Ask A Buddhist II

  • Thread starter Thread starter notself
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The oldest strata of Pali Buddhist scriptures clearly reject a belief in the existence of a creator God. As to the question in regards to the origin of the universe, it isn’t a matter directly touched on in the scriptures, but something that is talked about in the ancient commentaries. The commentaries posit that the universe undergoes periods of expansion and contraction, infinitely. In modern scientific terms, this would correspond to the big bang being caused by a big crunch caused by a big bang caused by a big crunch ad infinitum.
I don’t think it adds up scientifically because for a cyclic universe to carry on forever would mean that the universe is a perpetual motion machine, which violates the second law of thermodynamics. Further, as the universe expands, the amount of radiation will increase so that the next cycle after the big crunch would have more radiation and therefore be a longer cycle. So if you now go backwards, it means that previous cycles were shorter until you reach one with infinitesimal small cycle, which then puts you back to the beginning of the universe. All you do with such a model is kick things up one level, but in the end you still have a beginning to the universe. Richard Tolman has shown that a cyclic universe requires a finite time in the past when the cycle has started.
 
From en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Crunch
If the universe is finite in extent and the cosmological principle (not to be confused with the cosmological constant) does not apply, and the expansion speed does not exceed the escape velocity, then the mutual gravitational attraction of all its matter will eventually cause it to contract. If entropy continues to increase in the contracting phase (see Ergodic hypothesis), the contraction would appear very different from the time reversal of the expansion. While the early universe was highly uniform, a contracting universe would become increasingly clumped. Eventually all matter would collapse into black holes, which would then coalesce producing a unified black hole or Big Crunch singularity.

The Hubble Constant measures the current state of expansion in the universe, and the strength of the gravitational force depends on the density and pressure of the matter and in the universe, or in other words, the critical density of the universe. If the density of the universe is greater than the critical density, then the strength of the gravitational force will stop the universe from expanding and the universe will collapse back on itself. Conversely, if the density of the universe is less than the critical density, the universe will continue to expand and the gravitational pull will not be enough to stop the universe from expanding. This scenario would result in the ‘Big Freeze’, where the universe cools as it expands and reaches a state of entropy.[1] One theory proposes that the universe could collapse to the state where it began and then initiate another Big Bang, so in this way the universe would last forever, but would pass through phases of expansion (Big Bang) and contraction (Big Crunch)[2]

Recent experimental evidence (namely the observation of distant supernova as standard candles, and the well-resolved mapping of the cosmic microwave background) has led to speculation that the expansion of the universe is not being slowed down by gravity but rather accelerating. However, since the nature of the dark energy that is postulated to drive the acceleration is unknown, it is still possible (though not observationally supported as of today) that it might eventually reverse sign and cause a collapse.[3]
Then there is this on the Big Bounce en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bounce
Martin Bojowald, an assistant professor of physics at Pennsylvania State University, published a study in July 2007 detailing work somewhat related to loop quantum gravity that claimed to mathematically solve the time before the Big Bang, which would give new weight to the oscillatory universe and Big Bounce theories.[4]

One of the main problems with the Big Bang theory is that at the moment of the Big Bang, there is a singularity of zero volume and infinite energy. This is normally interpreted as the end of the physics as we know it; in this case, of the theory of general relativity. This is why one expects quantum effects to become important and avoid the singularity.

However, research in loop quantum cosmology purported to show that a previously existing universe collapsed, not to the point of singularity, but to a point before that where the quantum effects of gravity become so strongly repulsive that the universe rebounds back out, forming a new branch. Throughout this collapse and bounce, the evolution is unitary.

Bojowald also claims that some properties of the universe that collapsed to form ours can also be determined. Some properties of the prior universe are not determinable however due to some kind of uncertainty principle.

This work is still in its early stages and very speculative. Some extensions by further scientists have been published in Physical Review Letters.[5]

In 2003, Peter Lynds has put forward a new cosmology model in which time is cyclic. In his theory our Universe will eventually stop expanding and then contract. Before becoming a singularity, as one would expect from Hawking’s black hole theory, the Universe would bounce. Lynds claims that a singularity would violate the second law of thermodynamics and this stops the Universe from being bounded by singularities. The Big Crunch would be avoided with a new Big Bang. Lynds suggests the exact history of the Universe would be repeated in each cycle in an eternal recurrence. Some critics argue that while the Universe may be cyclic, the histories would all be variants.[citation needed] Lynds theory has been dismissed by mainstream physicists for the lack of a mathematical model behind its philosophical considerations.[6]

In 2011, Nikodem Popławski showed that a nonsingular Big Bounce appears naturally in the Einstein-Cartan-Sciama-Kibble theory of gravity.[7] This theory extends general relativity by removing a constraint of the symmetry of the affine connection and regarding its antisymmetric part, the torsion tensor, as a dynamical variable. The minimal coupling between torsion and Dirac spinors generates a spin-spin interaction which is significant in fermionic matter at extremely high densities. Such an interaction averts the unphysical Big Bang singularity, replacing it with a cusp-like bounce at a finite minimum scale factor, before which the Universe was contracting. This scenario also explains why the present Universe at largest scales appears spatially flat, homogeneous and isotropic, providing a physical alternative to cosmic inflation.
The Big Bang, the Big Crunch and the Big Bounce are called theories in general everyday language but the more correct term for these ideas is Hypotheses. There is insufficient data to eliminate any of these hypotheses.

Of course none of this contributes to the ending of stress.
 
Because an eternal will which is consistent, not subject to whims and change, completely transcendant must be better than ours. Otherwise we have to insist on mere arbitrarily. That no one is right or wrong, its merely what I think. The Pagans who committed infanticide were neither right nor wrong. The Christians who believed in ressurection are neither right or wrong.

It does seem to follow that an eternal and consistent will, must be right as opposed to a created will which has limited knowledge. And I’m taking for granted here as I think it logically neccesitates it that an eternal will (person) would have all knowledge, especially in this case, the case of the omnipresent God.
Such a will would be consistent and trancendent, yes, but how does it follow that such a will is in fact good?
 
An Idea which has little backing it up. Only theory. The picture as it stands now is that our universe is expanding and it expands at an excellerated rate. We have little reason to posit that it will “crunch” scientifically, but perhaps on some atheistic hope.
A lot about the universes’ expansion is mysterious. Not only is it expanding, but its accelerated rate of expansion necessitates some force which scientists are tentatively calling “Dark Energy”. Until we understand this mechanism, we don’t really know much about what will happen to the universe. Current evidence seems to indicate some sort of heat death scenario, but it’s still a mystery with this dark energy component involved.
 
Feel free. I think it would be very good to illustrate the important differences in origin to better understand the context of both religions.
There are a number of theories as to how the Indo-Aryans arrived in thd Indian subcontinent (or even whether they came from someplace else at all), but the currently favored model is that the Indo-Aryans, aka the Vedic people, share a common origin with the Iranian, Dardic and Nuristani peoples: the Indo-Iranian culture. The Indo-Iranians, sometimes postulated to be the descendants of the Bronze Age Andronovo culture which had its homeland in the Eurasian steppe that borders the Ural River on the west and the Tian Shan on the east, expanded southwards from their original habitat to the Caucasus, Central Asia, the Iranian plateau, Northern India, as well as Mesopotamia and Syria. The separation of Indo-Aryans proper from Indo-Iranians is commonly dated, on linguistic grounds, to roughly 1800 BC. By the mid-2nd millennium BC early Indo-Aryans had reached Assyria in the west, where they imposed themselves over the local Hurrian population and founded the state of Mitanni, while various tribes (the Rigvedic tribes) had reached the northern Punjab in the east contemporary to the Late Harappan phase (ca. 1700 to 1300 BC), when the civilization that once existed in the Indus Valley was experiencing a sharp decline.

The Indo-Aryans have brought with them a belief system descended from the Indo-Iranian religion, which in turn is of proto-Indo-European origin. The Indo-Aryans of Mitanni are known to have worshipped deities known as Mitrasil, Uruvanassil, Indara and the Nasatianna, which corresponds with Mitra, Varuna, Indra and the Nasatyas of the Rigveda.

When the Indo-Aryans entered India, they brought with them a religion in which the gods were chiefly personified powers of Nature, a few of them, such as Dyaus, going back to the Indo-European, others, such as Mitra, Varuna, Indra, to the Indo-Iranian period. They also brought with them the cult of fire and of Soma, besides a knowledge of the art of composing religious poems in several metres, as a comparison of the Rigveda and the Avesta shows. The purpose of these ancient hymns was to propitiate the gods by praises accompanying the offering of malted butter poured on the fire and of the juice of the Soma plant placed on the sacrificial grass.

…]

This is concerned with the worship of gods that are largely personifications of the powers of nature. The hymns [of the Rigveda] are mainly invocations of these gods, and are meant to accompany the oblation of Soma juice and the fire sacrifice of melted butter. It is thus essentially a polytheistic religion, which assumes a pantheistic colouring only in a few of its latest hymns. The gods are usually stated in the RV. to be thirty-three in number, being divided into three groups of eleven distributed in earth, air, and heaven, the three divisions of the Universe. Troops of deities, such as the Maruts, are of course not included in this number. The gods were believed to have had a beginning. But they were not thought to have all come into being at the same time; for the RV. occasionally refers to earlier gods, and certain deities are described as the offspring of others. That they were considered to have been originally mortal is implied in the statement that they acquired immortality by drinking Soma or by receiving it as a gift from Agni and Savitr.

The gods were conceived as human in appearance. Their bodily parts which are frequently mentioned, are in many instances simply figurative illustrations of the phenomena of nature represented by them. Thus the arms of the Sun are nothing more than his rays; and the tongue and limbs of Agni merely denote his flames. Some of the gods appear equipped as warriors, especially Indra, others are described as priests, especially Agni and Brhaspati. All of them drive through the air in cars, drawn chiefly by steeds, but sometimes by other animals. The favourite food of men is also that of the gods, consisting in milk, butter, grain, and the flesh of sheep, goats, and cattle. It is offered to them in the sacrifice, which is either conveyed to them in heaven by the god of fire, or which they come in their cars to partake of on the strew of grass prepared for their reception. Their favourite drink is the exhilarating juice of the Soma plant. The home of the gods is heaven, the third heaven, or the highest step of Visnu, where cheered by draughts of Soma they live a life of bliss.
  • A.A. Donnell, A Vedic Reader for Students
 
From en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Crunch

Then there is this on the Big Bounce en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bounce

The Big Bang, the Big Crunch and the Big Bounce are called theories in general everyday language but the more correct term for these ideas is Hypotheses. There is insufficient data to eliminate any of these hypotheses.

Of course none of this contributes to the ending of stress.
Unfortunately, the work of Martin Bojowald on loop quantum cosmology is an application of loop quantum gravity to homogeneous systems. And as you know, there are very serious objections to the theory of loop quantum gravity:
See: motls.blogspot.com/2004/10/objections-to-loop-quantum-gravity.html
 
Unfortunately, the work of Martin Bojowald on loop quantum cosmology is an application of loop quantum gravity to homogeneous systems. And as you know, there are very serious objections to the theory of loop quantum gravity:
See: motls.blogspot.com/2004/10/objections-to-loop-quantum-gravity.html
We have a whole lot to learn before any cosmology becomes certain. We’ve only been at this since the 1920’s.

Patrick,

I am looking forward to more of your posts. Isn’t there a story about the universe being created, destroyed and recreated with each blink of the eye of Brahma?
 
Such a will would be consistent and trancendent, yes, but how does it follow that such a will is in fact good?
Good would be integral to God. An aspect of him. It seems meaningless to question that.
 
There is devotion directed at key figures in Buddhism, but it is more like how Catholics venerate saints than how God is worshiped.

It is a little bit misleading to use the term prayer in a Buddhist context. It can play a role in folk religion where uneducated Buddhists mistakenly think that they can petition the Buddha for favors, and some sects involve the chanting of Mantras which are related to specific figures, but it’s not really praying in the usual sense of the term. Mantras are believed to have the power in and of themselves to affect a person’s development in the sects that practice them.
Also, when one becomes enlightened, that is when the cycle of reincarnation is broken?
 
Correct. BUT, he was over weight for a period in his life while he was searching enlightenment. It didn’t work out so he stopped. The middle statue of him standing you have is thought to be one of the most accurate images of Gotama.
 
We have a whole lot to learn before any cosmology becomes certain. We’ve only been at this since the 1920’s.

Patrick,

I am looking forward to more of your posts. Isn’t there a story about the universe being created, destroyed and recreated with each blink of the eye of Brahma?
Just to comment. Yes, but that is a Hindu idea, that whole thing about the universe getting destroyed and rebuilt over and over again (one of the shramanic influences I believe). And who gets to rebuild and destroy the worlds is rather confusing. Usually Brahma is designated as creator, with Vishnu as preserver and Shiva as destroyer. Now some will claim that Shiva, being the supreme divinity ultimately is the one who does all of that stuff, others will say that Vishnu (or Krishna or Rama) is responsible for it since he is the supreme god, still others will say that Vishnu or Shiva or Brahma or whatever are just different aspects of Brahman (the Absolute; this neuter BrAhma should not to be confused with the grammatically-masculine BrahmA we are talking about), and so on and so forth.

But yes, there is an idea that a world lasts for a single daytime (a kalpa, as Brahma perceives it - 4,320,000,000 years) and is destroyed at the end of it, at which point Brahma rests (pralaya ‘dissolution’). This cycle would continue until Vishnu sleeps, at which point this particular Brahma dies and pralaya - this time on a much wider scale - occurs (Brahma’s lifespan is a hundred Brahma years, which is equal to a single Vishnu day). When Vishnu wakes up at the following morning, he creates another Brahma and the cycle is again repeated.
 
Correct. BUT, he was over weight for a period in his life while he was searching enlightenment. It didn’t work out so he stopped. The middle statue of him standing you have is thought to be one of the most accurate images of Gotama.
On the contrary, I think you meant ‘emaciated’. Gotama at first tried rigorous fasting (that first pic shows a Gandharan sculpture of the emaciated Gotama) and other ascetic practices for quite some time but as you mentioned it did not work for him. In fact, the traditional story has it that he was on the verge of dying of hunger (at that point he was limiting himself to a single leaf per day) when a young girl named Sujata gave him rice pudding to eat.

And as our Buddhist posters would likely mention these images of the Buddha were made centuries after his lifetime. So like Jesus, no one knows for sure what Gotama actually looked like, although there are legends about certain of his supposed distinctive physical charasteristics.
 
To continue with the Vedic stuff:

One of the main deities (devas, asuras) of the Vedic pantheon is Indra, the national god of the Indo-Aryans, king of gods and deity of thunderstorms - in other words the Indo-Aryan analogue to Zeus (both of them share a common origin anyway). Perhaps the one with the most developed personality out of all Vedic deities, he is cocky, boisterous, and likes soma, the divine beverage so much that he gets drunk on it (in fact, it is what vitalizes him). Indra’s main claim to fame was waging war against and ultimately slaying the serpent Vritra, who hogged all the waters to himself, using his vajra (thunderbolt).

I will declare the manly deeds of Indra, the first that he achieved, the Thunder-wielder.
He slew the Dragon, then disclosed the waters, and cleft the channels of the mountain torrents.
He slew the Dragon lying on the mountain: his heavenly bolt of thunder Tvastar fashioned.
Like lowing kine in rapid flow descending the waters glided downward to the ocean.
Impetuous as a bull, he chose the Soma and in three sacred beakers drank the juices.
Maghavan = Indra] grasped the thunder for his weapon, and smote to death this firstborn of the dragons.
When, Indra, thou hadst slain the dragon’s firstborn, and overcome the charms of the enchanters,
Then, giving life to Sun and Dawn and Heaven, thou foundest not one foe to stand against thee.
Indra with his own great and deadly thunder smote into pieces Vrtra, worst of Vrtras.
As trunks of trees, what time the axe hath felled them, low on the earth so lies the prostrate Dragon.
He, like a mad weak warrior, challenged Indra, the great impetuous many-slaying Hero.
He, brooking not the clashing of the weapons, crushed - Indra’s foe - the shattered forts in falling.
Footless and handless still he challenged Indra, who smote him with his bolt between the shoulders.
Emasculate yet claiming manly vigour, thus Vrtra lay with scattered limbs dissevered.
There as he lies like a bank-bursting river, the waters taking courage flow above him.
The Dragon lies beneath the feet of torrents which Vrtra with his greatness had encompassed.
Then humbled was the strength of Vrtra’s mother: Indra hath cast his deadly bolt against her.
The mother was above, the son was under and like a cow beside her calf lay Danu [the primeval waters].
Rolled in the midst of never-ceasing currents flowing without a rest for ever onward.
The waters bear off Vrtra’s nameless body: the foe of Indra sank to during darkness.
Guarded by Ahi stood the thralls of Dasas, the waters stayed like kine held by the robber.
But he, when he had smitten Vrtra, opened the cave wherein the floods had been imprisoned.
A horse’s tail wast thou when he, O Indra, smote on thy bolt; thou, God without a second,
Thou hast won back the kine, hast won the Soma; thou hast let loose to flow the Seven Rivers.
Nothing availed him lightning, nothing thunder, hailstorm or mist which had spread around him:
When Indra and the Dragon strove in battle, Maghavan gained the victory for ever.
Whom sawest thou to avenge the Dragon, Indra, that fear possessed thy heart when thou hadst slain him;
That, like a hawk affrighted through the regions, thou crossedst nine-and-ninety flowing rivers?
Indra is King of all that moves and moves not, of creatures tame and horned, the Thunder-wielder.
Over all living men he rules as Sovran, containing all as spokes within the felly.
  • Rigveda 1.36
 
I think you may be talking about Dukkha, a word that is difficult to translate from the Pali.

Although it is often translated as suffering, it can also be translated as unsatisfactory or stress. Wanting things to remain the same is stress. Wanting things to be different than they are is stress. Separation from the loved is stress. Clinging to the pleasant is stress. Aversion for the unpleasant is stress.

There are reasons for stress. The reasons are clinging and aversion. There is a way to end stress. The way to end stress is the Noble Eightfold Path which is divided into three groups, morality, concentration, and wisdom.

Morality consists of Right Speech, Right Action and Right Livelihood.
Concentration consists of Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right Concentration
Wisdom consists of Right View and Right Resolve.

Living a life of equanimity is much preferable to living a life of stress.
Ah, you can run but you can’t hide! I’m back:D

Got a question;) Okay while I agree living a life of balance is much better then living a life of stress, it does not change the fact that in this world it just isn’t reality.

Isn’t tying to live your life in equanimity a stress in itself?

In the Catholic teaching when your life gets out of hand and stress gets out of hand we call on Christ to take away our suffering and our stress.

Every Sunday in church we say take away our anxiety’s etc.

But what I am asking are you not trying in a sense to escape from reality then, and make your own so called heaven on earth all by yourself?
 
Correct. BUT, he was over weight for a period in his life while he was searching enlightenment. It didn’t work out so he stopped. The middle statue of him standing you have is thought to be one of the most accurate images of Gotama.
Don’t you mean underweight? He practiced harsh ascetic practices of very restricted fasting prior to becoming enlightened.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top