Buddhist Cosmology and Science

Vincenzi

so... has there being any attempts to compare, contrast and analyze the buddhist cosmology and the "standard scientific" cosmology?

Ncryptx

Probably, but it would be less worthwhile than to compare western science with other, non-Buddhist, schools of thought from classical India (after the Buddhist period). A number of those schools developed ideas similar to modern atomic physics while relegating to second place the soteriological preoccupations with which Buddhism and earlier schools were concerned.

thickpaper

HH the Dalai Lama is into these ideas and knows his onions it seems.

But I would say that core dharma is "precosmological"; it is true in all imaginable cosmologies and realities (Apart from perhaps some kind of infinite non limited universe?).

DaltheJigsaw

What about this:

TheDoctorDonna

Mind and Life XIV -- Day 1 am - with the Dalai Lama

Here is a good overview of this topic. It is a few sessions long, but worth the watching, in my opinon

Buddha7

Read the Dalai Lama's book, "The Universe in a Single Atom". He discards many Buddhist thoughts about cosmology that contrast with modern knowledge, but also shows how modern science proves some of Buddhist cosmology/ideas.

thickpaper

Read the Dalai Lama's book, "The Universe in a Single Atom". He discards many Buddhist thoughts about cosmology that contrast with modern knowledge, but also shows how modern science proves some of Buddhist cosmology/ideas.

I have read that book, it's a great book. But I don't think he was trying to prove anything with it?

DhammaDhatu

there has been attempts to analyze the buddhist cosmology with standard scientific psychology

human = humane, ethical, reflective
heavenly = blissful, compasionate, powerful
animal = ignorant, unreflective, instinctual
hell = anger, depression, despair, suffering
ghost = craving, addiction

Vincenzi

I was refering to this:
The Thirty-one Planes of Existence

DhammaDhatu

my reading has these 31 equating with experienceable mental states, such as jhana

[DeletedUser]

Read the Dalai Lama's book, "The Universe in a Single Atom". He discards many Buddhist thoughts about cosmology that contrast with modern knowledge, but also shows how modern science proves some of Buddhist cosmology/ideas.

"Subhuti, if a good man or good woman were to pulverize three thousand great thousand world systems into motes of fine dust, what do you think, would that mass of fine dust be large?"

Subhuti said, "Large, World Honored One, And why? If that mass of fine dust motes actually existed, the Buddha would not speak of it as a mass of fine dust motes. And why? The mass of fine dust motes is spoken of by the Buddha as no mass of fine dust motes. Therefore it is called a mass of fine dust motes. World Honored One, the three thousand great thousand world systems are spoken of by the Tathagata as no world systems, therefore they are called world systems. And why? If world systems actually existed, then there would be a totality of marks. The totality of marks is spoken of by the Tathagata as no totality of marks. Therefore it is called a totality of marks."

"Subhuti, the totality of marks cannot be spoken of, but people of the common sort greedily attached to such things."

Whoknows

Hi Vincenzi,

Great reference!

As the Standard Model continues to stagnate, erode and crumble, heading towards the next (though equally faulty as the present one) paradigm shift due to the unrelenting process of impermanence, extra dimensions have already been suggested by cosmologists among these suggestions are parallel universes separated by less than a millimeter from our present universe. Apparently our universe is sitting on a 3D membrane (aka Brane) and there may be others very close to ours. Of course there is no mention of what a Brane is! But it is interesting how the present shift seems to be towards multiple parallel universes which has some level of compatibility with the Buddhist Cosmological universe. It could indicate a loosening of the rigidity of scientific thinking, though Cosmology has always been "out there" and is more of a philosophy that a science.

As to the Buddhist Cosmology itself, I don't really think much about it, to be honest. Though I would like to study it some time in the future. None of its really "real" anyway, it just is.

Cheers, WK

Vincenzi

my reading has these 31 equating with experienceable mental states, such as jhana

mostly... and it requires DharmaCakkhu.

but also, Deva Namanarati is the Pleadi Star Cluster.

Vincenzi

Hi Vincenzi,

Great reference!

As the Standard Model continues to stagnate, erode and crumble, heading towards the next (though equally faulty as the present one) paradigm shift due to the unrelenting process of impermanence, extra dimensions have already been suggested by cosmologists among these suggestions are parallel universes separated by less than a millimeter from our present universe. Apparently our universe is sitting on a 3D membrane (aka Brane) and there may be others very close to ours. Of course there is no mention of what a Brane is! But it is interesting how the present shift seems to be towards multiple parallel universes which has some level of compatibility with the Buddhist Cosmological universe. It could indicate a loosening of the rigidity of scientific thinking, though Cosmology has always been "out there" and is more of a philosophy that a science.

As to the Buddhist Cosmology itself, I don't really think much about it, to be honest. Though I would like to study it some time in the future. None of its really "real" anyway, it just is.

Cheers, WK

I think that the metaphor of "boronas" (pieces of bread) is closer to reality, and has the advantage of being accessible through meditation.

A multi-verse paradigm is quite close to Buddhist Cosmology! but branes are non-sense!

Another area is the informational entanglement* of "particles".

*is pratitya-samutpada related to entanglement?