Discovery of subatomic particles

• Jacky Woo

  7 Jul 12, 20:01

  How does the discovery of Higgs Boson mean?

  It is still not confirmed by CERN yet. If it is proven to be true, then all religion in the world teachings will be dispelled once and for all?

  Does this apply to Buddhist teachings as well, as Buddhism does not teaches creationism.

• 2009novice

  7 Jul 12, 22:53

  Not very sure what subsequent impacts will develop in future

  however in my personal point of view, Buddha is (was lol) still the wisest person I ever known.

  Appreciated him for teaching the Noble Truths, the Dharma everything

  Thank God Buddha is not a Creator lol

  Having said that, I am not trying to say that Buddhism is above science. I feel that religion and science is always hard to blend in together sometimes. Some parts of religion requires faith, but science does not do that

• Fcukpap

  7 Jul 12, 23:24

  agree totally with novice....

  religions exist to remind and provide the moral powers in us to resolve the sufferings of humanity...

  science serves to correct erroneous thinking or beliefs i.e. the copernican revolution

• Fcukpap

  7 Jul 12, 23:30

  Peter Higgs may be nominated for the Nobel Prize this year following the recent sensational news....God's particle...

• Jacky Woo

  8 Jul 12, 00:42

  yes the buddhism teachings is very different from other religions in that there is no god or creationism. in fact the teachings sort of against what the creationism taught ie non self or soul, dependent origination etc.

• Jacky Woo

  8 Jul 12, 00:48

  Ajahn Brahm said this brilliantly.

  You should not bend the truth to fit your religious beliefs.

• An Eternal Now

  8 Jul 12, 14:40

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson#.22God_particle.22

  "God particle"

  The Higgs boson is often referred to as the "God particle" by individuals outside the scientific community,^[74] after the title of Leon Lederman's popular science book on particle physics, The God Particle: If the Universe Is the Answer, What Is the Question?^[75][76] While use of this term may have contributed to increased media interest,^[76] many scientists dislike it, since it is sensational and overstates the particle's importance. Its discovery would still leave unanswered questions about the unification of quantum chromodynamics, the electroweak interaction, and gravity, as well as the ultimate origin of the universe.^[74][77] Higgs, an atheist himself, is displeased that the Higgs particle is nicknamed the "God particle",^[78] because the term "might offend people who are religious".^[79]

  Lederman said he gave it a nickname because the particle is "so central to the state of physics today, so crucial to our understanding of the structure of matter, yet so elusive,"^[74][75][80] and added that he chose "the God particle" because "the publisher wouldn't let us call it the Goddamn Particle, though that might be a more appropriate title, given its villainous nature and the expense it is causing."^[75]

  A renaming competition conducted by the science correspondent for the British Guardian newspaper chose the name "the champagne bottle boson" as the best from among their submissions: "The bottom of a champagne bottle is in the shape of the Higgs potential and is often used as an illustration in physics lectures. So it's not an embarrassingly grandiose name, it is memorable, and [it] has some physics connection too."^[81]

• Jui

  8 Jul 12, 15:09

  Actually, I'm not sure why Buddhism would be affected by this? Techniques to be free from suffering still work whether this particle is proven or not.

  Now if there's proof beyond doubt (heh) that there's no such thing as past/future life maybe the foundations of buddhism will be rocked to its core. Still doesn't mean that freedom from suffering can't be attained in this life though.

• An Eternal Now

  8 Jul 12, 15:18

  I guess this is an important scientific discovery, but not any more than many of the previous scientific discoveries. Might be wrong.

• sinweiy

  8 Jul 12, 16:33

  saw the video explaination.

  http://vimeo.com/41038445

  they are trying to find out why some particles are small while some are larger. why, why why. so they thought there should be some pattern behind this "why". but the yes or no pattern is so very similar, like comparing two filmstrips, neither same nor different. they want to find the difference. you think can? lol. 

  this is we called in Mahayana, "Dharmakaya".  

  quote this before by Ven Shen Kai:

  Since it's entire existence, it's so near to reach like space everywhere exist Dharmakaya. Without Dharmakaya, Earth cannot be in the air. Cars cannot works. Every thing is benefited by Dharmakaya. 

  can also say it's the 1st phenomenon aspect ç›¸åˆ†of the 4 cognition functions四分. 

  no big deal to Buddha.

  /\

• bycai

  8 Jul 12, 17:08

  Diamond Sutra(Vajracchedika-sutra)

  一�相

  Chapter 30.

  The lord Buddha resumed:

  "Subhuti, if any good person, either man or woman, were to take 3,000 galaxies and grind them into microscopic powder and blow it into space, what do you think, would this powder have any individual existence?"

  "Subhuti replied, "Yes, lord, as a microscopic powder blown into space, it might be said to have a relative existence, but as you use words, it has no existence. The words are used only as a figure of speech. Otherwise the words would imply a belief in the existence of matter as an independent and self-existent thing, which it is not."

  "Furthermore, when the Most Honored One refers to the '3,000 galaxies,' he could only do so as a figure of speech. Why? Because if the 3,000 galaxies really existed, their only reality would consist in their cosmic unity. Whether as microscopic powder or as galaxies, what does it matter? Only in the sense of the cosmic unity of ultimate being can the Buddha rightfully refer to it."

  The lord Buddha was very pleased with this reply and said:

  "Subhuti, although ordinary people have always grasped after an arbitrary conception of matter and galaxies, the concept has no true basis; it is an illusion of the mortal mind. Even when it is referred to as 'cosmic unity' it is unthinkable and unknowable."

• sinweiy

  9 Jul 12, 08:59

  6th Master Hui Neng finalised stanza in Platform Sutra:-

   

   å…­ç¥–大師法寶壇經:

   

  何期自性本自清淨。True Nature is Originally Pure.

   

  何期自性本�生滅。True Nature is Originally neither arising nor ceasing.

   

  何期自性本自具足。True Nature is Originally Inclusive

   

  何期自性本無動�。True Nature is Originally Still.

   

  何期自性能生�法。True Nature is able to Produce all dharma.

   

  even better than the 本æ�¥æ— ä¸€ç‰© stanza, which still leaning toward emptiness.

   

  元音�人:

   

  神秀说的是æ¸�修，而禅宗是顿悟ã€�é¡¿ä¿®ã€�é¡¿è¯�的圆顿法，所以五祖ä¸�把衣钵给他。六祖说：“本æ�¥æ— ä¸€ç‰©ã€‚”这就å��空了。所以五祖说：“也没有è§�性ï¼�”è‹¥ 真è§�性了，五祖为什么还è¦�三更说法，说到“应无所ä½�而生其心”六祖æ‰�大悟呢？这个å�ˆå­�改一改：“è�©æ��æ�ƒå�šæ ‘，明镜å�‡ä½œå�°ã€‚”现相妙用啊，暂且å�šå�šæ ‘å�°ä¹Ÿä¸� 妨ï¼�“本æ�¥ä¸�染污，说净亦尘埃”。有个清净，还是尘埃。本性是ä¸�垢ä¸�净，空无一物的，垢既无有，净å�ˆä½•æ�¥ï¼�？但现在把这两个å�ˆå­�è�”å�ˆèµ·æ�¥äº¦å¾ˆå½“用。因为现 代人根é’�，ä¸�“常常勤拂拭”，扫除妄习，怎能æˆ�é�“？ä¸�作“本æ�¥æ— ä¸€ç‰©”会，å�ˆæ€Žèƒ½ä¸�著有？所以近人说：六祖与神秀大师å�ˆèµ·æ�¥ï¼Œå…­ç¥–是摩醯首罗一å�ªçœ¼ï¼Œè€Œç¥ž 秀是å�Œç›®åœ†æ˜Žï¼Œä¿¡ä¸�诬也。----- æ¡¥æµ�æ°´ä¸�æµ�

   

  ����树，明镜�作�
  本��染污，说净亦尘埃

  Wisdom thinks that it can be the tree, while the bright mirror was trying to be the stand. Fundamentally, there was no contamination, to say we need purification, it's also a defilement.

   

  /\

   

• justdoit77

  9 Jul 12, 15:05

  Originally posted by Jacky Woo:

  How does the discovery of Higgs Boson mean?

  It is still not confirmed by CERN yet. If it is proven to be true, then all religion in the world teachings will be dispelled once and for all?

  Does this apply to Buddhist teachings as well, as Buddhism does not teaches creationism.

  How does the discovery of Higgs Boson dispell teachings of all religion?
  Higgs Boson is not a belief that everything in this world is created by god.

• Dawnfirstlight

  10 Jul 12, 00:07

  The discovery proves that there's no creator which tallies with  Buddha's teachings.

• sinweiy

  10 Jul 12, 08:54

  Buddha's teaching is better at non-abiding, ä¸�å�¯è¯´ä¸�å�¯è¯´"cannot say cannot say". all depend on perspectives. to say yes creation (not creator) or no creation(at an individual level, as in karma) is a defilement/wandering thoughts at work. don't want to grasp at any fixed point of view(in term of liberation).

  Dalai Lama's answer:-

  Q: You have said that according to Buddhist philosophy there is no Creator, no God of creation, and this may initially put off many people who believe in a divine principle. Can you explain the difference between the Vajrayana Primordial Buddha and a Creator God?

  A: I understand the Primordial Buddha, also known as Buddha Samantabhadra, to be the ultimate reality, the realm of the Dharmakaya-- the space of emptiness--where all phenomena, pure and impure, are dissolved. This is the explanation taught by the Sutras and Tantras. However, in the context of your question, the tantric tradition is the only one which explains the Dharmakaya in terms of Inherent clear light, the essential nature of the mind; this would seem imply that all phenomena, samsara and nirvana, arise from this clear and luminous source. Even the New School of Translation came to the conclusion that the "state of rest" of a practitioner of the Great Yoga--Great Yoga implies here the state of the practitioner who has reached a stage in meditation where the most subtle experience of clear light has been realized--that for as long as the practitioner remains in this ultimate sphere he or she remains totally free of any sort of veil obscuring the mind, and is immersed in a state of great bliss.

  We can say, therefore, that this ultimate source, clear light, is close to the notion of a Creator, since all phenomena, whether they belong to samsara or nirvana, originate therein. But we must be careful in speaking of this source, we must not be led into error. I do not mean chat there exists somewhere, there, a sort of collective clear light, analogous to the non-Buddhist concept of Brahma as a substratum. We must not be inclined to deify this luminous space. We must understand that when we speak of ultimate or inherent clear light, we are speaking on an individual level.

  Likewise, when we speak of karma as the cause of the universe we eliminate the notion of a unique entity called karma existing totally independently. Rather, collective karmic impressions, accumulated individually, are at the origin of the creation of a world. When, in the tantric context, we say that all worlds appear out of clear light, we do not visualize this source as a unique entity, but as the ultimate clear light of each being. We can also, on the basis of its pure essence, understand this clear light to be the Primordial Buddha. All the stages which make up the life of each living being--death, the intermediate state, and rebirth--represent nothing more than the various manifestations of the potential of clear light. It is both the most subtle consciousness and energy. The more clear light loses its subtlety, the more your experiences take shape.

  In this way, death and the intermediate state are moments where the gross manifestations emanating from clear light are reabsorbed. At death we return to that original source, and from there a slightly more gross state emerges to form the intermediate state preceding rebirth. At the stage of rebirth, clear light is apparent in a physical incarnation. At death we return to this source. And so on. The ability to recognize subtle clear light, also called the Primordial Buddha, is equivalent to realizing nirvana, whereas ignorance of the nature of clear light leaves us to wander in the different realms of samsaric existence.

  This is how I understand the concept of the Primordial Buddha. It would be a grave error to conceive of it as an independent and autonomous existence from beginningless time. If we had to accept the idea of an independent creator, the explanations given in the Pramanavartika, the "Compendium of Valid Knowledge" written by Dharmakirti, and in the ninth chapter of the text by Shantideva, which completely refutes the existence per se of all phenomena, would be negated. This, in turn, would refute the notion of the Primordial Buddha. The Buddhist point of view does not accept the validity of affirmations which do not stand up to logical examination. If a sutra describes the Primordial Buddha as an autonomous entity, we must be able to interpret this assertion without taking it literally. We call this type of sutra an "interpretable" sutra.

  http://hhdl.dharmakara.net/hhdlquotes22.html

  ps: to me, say yes also can, say no also can. non-abiding. 事事无�。:)

  "those" ppl say "God created humankind in His image ". actually, kind of think of it, quite true in certain aspect. as the �分perceiving aspect of true nature is as same as human's see, hear, feel, know �闻觉知. relative. quantum physics. what the big has, the small also has. a droplet quality is same as ocean quality.

  /\ 

• Army 21

  10 Jul 12, 09:19

  ..how on earth does martensite formation in a material has anything to do with the gods???

• Dawnfirstlight

  10 Jul 12, 15:40

  Cloning is another proof that there's no creator. In Buddhism, there are many types of birth. 胎生(humans & some animals)，化生(ghosts & heavenly beings, no need parents)，�生，湿生。Cloning is a type of 化生.

• Fcukpap

  10 Jul 12, 15:48

  Originally posted by Dawnfirstlight:

  Cloning is another proof that there's no creator. In Buddhism, there are many types of birth. 胎生(humans & some animals)，化生(ghosts & heavenly beings, no need parents)，�生，湿生。Cloning is a type of 化生.

  
  Profound!

• Pegembara

  10 Jul 12, 16:11

  All scientific discoveries fall within the realm of the six senses. In fact the world is nothing other than sights, sounds, smells, tastes, sensations and mind stuff, what the Buddha called loka.

  The hoo-haa regarding the God particle reminds me of this sutta.

  "I tell you, friend, that it is not possible by traveling to know or see or reach a far end of the cosmos where one does not take birth, age, die, pass away, or reappear. But at the same time, I tell you that there is no making an end of suffering & stress without reaching the end of the cosmos. Yet it is just within this fathom-long body, with its perception & intellect, that I declare that there is the cosmos, the origination of the cosmos, the cessation of the cosmos, and the path of practice leading to the cessation of the cosmos."

  http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.045.than.html

• Fcukpap

  13 Jul 12, 23:03

  personally i respect the scientific discoveries made, as well as the spiritual wonders one could explore in the depths of religions...

  religion is not a science, but a spiritual journey which helps us towards greater good and self realization.

• Jacky Woo

  14 Jul 12, 01:47

  how do u define spiritual?

  surely there must be an explanations on this?

• Fcukpap

  14 Jul 12, 08:12

  the immaterial reality - a path or paths towards discovering the inner self and its connectedness with the nature, larger world, cosmos...and throughout the journey, values such as love, compassion, humanity, patience, tolerance, forgiveness, harmony, mindfulness etc. are engaged, experienced and learned...

  towards this end, spiritual exploration thus brings much greater benefits for the self 

  just my opinion...

• Fcukpap

  14 Jul 12, 10:43

  

• bycai

  14 Jul 12, 17:16

  Spiritual, based on discussion between Meiretya and Buddha, is referring to the subatomic particle, the tiniest thought of mind has its spiritual value 彌勒�薩講「念念�形�，形就是物質�象,物質�象統統有�想行識

   ä½›å�³å•�彌勒。
  心有所念幾念幾想幾識耶。彌勒言。
  �手彈指之頃。三�二億百�念。念念�形。
  形形皆有識。識念極微細��執�。

  �薩處胎經�第二

  彈指之間三�二億百�念。多少個念頭？三百二�兆，一彈指。我們一秒�彈得快大概�以彈五次，�以一秒��單�，是一�六百兆，一秒�一�六百兆個生滅。 �個生滅都有物質�象，世尊所�的，幾相，就是物質�象，彌勒�薩講「念念�形�，形就是物質�象，就是相。「形皆有識�，識是什麼？�想行識，�個物質 �象統統有�想行識，念念是�立的，念念�相�。

  我們迷了這一念，根本就�知�這一念的存在，我們看到是什麼？這一念的相續相，相續相累�構�一個畫�，就�電影影片累�構�一個畫�在銀幕上，我們看到 了。銀幕上那個一念我們沒有看到，實際上銀幕上那個一念是二�四分之一秒，它一秒�二�四張畫�疊在一起。佛告訴我們這個速度是一�六百兆分之一秒。一� 六百兆，我們怎麼知��你就曉得我們所看的這個境界，就是這個�念累�產生的幻相，這個相是個動的相，�是�止的。你看一秒�一�六百兆次的生滅，�在我 們講振動，頻率的振動。這是一真法界，迷了之後，這一真法界隨著我們念頭在變，一切法從心想生，我們把它變�四�法界，���緣覺��薩變的，這些人覺悟 了，但�是大徹大悟，他沒見性。見性就是見到一�六百兆分之一秒，他見到這個，那�見性。見到最�一念�覺而有無明，他見到這個，見到這個�能把無明破 掉，就是什麼？

  http://amtb-mtl.org/wordpress/?p=273

   

• Jacky Woo

  14 Jul 12, 21:55

  do you have english version? what sutra is this