- This topic has 11 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
This is something that has been addressed in this website but I want to elaborate my reflections. When we want to test the credibility of a worldview, we ought to examine it carefully without blindly accepting or discarding it. I took some help from ChatGPT to simplify this process:
Me: Let’s say there is a theory that can’t be directly proven by science. How could one test its legitimacy?
ChatGPT:
To test the legitimacy of a theory that can’t be directly proven by science, you can approach it using these methods:
Internal Consistency: Examine if the theory is logically consistent within itself. Are there any contradictions in its foundational principles or derived conclusions?
Predictive Power: Even if it can’t be directly tested, does the theory make predictions that align with observable outcomes? While indirect, its ability to anticipate real-world results can offer evidence of its legitimacy.
Coherence with Known Facts: Does the theory align with established scientific knowledge or observed phenomena? Even if it’s not directly verifiable, it should not conflict with well-supported evidence.
Explanatory Power: Evaluate if the theory provides a better or more complete explanation for certain phenomena than existing theories.
Testability of Related Aspects: Sometimes, aspects of a theory can be tested or falsified indirectly, providing clues to its validity.
Practical Application: Apply the theory in practice. If it leads to consistently successful outcomes or solutions, that can support its legitimacy.
By combining these approaches, you can build a strong case for or against a theory, even if it cannot be directly proven by science.
I would like to apply the above approach to test Buddha Dhamma:
Internal Consistency: This doesn’t need to be stated, does it? This website alone gives the proof that all the major Dhamma concepts (Paticca Samuppada, Tilakkhana, 4 Noble Truths, Pancaupadanakkhandha, etc.) from all 3 Pitakas (Vinaya, Sutta, and Abhidhamma) are inter-consistent.
Predictive Power: This is an interesting approach since it has been about 2500 years since the Buddha taught the Dhamma. The following are some of the scientific facts that Dhamma predicted:
- Fabricated perceptions of sentient beings (Distorted Sanna)
- Existence of Uncountable revolving planetary systems (chakkavala) that get destroyed and reform spontaneously
- Very complex and unstable cosmos (heat deaths, supernova explosions, etc.)
- Innumerable beings discovered in the oceans and through microscopes
- Immense suffering in the animal realm (one of the 4 apayas)
The following are more predictions that are starting to become vindicated:
- Other planetary systems have life
- Thoughts don’t generate in the brain but in the mental body (gandhabba/hadaya vatthu)
- Universe has no discernible beginning
Coherence with Known Facts: Buddha Dhamma can be shown to be consistent will almost all our world knowledge. To add on to the above point, the scientific discoveries that show that the Earth is billions of years old (really old) is consistent with the statement that the lifetime of a solar system is an incalculable kappa. People in the ancient world used to think that Earth is only a few thousand years old at most, but Buddha knew that a kappa is billions of years long. Furthermore, the discoveries of fossils showing the variations and evolution of species of life on Earth is also consistent with the “reverse evolution” explained by Buddha in the Agganna Sutta.
Explanatory Power: This is my favorite part. “Consciousness” or “Mental Phenomena” is arguably the least understood thing in Modern Science and Philosophy. The irony is that Buddha Dhamma (Tipitaka) literally consists of many layers of detailed and self-consistent explanations of mental phenomena that do not exist anywhere else. Most attempts by Philosophers are quite shallow and nowhere near as complete as the Tipitaka, especially the Abhidhamma.
Testability of Related Aspects: Turns out, we are living at a really unique time in the middle of the Buddha Sasana. The following is my super brief summary of some aspects that have been empirically tested:
- Near Death Experiences: This is one of the studies that could revolutionize scientific perspective of the mind. Scientists think it is difficult to understand but it does not seem too hard if you understand the concepts of para loka, gandhabba, nama loka, mana indriya, bhava, jati and jhana. Some of the major aspects of NDE that are explainable through these concepts are:
- Thoughts speeding up: When the gandhabba is inside the body, the mana indriya in the brain helps organize the conscious experience. When the gandhabba leaves the physical body, the brain is no longer slowing down the thoughts.
- Seeing and hearing things they never did before with 360 vision: A gandhabba can see in all directions without light and hear without air over long distances. Our world is much more complex than perceived by our senses and scientific instruments.
- Life events flashing in mind: The brain is no longer used to access memory from nama loka (memory plane), so it happens directly. This explains why NDErs think they are having a life review.
- Encountering dead relatives: After death, if the kammic energy for human bhava isn’t exhausted, the gandhabba lives in para loka until nature finds a matching womb. Gandhabbas with similar gati tend to be around each other.
A skilled meditator in 4th Jhana can apparently have an even superior experience.
- Evidence of Rebirth: There have been several recorded cases of children recalling past lives. In Asian countries, it is common knowledge. In the West, the studies done by Dr. Ian Stevenson and Dr. Jim Tucker in University of Virginia, Division of Perceptual Studies have collected thousands of compelling cases of rebirth that involve children giving accurate descriptions of dead individuals. The interesting part is that it includes many traumatic cases where children born with birthmarks or defects resemble their descriptions of the way they died in their previous lives. One could ask why they were born with such defects if they were the victims. This gives a clear sign that the workings of Kamma are very complex. Being killed in a traumatic way and being born with a resembling defect are likely both parts of their kamma vipaka. Furthermore, the abilities of children prodigies and the sheer inequalities of the world can easily be explained by the concepts of rebirth and gati.
Practical Application: Well, Dhamma is all about implementation, ain’t it? Buddha strongly encouraged his followers to not blindly believe him, but rather test his teachings by applying them in practice. There are many practical methods that Buddha gave: Meditation techniques like Vipassana, Anapanasati, Satipatthana, etc. and the Noble Eightfold Path itself. One makes progress in stages with 4 major levels of awakening: Sotapanna, Sakadagami, Anagami, and Arahant.
There is a lot more in my mind but from the above analysis, I feel like Buddha Dhamma fluidly passes this test. There are still people who ignorantly claim that Buddha was guessing/speculating the things he taught. My issue with that comment is that is it even possible for someone to speculate all these information? It would be easier to become a Buddha than to speculate the teachings of a Buddha.
5 users thanked author for this post.
-
-
-
Taryal’s essay reads well and is a good summary.
- I thought of adding another perspective. That is to pinpoint and highlight where the uniqueness of Buddha’s teachings lies.
1. Soon after attaining Buddhahood, the Buddha realized that teaching his “newfound worldview” to humans would be challenging.
- That is described in the “Brahmāyācana Sutta (SN 6.1)” and is highlighted in the following verse (which also appears in many suttas, including DN 1, DN 14, MN 26, MN 72, MN 95.) “adhigato kho myāyaṁ dhammo gambhīro duddaso duranubodho santo paṇīto atakkāvacaro nipuṇo paṇḍitavedanīyo.”
- The translation in that link: “This Dhamma (worldview) I have discovered is deep, hard to see, hard to understand, peaceful, sublime, beyond the scope of logic, subtle, comprehensible to the astute.”
- “Adhigato kho myāyaṁ dhammo” means “This Dhamma I uncovered.” “gambhīro” means “profound.” Thus, the rest of the translation is good, but “atakkāvacaro” does not mean “beyond the scope of logic.”
- “Atakkāvacaro” means “beyond the scope of erroneous logic of humans” OR “cannot be analyzed/debated with mundane human logic.”
2. In the same sutta, the Buddha further explained why it is difficult for average humans (puthujjana) to see the validity of his teachings.
- Starting at marker 1.5, he explains why. That verse is better translated as “But people like clinging to sensory pleasures; they love it and enjoy it.”
- @ marker 1.6: “It’s hard for them to see the truth, i.e., idappaccayatā paṭicca samuppāda.
- Idappaccayatā paṭicca samuppāda explains how a mind starts in an undefiled state and is defiled within a split second. It also describes the accumulation of pañcupādānakkhandha.
3. Idappaccayatā paṭicca samuppāda explains how we accumulate kammic energies (that sustain the rebirth process), starting with the attachment to sensory pleasures.
- That attachment and subsequent kamma accumulation happen in two steps: “upaya” and “upadana.” Initial attachment ALWAYS occurs in the “upaya” stage (also called the “purana kamma” stage), and strong kamma accumulation occurs in the “upadana” stage (also called the “nava kamma” stage) only in SOME cases.
- An average human’s (puthujjana) mind ALWAYS goes through the “upaya” stage. That stage happens in a split second and depends only on how many samyojana (samsaric bonds) remain intact. A puthujjana has all ten samyojana intact. Since an Arahant has none left, even this initial stage is absent, and thus Idappaccayatā paṭicca samuppāda (and hence kamma accumulation) NEVER takes place for an Arahant.
4. The KEY POINT is that the “purana kamma” stage plays THE critical role of INITIATING kamma accumulation.
- If a mind avoids attachment to a sensory input from the very beginning (as in the case of an Arahant), one would have attained Nibbana.
- The reason for a mind to automatically attach to every sensory input in the “purana kamma” stage is the “distorted/false sanna” built into” a human.
5. That last sentence captures the essence of Buddha’s teachings.
- Arising of the “distorted/false sanna” is “beyond the scope of erroneous logic of humans” OR “cannot be analyzed/debated with mundane human logic.”
- It can ONLY be explained with an understanding of the Idappaccayatā paṭicca samuppāda based on “distorted/false sanna.“
- No matter how many experiments scientists conduct, they are all compatible with the “distorted/false sanna” built into humans and animals. That is the reason why Buddha Dhamma is “beyond the scope of erroneous logic of humans.”
- That erroneous logic has roots in “distorted/false sanna.“
6. I suggest reading the posts “Upaya and Upādāna – Two Stages of Attachment” and “Purāna and Nava Kamma – Sequence of Kamma Generation.”
- With the above explanations (#1 through #5) in mind, those two posts may help clarify the ideas/concepts I have been trying to explain for over a year.
- Most of the posts in “New / Revised Posts” are on that subject, starting with the post “Uncovering the Suffering-Free (Pabhassara) Mind ” on 8/5/23. Those interested can scan through and read selected posts there as needed.
- Of course, I would be happy to answer questions.
-
Namo Buddhaya ☸️
Dear brothers and sisters in Dhamma. Peace and insight to all beings.
A question, please: The opening post must have taken an hour to write, and the reply by brother Lal more than an hour. What would the Buddha think about us spending so much time typing out long forum posts?
Thank you 🙏
-
Thank you, Dr. Lal. My post specifically referred to those who are relatively new and on their way to the Sotapanna stage. To make a paradigm change in thinking by going beyond the “mundane logic” of humans, one needs to be able to build confidence in the teachings first, so that they know that it is worth the time and effort. Your post encompasses the most relevant aspects. I’ve read suttas where Buddha says one can’t be truly sure about anything until they have experienced it themselves.
-
HugoZyl: The opening post must have taken an hour to write, and the reply by brother Lal more than an hour. What would the Buddha think about us spending so much time typing out long forum posts?
When we write there can be a few reasons:
- It is meritorious to share the dhamma, it said that the gift of dhamma is the best!
- Discussion is a way to better understand concepts, to see where we are wrong, to validate if we are right, just like how teachers would ask us to discuss topics in class
- As we write we are organising the concepts in our mind, so it is a form of contemplation too!
-
1. Writing helps me as much as it may help others.
- Sometimes, I think I understand some aspects of a given issue. However, when I started writing, I realized that related problems were poorly thought out.
- Furthermore, expressing one’s ideas in words (so that others can understand) is always challenging. I may not have described them in a way that some other person takes it in a wrong (different) way. I realized I should have worded it differently after reading their comments/questions.
- Thus, I advise everyone to start writing down at least a few notes/summaries. When you do that, questions may arise that need to be answered for clarification. Writing is a way of contemplation.
2. In the “Vimuttāyatana Sutta (AN 5.26),” the Buddha outlined five ways of practicing Dhamma to attain Nibbana. I highly recommend reading through the five ways.
- Of course, writing is not among them because writing was not common in those days. Writing is probably close to the method of reciting verses with understanding (@marker 4.1).
-
You seem to be very good at summarizing large amount of information. Are you a professional writer?
-
@Lal:
- No matter how many experiments scientists conduct, they are all compatible with the “distorted/false sanna” built into humans and animals. That is the reason why Buddha Dhamma is “beyond the scope of erroneous logic of humans.”
- That erroneous logic has roots in “distorted/false sanna.“
But is it not known to scientists that our subjective reality is a fabrication? I believe I saw a video in the forum where neuroscientists talk about this aspect of our experience (colors, sounds, survival instincts, etc.). If one can understand that and be a remarkable Scientist, what else would they need to be able to comprehend Dhamma?
-
That understanding of scientists “that our subjective reality is a fabrication” comes from the fabrication of the sanna itself. It is related to “simulation theory” and other wrong views, so wrong views can not liberate themselves. If you are under the influence of something and become aware of it, it does not mean it brings a solution to the issue because the root problem is still there. You need to be mindful of it with the proper understanding that it comes with Dhamma to be liberated from those views.
To put it simply, just because you are aware of wrong views while having wrong views does not bring a solution. The “root” view needs to be proper so the rest will “grow” from it.
1 user thanked author for this post.
-
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.