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 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-been-ness 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."