Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
David Bohm physics and western and eastern thought
Jeffrey
Veteran
This is interesting. David Bohm has a view that sounds like Buddhist.
6
Comments
I need to watch this a few times before making a comment - it is as insightful as any dharma talk I have heard.
Mettha
It soothes my westernized brain to listen to a genius scientist/philosopher describe what what my (our) heart already intuits. "Interview with David Bohm" is probably no more extraordinary, in terms of human genius, than the suttas and Teachings that preceeded it by 2500 years. But to my painfully western mind, it was amazing and reassuring, so thank you for sharing it @Jeffrey, a great way to spend 50 minutes
Gassho
If Bohm's description of quantum field theory is in any way true, it almost sounds like someone figured out the Math beneath the unity of all things as described by the Buddha. I already see a lot wrong in my logic, but I'd like to hear what you think is wrong with that kind of logic, too.
Gassho
It's the potential of abuse by a religion that is the danger.
For example, go back to the Galileo affair: (from Wikipedia, a brief reminder): "The Galileo affair was a sequence of events, beginning around 1610, during which Galileo Galilei came into conflict with the Catholic Church over his support of Copernican astronomy. In 1610, Galileo published his Sidereus Nuncius (Starry Messenger), describing the surprising observations that he had made with the new telescope, namely the phases of Venus and the Galilean moons of Jupiter. He went on to propose a theory of tides in 1616, and of comets in 1619. He argued that the tides were evidence for the motion of the Earth, and promoted the heliocentric theory of Nicolaus Copernicus... Following mounting controversy over theology, astronomy and philosophy, the Roman Inquisition tried Galileo in 1633 and found him "gravely suspect of heresy", sentencing him to indefinite imprisonment. This was subsequently commuted to house arrest, under which he remained for the rest of his life." One of the greatest examples of what can happen when you attempt to merge science + religion.
Or think of how the Catholic Church could abuse scientific research on abortion.
In my view, to paraphrase, "Render unto science the things that are science, and unto religion the things that are religious". Of course, there's always the possibility that science may prove some religious belief, although I would guess that more often it disproves religion.
We've come so far that scientific concepts -- such as evolution -- are never mixed into religion. And in turn, neither scientific nor religious beliefs are never mixed into government. Right, Jeffrey????
I am a lot more clear now. What was unclear before, I think, is how I was conceptualizing 'religion' (as used in your post) and how it seems you were, at that moment.
Maybe it would be more accurate to say what David Bohm said in this interview is stunningly similar to what Siddhartha Gotama said to his monks all those years ago. Buddha proposed a nature of reality, perceived without complex scientific mathematics and hardware; today, with all the high math and particle accelerators, the major egghead geniuses are striking similar conclusions to the Buddha.
"Religion" has a formal Webster's dictionary definition, but colloquially 'religion' has such varied meanings that it's a wonder we understand each other at all. The Buddhism becoming the center of my life is NOT a religion in any sense of the word, colloquial or formal. Buddhism IS a religion, or a variety of them, across the world. I would fight hard against Buddhism, as a religion, to be mixed with politics or science or any public institution.
Gassho
From The Literal Meaning of Genesis by Augustine (354-430): And here is Origen (185-254) in De Principiis: These Christians from the the first four centuries of Christianity would be shaking their heads at those Christians today railing against evolution (the Catholic church still has no problem with evolution).
In the case of Galileo, it was primarily the Lutherans who caused the Catholic church to try to save face politically-- it was many Reformers who pointed fingers at the Catholic church (who supported and sponsored Copernicus' efforts), saying "See how devilish these Catholics are-- they don't even believe the earth is literally the center of the universe!" (I'm not defending the Catholic church, here BTW, just putting it in the context of what was actually happening regarding Galileo's imprisonment).
Science and religion both suffer in the process. Dietrich Bonhoeffer warned of this kind of reductionist thinking in his Letters and Papers from Prison: So rather than having faith in God, people are left with mere ideological belief and superstition.
More in relation to Buddhism, what good does it do me to "know" that quantum physics jives with sunyata (assuming that it were an "empirical fact")? The point of Buddhist practice is to to REALize it within oneself, not to prove it. That would be a terrible mistake to make and would be fatal to Buddhist practice, just as many Christians made the mistake of looking to science as an "objective" confirmation of their faith. Why do you think all those Zen masters kept whacking their students?
I appreciate so much the efforts of Augustine and Origen and Meister Eckhart and Thomas Merton among others, who I leaned heavily upon while struggling to REALize the Cosmos as a Christian. It just wasn't my path, apparently, but we owe them too much to put down here. My little problem with 'worshipping' a man dead now for 2000 years and his Father, a reformed sun god called Jehovah, was more than I could manage, even unpacked by the Christian Mystics.
The following paragraph is a rant and a tangent. Sorry in advance. It is the REST of the followers of Christianity, or it's fellow sun god religions, that have created a mockery of religion, one that readily absorbs politics and power, that have produced atrocities from the combo. "American" political Christianity, in particular, is an outright blasphemy. The rest of the world's Christians look at how the conservative politicians have USED Christianity to gather up voters and polluted a peaceful, inclusive Jesus into a gun-toting, Food Stamp-denying, Homo-Hating, Tea Party-drinking mockery of his Teachings.
Riverflow, I don't 'see' that anything fatal could happen to Buddhist practice by acknowledging the relatively recent advent of 'science' also jives or even 'proves empirically' the Buddha's cosmology. Not to us Buddhadharma students
As for Zen masters whacking their students . . . I don't understand that in any other way than interpersonal violence, which I can see no good reason for, no matter how dense the student :shrug:
Gassho
The scientific method means the result can be measured, and the experiment reproduced and the same results will be gotten each time. So far, there have been applications of scientific method to measure results in those using 'mindfulness meditation', which show significant results. The problem is the scientific method tends to knock over and smash the delicate little psychological things it's trying to test. A work in progress, I hope.
Gassho
Expounding on this in my own way in my own scribblings earlier this year:
Buddhist doctrines are not meant to provide objective information about the world “out there.” Even when these doctrines happen to coincide with scientific discoveries, it must be remembered that the methodology and aims of science are very different from those of Buddhism. The truth that the scientific method discovers is conceptual. Within the context of science, this is certainly laudable. Such discoveries may even help one’s understanding of Buddhism. But science cannot prove Buddhism to be “true”—this is to misunderstand the purpose of Buddhism, its practices, and its doctrines.
The “truth” of Buddhism is insight—and this insight is not a concept: it cannot be replicated; it cannot be grasped. It is neither “objective” nor “subjective.” It can only be real-ized intimately through the lifelong process of self-inquiry and daily mindfulness. Buddhist doctrines function as upaya, skillful means. They are like lenses designed to bring clarity to self-inquiry. They are insightful methods to examine our perceptions and thoughts. Approaching Buddhist doctrines as information about the world is to not real-ize their fullest potential—in fact, as information, these doctrines are reduced to just another view about reality. This can potentially lead to dogmatism, which is counterproductive in learning non-attachment (including non-attachment to views).
Rather than providing information, Buddhist doctrines are a means to develop insight into the interbeing of one’s own “self.” Emptiness, dependent co-origination, impermanence, no-self, etc. may appear to be objective propositions about the world. If we approach Buddhism as only information rather than as methods for awakening, it becomes all too easy to misunderstand Buddhism as merely nihilistic. Buddhism can only appear to be nihilistic when we cling to the notion that emptiness and impermanence are negative qualities about “existence”—and that life ought to be otherwise.
But the purpose of Buddhism is to help cultivate self-inquiry and compassion. Emptiness and impermanence are the very basis for compassion in Buddhism. It is because of impermanence that there arises the opportunity for nourishing positive seeds within ourselves and in others. It is because of emptiness that we can real-ize that compassion for ourselves and for others are seamlessly interwoven together. Gaining insight through emptiness and impermanence helps to deepen one’s compassion.
The Buddhadharma is a path upon which one walks—it is not a body of “correct information” that one should simply agree with. Rather, Buddhist doctrines provide a means of skillfully guiding oneself one step at a time down the path of awakening understanding and compassion.