20 billion years
old, while the Earth is about 4.6bil yr old. This figure is much
greater than a complete cycle of the 4 stages(1.344bil). How
accurate are the estimates of a "kalpa"?
Firstly, the statement that 1 great kalpa is "1.344 billion
years" is a calculation by the editor of the website. I personally
do not agree with this calculation to be taken
literally because there's a problem with the Small kalpa - Each
small kalpa is made up of 10 X 2 X 84000 = 16.8 million years,
however, the number "84000" is not to be taken
literally! And so, the medium kalpa, great kalpa and so on, are all
affected because of the first calculation of the small kalpa. The
number 84000 is used in several occasions by Buddha to describe
"uncountable". For example, Buddha held up a cup of water, pointed
to it and said something like... "there are 84000 tiny unseeable
beings", which of course was unimagineable then but explanable now.
84,000 years could be 200,000 years, who knows the exact
calculations? Only Lord Buddha knows through his wisdom. So, don't
you think the lost years could easily be make up? In fact, there is
one calculation by Ajahn Brahmavamso, he's a famous monk who was a
scientist before renuncing. He calculated according to Buddhist
sources that the universe is 12.7 (i know it's 12 point something,
but not too sure whether its 12.7) billion years old, and that's
very accurate to modern findings.
The radiowave analogy can be easily understood. What happens if
the intermediate state of 49 days are over and the deceased juz
cant find any "receiver"? Will he get "dispersed" (hun fei po san)
and cease to exist? Will such a phenomenon of dispersion even
occur?
His bardo state will transform into a ghost if he were not to be
reborned within 49 days, very often it's due to attachments, that
the bardo could not reborn. It does not mean he cease to exist. He
will still continue to be reborn in the 6 realms, undergo
sufferings in samsara, until he walks the path of liberation.
In regards to the phenomenon of dispersion... this one, I cannot
find anything in Buddhist scriptures. But from what I heard...
after 49 days, the bardo will become a ghost and "disperse" into a
messy form and then reform into a shape due to his karma. So if you
have of ghostly stories of sightings of foggy ghosts, it could be
the transformation. I don't know about this, because I've not
witnessed.
What do u mean by a "character"? What is "8th conciousness"?
Characters and the 8th consciousness are related. The 8th
consciousness is like a video tape, it goes all the way back for
kalpas and aeons, and it records things that happened. And then,
you can rewind back and refer to the past happenings. It's
basically our memory consciousness.
Our character is hardened through our habits, these habits (xi qi)
will continue to manifest itself after lives if it has not been
purified. So if you plant a bad seed into your mind, this seed may
grow into bad speech and actions, and may cause further karma. But
if you plant a good seed (e.g generosity, practicing 10 virtuous
deeds), these good seeds will become your character too, and
naturally more virtuous karma in future lives.
The thought manifests as the
word; the word manifests as the deed. The deed develops into habit;
and habit hardens into character. So watch the thought and its ways
with care, and let it spring from love. Born out of concern for all
beings... The shadow follows the body and never leaves. In the same
way, as we think, so we become. - Lord
Buddha[i]
I understand when u said
everything is not permanent, and everything is ever-changing, thus
the mind and soul is not the same all the time. (hmm, i can't find
the link to the story on the flames on the first and third
watch)
Why is it then that the characters, karma and 8th conciousness gets
transferred? There must be some kind of a bonding amongst these
three, it is a "collection" of the three "elements" and it follows
the "person" on to his next life. Rather, it is that which
[i]defines the person.
Karma is a universal balancing law of cause and effect, each
Mind, Speech, Action committed with intent will surely result in a
consequence, with exception of neutral acts like e.g walking, that
one probably doesn't have much karma.
Whatever happens from our Mind, Speech, Actions, gets registered
into the 8th consciousness. This is how we usually get our dreams -
during our dreams, during our semi conscious states, our minds
reconstruct parts of our 8th consciousness into dreams.
As for what links are there, there are the 12 Interdependant Links
of Origination:
http://www.onclipevent.com/archives/sugatagarbha/000384.html
* Dependent on ignorance (avijj±), reactions (saªkh±r±)
arise,
* Dependent on reactions, consciousness (viññ±ºa) arises,
* Dependent on consciousness, mind and body (n±ma-r³pa)
arise,
* Dependent on mind and body, the six sense doors (sa¼±yatana)
arise,
* Dependent on the six sense doors, contact (phassa) arises,
* Dependent on contact, sensation (vedan±) arises,
* Dependent on sensation, craving (taºh±) arises,
* Dependent on craving, clinging (up±d±na) arises,
* Dependent on clinging, becoming (bhava) arises,
* Dependent on becoming, birth (j±ti) arises,
* Dependent on birth, decay and death (jar±, maraºa) arise
Can't it be said that the soul is a collection of these three
elements? Even if they are ever-changing, they are still existent
isn't it?
Buddha said that there is the 5 skandhas, but no such components
as a "soul". If you ask me, I would say that there is the soul, the
soul is our 7th consciousness. But the Buddha no longer has the 7th
consciousness. The 7th consciousness creates a false perception
that we have a fixed "self".
Also, you have to understand what the concept of "emptiness" is all
about in Buddhism. In Buddhism, "Emptiness" does not refer to
absence nor rejection. It is definitely not
nihilism as some people may think. In buddhism, Emptiness means the
emptiness of inherent existences, which means, nothing exists
seperated from the rest of the world. For example, if you sit on a
chair, does the emptiness around the chair reject you? If you stand
up, does the emptiness reject you? It's our minds that make
identities to them, but they themselves have no inherent existence
on their own. All things in the world originates from Emptiness,
they ends with Emptiness too. A watermelon was once only a seed
(Cause). This seed meets with the conditions (Water, nutrients),
and grow into the fruit.
So, all things are just causes and conditions, they are
impermanent, they are interdependant with no inherent
existences.
Can I say that when a person dies, his character, karma, and 8th
conciousness gathers on to a "new body" and his new life begins. At
the end of this new life, these three elements (albeit being
different now) will again gets transferred to another body?
Yes, they get manifested again in the body they are
reborned.
P.S> Is it true that all life consists of character, karma
& 8th Conciousness? Are plants and bacteria considered life? If
so, they would have these three elements too?
Plants and bacteria/viruses are considered life, but they are
inanimate life, they do not have karma, they do not have mind, they
do not have consciousness, and so on (all the things listed in the
12 dependant origination). They have the Dharma Nature*, but they
do not have the sentient being's nature, they do not suffer nor are
reborned in the 6 realms.
How do we know? There are a few methods to test. You can do a
simple test. If you believe a bacteria has a soul, when u try to
kill it, it should try to run away. This is the nature of all
sentient beings, they react to the threat, and they try to save
their lives, whether they are humans, large animals, or small
animals like ants, or smaller ones which we cannot see. If the
bacteria and virus do not run away, it is not a sentient being. I
believe usually bacteria and viruses are too small for
consciousness, thinking, to occur. It's made up of only a coulple
of cells, how do you think that there are nervous systems?
There was once a researcher told my master that he was afraid he
would commit bad karma because his works involves in killing a lot
of microscopic organisms (bacteria/viruses). My master told him
that it's OK.
* Dharma Nature: The intrinsic nature of all things. Used
interchangeably with
"emptiness," "reality."
Thanks again m(_ _)m
Welcome 
