Download Buddhist Physics - The Spiritual Naturalist Society

Spiritual Naturalists 005
BUDDHIST PHYSICS
Much of this has been adapted from Wikipedia.
Speculation versus direct experience in Buddhist epistemology
Decisive in distinguishing Buddhism from other schools of Indian philosophy is
the issue of epistemological justification. While all schools of Indian logic
recognize various sets of valid justifications for knowledge, Buddhism recognizes
a smaller set than do the others.
According to the scriptures, during his lifetime the Buddha remained silent when
asked several metaphysical questions. These regarded issues such as whether
the universe is eternal or non-eternal (or whether it is finite or infinite), the unity or
separation of the body and the self, the complete inexistence of a person after
Nirvana and death, and others. One explanation for this silence is that such
questions distract from activity that is practical to realizing enlightenment and
bring about the danger of substituting the experience of liberation by conceptual
understanding of the doctrine or by religious faith. Another explanation is that
both affirmative and negative positions regarding these questions are based on
attachment to and misunderstanding of the aggregates and senses. That is,
when one sees these things for what they are, the idea of forming positions on
such metaphysical questions simply does not occur to one. Another closely
related explanation is that reality is devoid of designations, or empty, and
therefore language itself is a priori inadequate.
Thus, the Buddha's silence does not indicate misology or disdain for philosophy.
Rather, it indicates that he viewed these questions as not leading to true
knowledge. Dependent arising provides a framework for analysis of reality that is
not based on metaphysical assumptions regarding existence or non-existence,
but instead on direct cognition of phenomena as they are presented to the mind.
The Buddha of the earliest Buddhists texts describes Dharma (in the sense of
"truth") as "beyond reasoning" or "transcending logic", in the sense that
reasoning is a subjectively introduced aspect of the way humans perceive things,
and the conceptual framework which underpins it is a part of the cognitive
process, rather than a feature of things as they really are.
Theravada Buddhism promotes the concept of vibhajjavada (Pāli, literally
"Teaching of Analysis") to non-Buddhists. This doctrine says that insight must
come from the aspirant's experience, critical investigation, and reasoning instead
of by blind faith. As the Buddha said according to the canonical scriptures:
"Do not accept anything by mere tradition ... Do not accept anything just
because it accords with your scriptures ... Do not accept anything merely
because it agrees with your pre-conceived notions ... But when you know
for yourselves—these things are moral, these things are blameless, these
things are praised by the wise, these things, when performed and
undertaken, conduce to well-being and happiness—then do you live acting
accordingly."
Dependent arising
The doctrine of pratītyasamutpāda is an important part of Buddhist metaphysics.
It states that phenomena arise together in a mutually interdependent web of
cause and effect. It is variously rendered into English as "dependent origination",
"conditioned genesis", "dependent co-arising", "interdependent arising", or
"contingency".
Emptiness
The concept of emptiness brings together other key Buddhist doctrines,
particularly anatta (no-self) and pratītyasamutpāda (dependent origination). It is
not merely sentient beings that are empty of ātman; all phenomena are without
any "self-nature", and thus without any underlying essence; they are "empty" of
being independent.
The three marks of existence: Impermanence, suffering, and not-self
Anicca (Pāli for "inconstancy", usually translated as impermanence) is one of the
three marks of existence. The term expresses the Buddhist notion that all
compounded or conditioned phenomena (all things and experiences) are
inconstant, unsteady, and impermanent. Everything we can experience through
our senses is made up of parts, and its existence is dependent on external
conditions. Everything is in constant flux, and so conditions and the thing itself
are constantly changing. Things are constantly coming into being, and ceasing to
be. Since nothing lasts, there is no inherent or fixed nature to any object or
experience.
According to the impermanence doctrine, human life embodies this flux in the
aging process, the cycle of rebirth, and in any experience of loss. The doctrine
further asserts that because things are impermanent, attachment to them is futile
and leads to suffering (dukkha).
Suffering or dukkha is a central concept in Buddhism, the word roughly
corresponding to a number of terms in English including suffering, pain,
unsatisfactoriness, sorrow, affliction, anxiety, dissatisfaction, discomfort, anguish,
stress, misery, and frustration. Although dukkha is often translated as "suffering",
its philosophical meaning is more analogous to "disquietude" as in the condition
of being disturbed. As such, "suffering" is too narrow a translation with "negative
emotional connotations" which can give the impression that the Buddhist view is
one of pessimism, but Buddhism seeks to be neither pessimistic nor optimistic,
but realistic. Thus in English-language Buddhist literature "dukkha" is often left
untranslated, so as to encompass its full range of meaning.
Anatta (Pāli) or anātman (Sanskrit) refers to the notion of "not-self". Upon careful
examination, one finds that no phenomenon is really "I" or "mine"; these concepts
are in fact constructed by the mind. In the Nikayas anatta is not meant as a
metaphysical assertion, but as an approach for gaining release from suffering. In
fact, the Buddha rejected both of the metaphysical assertions "I have a Self" and
"I have no Self" as ontological views that bind one to suffering.[44] When asked if
the self was identical with the body, the Buddha refused to answer. By analyzing
the constantly changing physical and mental constituents (skandhas) of a person
or object, the practitioner comes to the conclusion that neither the respective
parts nor the person as a whole comprise a self.
Karma as the law of cause and effect
Karma (from Sanskrit: "action, work") in Buddhism is the force that drives
Samsara - the cycle of suffering and rebirth for each being. Good, skillful deeds
(Pāli: "kusala") and bad, unskillful (Pāli: "akusala") actions produce "seeds" in the
mind which come to fruition either in this life or in a subsequent rebirth. The
avoidance of unwholesome actions and the cultivation of positive actions is
called śīla (from Sanskrit: "ethical conduct").
In Buddhism, karma specifically refers to those actions (of body, speech, and
mind) that spring from mental intent and which bring about a consequence or
result. Every time a person acts there is some quality of intention at the base of
the mind and it is that quality rather than the outward appearance of the action
that determines its effect (note the similar distinction between effort and results in
Stoicism).
In Theravada Buddhism there can be no divine salvation or forgiveness for one's
karma, since it is a purely impersonal process that is a part of the make up of the
universe. Some Mahayana traditions however hold different views. For example,
the texts of certain Mahayana sutras (such as the Lotus Sutra, the Angulimaliya
Sutra and the Nirvana Sutra) claim that reciting or merely hearing their texts can
expunge great swathes of negative karma. In like fashion, some forms of
Buddhism (e.g. Vajrayana) regard the recitation of mantras as a means for
cutting off previous negative karma. Similarly, the Japanese Pure Land teacher
Genshin taught that Amida Buddha has the power to destroy the karma that
would otherwise bind one in Samsara.
There is a misconception about the connection between the act and the
suffering. Matthew Bortolin is an ordained member of Thich Nhat Hanh’s
Buddhist Community and is also a Star Wars fan who recently wrote a book
outlining Buddhist themes found in the film series called The Dharma of Star
Wars. In that book he describes karma saying:
"Karma is not a cosmic decree of justice or system of reward and
punishment. If you break your leg today it is not because you swore at
your brother yesterday. That is not the functioning of the law of karma.
The remorse you feel for swearing at your brother is the fruit of karma, not
the fact of the bone fracture. Similarly, an act of kindness does not always
necessarily produce happiness – the intention behind the action or thought
is of critical importance. If one performs a kind deed in the hopes of being
rewarded by the stars or God then that deed is not good karma."
American scholar and author Alexander Berzin has created an online archive of
Buddhist teachings at www.berzinarchives.com. On that website, he discusses
karma as follows:
"We could talk about a network connecting physical points in one moment,
like all the different parts of a machine. That is how we usually think of a
network, isn’t it? Here, let’s change dimensions and think of a network in
terms of connecting different moments of time. We acted like this; we
acted like that. I yelled then; I yelled another time; and then I yelled again.
For example, each time I complain, the karmic force of that act networks
with the karmic forces of previous times I complained. The more times I
complain, the stronger the network of karmic force from complaining
grows and the stronger its effects can be. Here, the abstraction becomes
what we in the West might call a "karmic pattern."
This is what karmic networks are talking about, and I think this way of
explaining it makes a lot better sense of the whole picture of karma than
using such words as "collection of merit." It is certainly not a collection of
points that we keep in a book and, with enough points or "merit," we win a
prize.
Question: Are these networks some sort of energy?
No, the networks of karmic force are not forms of energy; they are
nonstatic abstractions imputed on a continuum."
Rebirth
Rebirth refers to a process whereby beings go through a succession of lifetimes
as one of many possible forms of sentient life, each running from conception to
death. However, Buddhism rejects concepts of a permanent self or an
unchanging, eternal soul, as it is called in Hinduism or even Christianity. As there
ultimately is no such thing as a self (the doctrine of anatta) according to
Buddhism, rebirth in subsequent existences must rather be understood as the
continuation of a dynamic, ever-changing process of "dependent arising"
determined by the laws of cause and effect rather than that of one being,
transmigrating or incarnating from one existence to the next.
Consider the following, from David S. Noss’ “A History of the World’s Religions”:
"This does not mean, the Buddha said, that one who is born is different
from the preceding person who has passed his or her karma on at death,
nor does it mean that one is the same. Such an issue is as meaningless
as to say that the body is different from the self or that self and body are
the same... Since there is no permanent ego-entity accompanying the
skandhas [aggregates], discussions as to whether the successive
personalities in a continuous series of rebirths are the same or different
lack point. It is better simply to know that a specific necessity (karma)
leads to the origination of one life as the total result of the having-beenness of another, and that connection is as close as that of cause and
effect... It is difficult to construe, but the fundamental fact remains – that
what one does and thinks now carries over into tomorrow and tomorrow
and tomorrow."