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.
Is Buddhism Scientific, or Mystical?
compassionate_warrior
Veteran
Is mysticism part of Buddhism, or is Buddhism purely "scientific"? Are the two incompatible?
0
Comments
Depends on the person following the teachings I guess. There are some cults that seem to do quite mystical things, but these are cultural and in the West I think those don't exist.
I'd call the way I see it scientific beyond science. Why beyond science?
I personally have never seen an electron up close. Or a photon or whatever. Yet still I think it is quite reasonable they exist in some way or the other. But still these are just models and I have to believe the one who explains it to me on his word and his experiments.
Also often certain models that were acceptable in science for years are proven to be wrong afterward. That's why I sometimes wonder why people put such great faith in science, maybe sometimes people put more faith in science than in themselves.
However what you experience in meditation, now that's something you can REALLY trust and see for yourself. You see for example a thought, you just KNOW it was a thought. Nobody had to come and explain to you how a thought works and how it behaves before you understand what it is. And nobody can ever change that.
With metta,
Sabre
Mysticism – in my book – is replacing all certainties that religions proclaim, with “not-knowing”.
Science also has no certainties. It is a method, and every theory must be questioned and looked at again and again from every possible angle.
“Knowing” is a hindrance, and doubt plus questioning are essential, both in religion and in science.
Maybe the psychological common ground is that we try to establish our sense of self, by clinging to certainties. When we admit that we don’t know anything at all, we don’t know who we are anymore. We don’t know where we come from and where we are going.
The unknown blows away our false sense of self.
Mystical means 100% beyond the physical
Scientific means 100% physical.
So you cant have something that is both 100% in the physical and beyond the physical.
As far as the standard sciences, there are no absolute truths. That is why things are theories and laws. Even gravity is a theory. I would put Buddhism more as a mixture of philosophy and mysticism.
* a method of investigation involving observation and theory to test scientific hypotheses
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
* Scientific method refers to a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method
* A method of discovering knowledge about the natural world based in making falsifiable predictions (hypotheses), testing them empirically, and developing peer-reviewed theories that best explain the known data
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/scientific_method
* The set of rules used to guide science, based on the idea that scientific "laws" be continuously tested, and replaced if found inadequate.
chandra.harvard.edu/resources/glossaryS.html
* the Koch-Henle Postulates first explained in the later 19th century; with respect to polio: to prove the role of the poliovirus in disease (the hypothesis), a researcher had to identify and isolate the alleged entity (poliovirus), grow it, infect an animal with it so that it produced the same ...
americanhistory.si.edu/polio/glossary/index.htm
* the means of science by which phenomena are observed, hypotheses are tested, and conclusions are drawn.
darkwing.uoregon.edu/~mmoss/GLOSSARY.HTM
* The principles and empirical processes of discovery and demonstration considered characteristic of or necessary for scientific investigation, generally involving the observation of phenomena, the formulation of a hypothesis concerning the phenomena, experimentation to demonstrate the truth or ...
bama.ua.edu/~alaarch/Glossary/index.htm
* A process that is the basis for scientific inquiry. The scientific method follows a series of steps: (1) identify a problem you would like to solve, (2) formulate a hypothesis, (3) test the hypothesis, (4) collect and analyze the data, (5) make conclusions.
www.ncsu.edu/labwrite/res/res-glossary.html
* A systematic approach to observing phenomena, drawing conclusions and testing hypotheses.
www.smm.org/catal/introduction/glossary/
* Systematic methods used in scientific investigations of the natural world, which include designing controlled experiments, gathering data, and developing and testing hypotheses.
environment.nelson.com/0176169040/glossary.html
* This may be a different approach to defining the scientific method than what is commonly taught in science classes. These courses generally focus the particulars of the scientific method and how to implement it. This definition focuses on the underlying philosophy of science. ...
www.postmodernpsychology.com/Postmodernism_Dictionary.html
* Systematic apporach of observation, hypothesis formation, hypothesis testing and hypothesis evaluation that forms the basis for modern science.
estrellamountain.edu/faculty/farabee/biobk/BioBookglossS.html
* is a procedure for conducting research that states that a testable hypothesis should be verifiable and the results repeatable
academics.tjhsst.edu/psych/oldPsych/ch1/terms.html
* n principles and procedures for the systematic pursuit of knowledge involving the recognition and formulation of a problem, the collection of data through observation and experiment, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses
home.att.net/~tangents/data/rlgdef.htm
* A sequence of steps for systematically analyzing scientific problems in a way that leads to verifiable results.
www.wwnorton.com/college/geo/earth2/glossary/s.htm
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&noj=1&defl=en&q=define:scientific+method&sa=X&ei=YCOaTYq_MYzZiAKUue2cCQ&ved=0CBgQkAE
Definitions of mysticism on the Web:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&noj=1&q=define:mysticism&btnG=Search
* a religion based on mystical communion with an ultimate reality
* obscure or irrational thought
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
* Mysticism (from the Greek μυστικός, mystikos, an initiate of a mystery religion) is the pursuit of communion with, identity with, or conscious awareness of an ultimate reality, divinity, spiritual truth, or God through direct experience, intuition, instinct or insight. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mysticism
* The beliefs, ideas, or thoughts of mystics; A doctrine of direct communication or spiritual intuition of divine truth; A transcendental union of soul or mind with the divine reality or divinity; Obscure thoughts and speculations
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/mysticism
* mystic - mysterious: having an import not apparent to the senses nor obvious to the intelligence; beyond ordinary understanding; "mysterious symbols"; "the mystical style of Blake"; "occult lore"; "the secret learning of the ancients"
* mystic - relating to or resembling mysticism; "mystical intuition"; "mystical theories about the securities market"
* mystic - someone who believes in the existence of realities beyond human comprehension
But I interpreted mysticism as spooky things I can not understand an science as things I can understand.
Thanks SherabDorje for those extensive references.
Seriously. The burden of proof is stricter in buddhism which makes it more reliable.
I do not know about mystical. I guess laymen Buddhism is.
I speak mainly of the Theravada tradition.
Those who make good progress imo are those who approach it with a scientific mind, with a structured and methodical practice.
Always remember, if it is real, it is scientific. Whatever you experience is real.
If you see flying pigs outside your skyscraper window, there is probably no flying pigs out there, but your hallucination was real.
If someone is sending loving kindness to you and you feel it inside, that feeling is obviously real.
Weather it is this guy who projected his energy into you, or weather it was you who reacted emotionally and generated your own feeling is a different question.
(a good idea as always is to keep an open mind and not accept anyone's interpretation of events, even our own.)
But the point is unquestionable, everything you experience is real.
Your interpretation of what you experience is what can (and should) be questioned.
def: Immediate consciousness of the transcendent or ultimate reality or God.
If this is the definition, then yes, Buddhism is mystic to me.
But is it scientific?
def science: The intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.
Yes.
So it is both, scientific and mystical.
Not encouraged? Then what is the purpose of meditation? Are you perhaps confusing the insights that come during meditation with "siddhis", or paranormal phenomena? Those are very different from insight.
I am talking about jhana euforia, samadhi chackra lights communion with God etc. i.e not attainments.
Love google and love wikipedia...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mysticism
/Victor
Still, there's an interesting logic here: a) Whatever you experience is real b) if it's real, it's scientific. Therefore, if you experience clairvoyance, a spontaneous healing, or an exorcism by any means, those experiences are real, and scientific. It suits me
(We shouldn't pick on patbb; he admitted that one obstacle was negative connotations he's associated with the word, "mystical". I think that's a valuable insight. Probably other members are having that problem as well, but are as yet unaware of it. ...? Maybe it's a cultural thing.)
Watch the people talking with the dead, "I am getting an A..." I meant wtf is that. If the spirit can transmit an A why not transmit the second, third letters and so on and create a coherent sentence. This is not scientific.
"Therefore, if you experience clairvoyance, a spontaneous healing, or an exorcism by any means, those experiences are real, and scientific" To me, these experiences are the opposite of scientific. They dont apply to the physical world and they can not be repeatedly tested with predictable results. Others, harsher than me, might even call it quackery in most cases.
I also wasn't talking about parlor tricks or TV psychics, but serious professionals with an extraordinary gift (they do exist), like the Oracles among the Tibetans and similar people in other cultures. A steady meditation practice can lead to clairvoyant episodes, you know.
Now weather it was a special psychic skill, or your imagination is the interpretation of that experience that you must question. Well something must have happened here to. What exactly have happen is the interpretation. People are (and always been) quick to explain perfectly natural phenomenon with the idea of a higher power.
If we are to look at this historically, people who did so were pretty much always wrong. So if we are to learn anything from history is that we should be very careful to explain anything with the idea that some kind of superior entity was the cause, and we should look very closely to find the natural causes and mechanism behind phenomena that we cannot explain.
simple example could be that many people experience a strong white light and are filled with bliss in meditation.
Some religious people may sometimes pray alot.
Praying will become a form of concentration meditation using a mantra.
So some religious people will experience this phenomenon. But the difference is that they will more likely interpret this as a communion with whatever god they believe in; as oppose to a natural phenomenon, something similar to "if i hit the wall with my pinky toe, there will be strong sensations of pain."
Sotapnna, Skadagami, Anagami, Arahant.
Also the path of insight has its own sequential steps of advancement that might or might not be connected to the above four.(I am not sure)
Sometimes the jhana (4 or 8) are considered attainments along with access concentration. But the euforia is never seen as goals nor are the diffrent supernormal powers.
Who is we?
/Victor
Vic, you referred to meditation as "the path of insight". So that right there could be defined as a mystical experience, though you may think of it differently, perhaps as quietude and observation. But the fact is that meditation brings about an altered state of consciousness (that element is absent from the "mysticism" definitions above), and so by its very nature is inclined toward mystical experience.
@Dakini
Following the definition on that page. You are right and I am wrong. Since I brought it up. I guess I will have to stick with it.
You will have to excuse me. I had a bit of knee surgery that morning and could not really concentrate properly since the anesthesia was wearing out during the day.
/Victor
A student writes:
I read a recent teaching with great interest; it could almost have been me that asked the question you replied to. You may not remember me, I came to see you at the Hermitage about a year ago, we talked about me going for refuge, and I expressed concerns about the rituals involved. I have since left the Sangha, and feel a bit adrift.
However, I am feeling more positive that I have found the beginnings of my path. I have been reading a lot by Steven Batchelor and feel that a genuinely agnostic approach is right for me at this time.
I do feel that the work you are doing is so good and I love the simple approach of Discovering the Heart of Buddhism, I started to get a bit concerned about some of the aspects of Trusting the Heart of Buddhism.
Is there a place for someone like me within the Sangha, when, if I'm going to be true to myself, can't accept the rituals and prayers etc?
Lama Shenpen replies:
Yes I remember you. I hope you will find a place in the Sangha for yourself that feels right for you. The important quality that we all need is an open mind and deep respect for the Buddha's teaching. Then we listen to the teachings and ponder them for ourselves and notice where our sticking points are.
If we have respect for the Buddha’s teachings and admit to ourselves that we do not as yet understand them, we can simply practise what we can understand and sometimes maybe open out a bit more to what we cannot. There is no need for us to force ourselves to do practices such as rituals just because everyone else does. Neither do we have to exclude ourselves from the Sangha just because there are rituals and practices that others - maybe the majority - do that we are not drawn to and which we cannot understand the point of. It may help you to know that many students come into Buddhism highly sceptical about teachings such as rebirth, karma and ritual (me included).
My advice to you is not to limit yourself by deciding before you start to reduce the Buddha’s teaching to something you already think and believe …. somehow trying to push it into the straightjacket of your preconceived ideas. The Dharma is realised through giving up all 'views' which might perhaps be translated as preconceived ideas in this context. Just because in our modern western society it is regarded as normal to not believe in past and future lives, in the efficacy of rituals and in supernormal powers, beings outside the field of our senses and so on, doesn’t mean that these views are proven, true or even particularly rational. They are part of our conditioning..... that is why they seem so normal and sensible - that is why they are easier to accept.
There is much to ponder here and I hope you decide to stick around long enough to feel the benefit of keeping an open mind on all these things.
I hope this answer is helpful
Perhaps, before some of you go further, you may want to read an interesting book, published in 2005. It's title is "The Universe In A Single Atom; The Convergence Of Science And Spirituality." The author is - His Holiness The Dalai Lama.
It was a national Best Seller and is a great read.
Namaste
Outstanding idea. How do we decide which books? A vote or a leader? Or mixture?
So...how do we convince the admins to set up a section? Or would it be under Arts & Writings?
I think a book listing with something like a book of the month or something like that might work. I'm not sure how we go about dealing with this at the admin level. As long as it doesn't become too much work for any one person. I certainly would be willing to put some time in.
We would also need to talk about parameters regarding the subject matter. I would think that anything that is currently discuss on this site should be alright.
B