Weakness of buddhism teachings

january SG

i feel that buddhist teachings are not connected to the scientific communities.

Buddhist theories lack the system that science has, like peer review, use of equipemnt to measure things, and application and experiment.

january SG

its like physics and chemistry has been delving into the properties of sub atomic particles and building nanomachines to study them and buddhist are still using the books and talking method to further their studies.

SturmDerSchatten SG

First statement: Opinion. So, no way to dismiss it or prove it entirely.

Of course Buddhism, or any philosophy or religion for that matter, doesn't have to use scientific methods. It's like trying to explain atoms theologically; it just doesn't work well enough.

SturmDerSchatten SG

Because in the field of the sciences, we have to discover things for ourselves. No human has true, complete knowledge of everything scientific. Buddhism is similar in the aspect that we must discover the way to Enlightenment for ourselves, but because there are teachers who have discovered the way, books and lessons are used instead.

An Eternal Now SG

I would say rather, that Buddhism provides the scientific method to lead to enlightenment yourself, to realise the same truths that the Buddha and countless other enlightened sages have realised.

ndmmxiaomayi SG

I don’t see any links between Buddhism and Science.

An Eternal Now SG

Buddhism is a science by itself with scientific methods. But it is not chemistry, or physics, or biology.

See Buddhism and Science article

The posts by Concerned_Man,

BUDDHISM AND SCIENCE

Based on a talk given by Ajahn Brahmavamso to lay people at the Dhammaloka Buddhist Centre, Nollamara, Western Australia, on 19th of October 2001

An Eternal Now SG

Buddhism has all the systems that science has.

Buddhism is all about one's observation and realisations, it is not about reading or blindly believing. The aim of Buddhism is for everyone to use its scientific method to reach the same realisation and observation as countless others who have done the same in the past and present. Therefore it is a science.

But of course we do not use physics or other subjects' equipments, just as physics equipment are not used to study biology, chemistry equipments are not used to study geography.

Don't confuse maths with art, biology with physics, etc.

Anyway do watch: Spirituality and the 3 Strands of Deep Science

january SG

maths, physics, chemistry, biology, computer technology are highly interconnected subjects.

Isis SG

Use of equipments to measure things, procedure and experiments are just physical means invented by scientist to determine and understand scientific theories and physical phenomenons. It isn't perfect.

Anyway, i, who have studied engineering discipline, can safety said that experimental procedures and equipments have its constraint in its discipline studies. In some studies, different experimental procedures could actually leads to different results.

Sometime, the conclusion of these experiment or aka the results often does not correlate with what has been observed in reality. This sort of discrepancies has been observed in numerous physic textbook and journals.

zhulin SG

Hallo,

unfortunately my englisch is not very professional. But I hope we will understand each other.

You wrote: i feel that buddhist teachings are not connected to the scientific communities.

Maybe you do not know all different Buddhist Teachings. What the Buddha did teach is natur-science. You have to keep away all religoes views what came after the Buddha.

In our Sangha named Dao Jun Community (found 1934 from Dao Jun in Germany) we have some natur-scientist as members. The last students of Dao Jun died for a couple month. It was the most famous physicist Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker.

For us is the Buddha Teaching a approved method ground of natur-science.

Best regards, Xue Feng Chan-ju

Isis SG

Hi, to clarify ur PM, i didn't say that science isn't connected to Buddhism. I merely, say scientific methods aren't advanced to fully comprehend the Dharma, reality as it is. Some scientific theory does not correlate to observation of what reality is. These are some of the limitation of science. i quote that sentence from Thread-starter for reference.

There is some differences between science and Buddhism.

Probably you could read on this
http://www.buddhistinformation.com/role_of_faith_in_science_and_bud.htm

Btw in Buddhism, we have this Kalama Sutra,

"Rely not on the teacher/person, but on the teaching. Rely not on the words of the teaching, but on the spirit of the words. Rely not on theory, but on experience.
Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it.
Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations.
Do not believe anything because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything because it is written in your religious books.
Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and
elders. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and the benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it."

- the Buddha

It is simple wisdom and not really dogmatic religious view.

Cheers

Isis SG

Btw is natur-science related to naturalism ?

TheGoodEarth SG

Exactly, so why bother whether its science or no science. If we can't reason or use logic but merely rely on what people claimed or say, then it is both dogmatic and religious!

crosshairs SG

Just to be clear here, the perceived “Buddhism” practiced widely in singapore is not buddhism, but a mixture of old traditional chinese beliefs and some other superstitions that have evolved and have continued to evolve even up till this day.

Phaze SG

Good point. I was first exposed to Buddhism in an academic setting. I was quite confused by how the Chinese practice buddhism.

Herzog_Zwei SG

So we can put the situation as prescribed by Buddha to test and see if it always true..