One can't prove that God but science makes God unnecessary

• Jui

  5 Feb 13, 22:05

  Oh, I get where the problem is now. Because according to buddhism it's a "downward" evolution, first comes the devas then eventually we go into the hell beings, and not some kind of situation where in the beginning there were already hell beings/animals so evolution becomes a upward & downward thing right?

• An Eternal Now

  5 Feb 13, 22:11

  There are different interpretations of Aganna sutta, I've read a Theravada booklet that interprets it as "upward" evolution.
  
  Venerable Hui Lu also supports the "upwards" evolution interpretation of the Aganna sutta.
  
  In any case, it is just one out of countless suttas and does not take any central importance in the scriptures... and is quite open to interpretation. Loppon Malcolm calls it a "mythology" and D.N. (the most late collection of Nikayas) is known to have more of these kind of suttas.
  
  81% of Buddhists believe in evolution: http://www.wildmind.org/blogs/on-practice/buddhism-evolution

• sinweiy

  5 Feb 13, 22:12

  Originally posted by Jui:

  Oh, I get where the problem is now. Because according to buddhism it's a "downward" evolution, first comes the devas then eventually we go into the hell beings, and not some kind of situation where in the beginning there were already hell beings/animals so evolution becomes a upward & downward thing right?

  bingo!

• An Eternal Now

  5 Feb 13, 22:14

  Loppon Malcolm: "rebirth and material evolution are non-contradictory so we can have beings who take rebirth in "miraculous" form (i.e. they have prana bodies) and meanwhile, life on earth can evolve materially.",
  
  

  What I mean is that if you accept the bardo, then you can accept that there are beings born with subtle bodies. As biological lifeforms advanced, beings with karma to be reborn in those forms where born here."
• sinweiy

  5 Feb 13, 22:16

  eventually it's all upward toward the highest life form, Buddhahood. :)

  /\

• sinweiy

  5 Feb 13, 22:19

  Originally posted by sinweiy:

  eventually it's all upward toward the highest life form, Buddhahood. :)

   

  then again, originally we are Buddha, there's no up (non down). 

  /\

   

• An Eternal Now

  5 Feb 13, 22:28

  :)
  
  By the way a month ago I wanted to find out what Ven Hui Lu thought about evolution... and I searched very long, finally found it.
  
  Then very funny.... just nice I click "Play" on the Ven Hui Lu DVD passed to me then instantly is talking about that exact part.
  
  http://blog.fo.ifeng.com/article/14407657.html
  

  ���万象。】

  è¿™ 个森罗万象就是一法所包容，就是性空，当体就是空。简å�•è®²ï¼šæ£®ç½—万象；诸ä½�ï¼�佛陀讲的空的æ€�想有几个层é�¢ï¼Œæœ‰å‡ ä¸ªå±‚é�¢ï¼šç¬¬ä¸€å±‚就是因为生ç�­ï¼Œåˆ¹é‚£ç”Ÿç�­ï¼Œæ‰€ 以，佛陀讲空；因为是缘起ã€�æ�¡ä»¶æ‰€æž„æˆ�的，所以，佛陀讲空；因为是无常法，万法都是无常法，所以，佛陀讲空。所以，空有很深的å�«ä¹‰ï¼Œç©ºæœ‰å¾ˆæ·±çš„å�«ä¹‰ã€‚简å�• 讲：空就是é€�视相的ä¸�实在性；空就是é€�视相的没有永æ�’性；空就是é€�视相上的无常性；空就是é€�视相的刹那å�˜åŒ–性。所以，佛陀告诉我们：微细的å�˜åŒ–，本身就是 一ç§�苦。这一å�¥è¯�，很有智慧的人æ‰�能讲出。微细的å�˜åŒ–，其实是一ç§�苦，这是佛陀在《阿å�«ç»�》讲的。你注æ„�观察这个天地万物，山也会å�˜é«˜ï¼Œå› ä¸ºæ�¿å�—çš„è¿�动。 所以，这个山，有的山æ¯�年都在长高，æ¯�年都在长高，æ¯�年都在长高……对ä¸�对？æ¯�年都在长高。地ç�ƒå®ƒæœ‰æ�¿å�—è¿�动，譬如说è�²å¾‹å®¾æ�¿å�—ã€�欧亚æ�¿å�—等等这些æ�¿å�—è¿�动，所以，推挤的能é‡�，山就会å�˜é«˜ã€‚有一个徒弟问说：师父ï¼�那陆地到底怎么æ�¥çš„？我说：陆地就是ç�«å±±å–·å‡ºæ�¥çš„，碰到海水å‡�结，它就一直喷一直喷。所以，包括现在的å¤�å¨�夷，å¤�å¨�夷Hawaii 它 æ¯�一年喷出æ�¥çš„岩浆，碰到海水，冷å�´äº†ï¼Œå�ˆå¢žåŠ äº†åœŸåœ°ã€‚所以，我们现在的这个土地，其实就是由地壳å�˜åŠ¨æ�¥çš„ã€�ç�«å±±å–·å‡ºæ�¥çš„，冷å�´ä¸‹æ�¥çš„，ç»�过几亿年的风 化，å�˜æˆ�了土壤，就是这样æ�¥çš„。大海的生命怎么æ�¥çš„？大海的生命，里é�¢çš„生物是怎么æ�¥ï¼Ÿå°±æ˜¯å› ä¸ºå¤§æµ·ã€�这个海水冲刷了岩石，这个岩石里é�¢æœ‰æ°¨åŸºé…¸ã€�有蛋白 è´¨ã€�有生命的基本元素；碳ã€�æ°¢ã€�é’™ã€�é“�ã€�氨基酸ã€�蛋白质。所以，海水冲刷了这个矿物，å�˜æˆ�矿物质，å�˜æˆ�了氨基酸ã€�蛋白质，阳光一照射的时候，因缘具足，刹 那之间å�˜æˆ�了生物，微生物，生命就是这样æ�¥çš„。

  所 以，有一个人看了佛ç»�就说：师父ï¼�我看了一本佛ç»�，他说：人是由光音天æ�¥çš„，因为å�ƒåˆ°é‡�的东西，所以，飞ä¸�èµ·æ�¥ï¼Œå› æ­¤å°±ç•™åœ¨åœ°ç�ƒã€‚我这一段实在是看ä¸�懂ï¼� 我说：哎呀ï¼�很简å�•ï¼�外太空的陨石夹带ç�€äººç±»èº«ä¸Šçš„元素，撞击到这个地ç�ƒï¼›æ’žå‡»åˆ°è¿™ä¸ªåœ°ç�ƒï¼Œå››ã€�五å��亿年å‰�，没有这个动物ã€�没有这个æ¤�物的。这个元素，生 命的元素，因缘具足的时候就å�•ç»†èƒžï¼Œå�•ç»†èƒžï¼Œé‚£ä¸ªæ—¶å€™æ˜¯æ²¡æœ‰æ°§çš„世界。诸ä½�ï¼�五å��亿年ã€�å››å��亿年å‰�的天空，看起æ�¥å®Œå…¨æ˜¯ç�«çº¢è‰²ï¼Œç�«çº¢è‰²ï¼�是为什么？因为是CO2的世界，就是二氧化碳，ç�«çº¢çš„世界。那么，由一ç§�藻类分，一直排出æ�¥åˆ¶é€ è¿™ä¸ªæ°§ï¼Œåˆ¶é€ è¿™ä¸ªæ°§……海中的这个藻类制造这个氧，这个氧慢慢地慢慢地气候改å�˜ï¼Œæ…¢æ…¢è¿™ä¸ªæ”¹å�˜ï¼Œæ…¢æ…¢è¿™ä¸ªæ”¹å�˜ã€‚所以，我们现在看到的天空，为什么是è“�色的呢？因为有O2，因为是充满ç�€æ°§æ°”，充满ç�€æ°§æ°”，所以，我们看到的天空是è“�色的，是è“�色的。

   

• Jui

  5 Feb 13, 22:28

  Loppon Malcolm said it well! Of course, eventually (not sure how long) everyone can and will become fully enlightened.

  But I think we're going a bit OT eh?

• sinweiy

  5 Feb 13, 22:32

  Originally posted by Jui:

  Oh, I get where the problem is now. Because according to buddhism it's a "downward" evolution, first comes the devas then eventually we go into the hell beings, and not some kind of situation where in the beginning there were already hell beings/animals so evolution becomes a upward & downward thing right?

  hell beings and ghost beings like devas are 化生 transitional (?) bodies. when human created karma, then they created hell and ghosts realms. beginning don't have. but animal is related to ignorance and are found everywhere even in the lower heavenly realm, even Amitabha PL also "have". so i think how animal come about here could also be like that in Aganna sutta.

  /\

   

• Jui

  5 Feb 13, 22:33

  Originally posted by An Eternal Now:

  :)
  
  By the way a month ago I wanted to find out what Ven Hui Lu thought about evolution... and I searched very long, finally found it.
  
  Then very funny.... just nice I click "Play" on the Ven Hui Lu DVD passed to me then instantly is talking about that exact part.
  
  http://blog.fo.ifeng.com/article/14407657.html

  ���万象。】

  è¿™ 个森罗万象就是一法所包容，就是性空，当体就是空。简å�•è®²ï¼šæ£®ç½—万象；诸ä½�ï¼�佛陀讲的空的æ€�想有几个层é�¢ï¼Œæœ‰å‡ ä¸ªå±‚é�¢ï¼šç¬¬ä¸€å±‚就是因为生ç�­ï¼Œåˆ¹é‚£ç”Ÿç�­ï¼Œæ‰€ 以，佛陀讲空；因为是缘起ã€�æ�¡ä»¶æ‰€æž„æˆ�的，所以，佛陀讲空；因为是无常法，万法都是无常法，所以，佛陀讲空。所以，空有很深的å�«ä¹‰ï¼Œç©ºæœ‰å¾ˆæ·±çš„å�«ä¹‰ã€‚简å�• 讲：空就是é€�视相的ä¸�实在性；空就是é€�视相的没有永æ�’性；空就是é€�视相上的无常性；空就是é€�视相的刹那å�˜åŒ–性。所以，佛陀告诉我们：微细的å�˜åŒ–，本身就是 一ç§�苦。这一å�¥è¯�，很有智慧的人æ‰�能讲出。微细的å�˜åŒ–，其实是一ç§�苦，这是佛陀在《阿å�«ç»�》讲的。你注æ„�观察这个天地万物，山也会å�˜é«˜ï¼Œå› ä¸ºæ�¿å�—çš„è¿�动。 所以，这个山，有的山æ¯�年都在长高，æ¯�年都在长高，æ¯�年都在长高……对ä¸�对？æ¯�年都在长高。地ç�ƒå®ƒæœ‰æ�¿å�—è¿�动，譬如说è�²å¾‹å®¾æ�¿å�—ã€�欧亚æ�¿å�—等等这些æ�¿å�—è¿�动，所以，推挤的能é‡�，山就会å�˜é«˜ã€‚有一个徒弟问说：师父ï¼�那陆地到底怎么æ�¥çš„？我说：陆地就是ç�«å±±å–·å‡ºæ�¥çš„，碰到海水å‡�结，它就一直喷一直喷。所以，包括现在的å¤�å¨�夷，å¤�å¨�夷Hawaii 它 æ¯�一年喷出æ�¥çš„岩浆，碰到海水，冷å�´äº†ï¼Œå�ˆå¢žåŠ äº†åœŸåœ°ã€‚所以，我们现在的这个土地，其实就是由地壳å�˜åŠ¨æ�¥çš„ã€�ç�«å±±å–·å‡ºæ�¥çš„，冷å�´ä¸‹æ�¥çš„，ç»�过几亿年的风 化，å�˜æˆ�了土壤，就是这样æ�¥çš„。大海的生命怎么æ�¥çš„？大海的生命，里é�¢çš„生物是怎么æ�¥ï¼Ÿå°±æ˜¯å› ä¸ºå¤§æµ·ã€�这个海水冲刷了岩石，这个岩石里é�¢æœ‰æ°¨åŸºé…¸ã€�有蛋白 è´¨ã€�有生命的基本元素；碳ã€�æ°¢ã€�é’™ã€�é“�ã€�氨基酸ã€�蛋白质。所以，海水冲刷了这个矿物，å�˜æˆ�矿物质，å�˜æˆ�了氨基酸ã€�蛋白质，阳光一照射的时候，因缘具足，刹 那之间å�˜æˆ�了生物，微生物，生命就是这样æ�¥çš„。

  所 以，有一个人看了佛ç»�就说：师父ï¼�我看了一本佛ç»�，他说：人是由光音天æ�¥çš„，因为å�ƒåˆ°é‡�的东西，所以，飞ä¸�èµ·æ�¥ï¼Œå› æ­¤å°±ç•™åœ¨åœ°ç�ƒã€‚我这一段实在是看ä¸�懂ï¼� 我说：哎呀ï¼�很简å�•ï¼�外太空的陨石夹带ç�€äººç±»èº«ä¸Šçš„元素，撞击到这个地ç�ƒï¼›æ’žå‡»åˆ°è¿™ä¸ªåœ°ç�ƒï¼Œå››ã€�五å��亿年å‰�，没有这个动物ã€�没有这个æ¤�物的。这个元素，生 命的元素，因缘具足的时候就å�•ç»†èƒžï¼Œå�•ç»†èƒžï¼Œé‚£ä¸ªæ—¶å€™æ˜¯æ²¡æœ‰æ°§çš„世界。诸ä½�ï¼�五å��亿年ã€�å››å��亿年å‰�的天空，看起æ�¥å®Œå…¨æ˜¯ç�«çº¢è‰²ï¼Œç�«çº¢è‰²ï¼�是为什么？因为是CO2的世界，就是二氧化碳，ç�«çº¢çš„世界。那么，由一ç§�藻类分，一直排出æ�¥åˆ¶é€ è¿™ä¸ªæ°§ï¼Œåˆ¶é€ è¿™ä¸ªæ°§……海中的这个藻类制造这个氧，这个氧慢慢地慢慢地气候改å�˜ï¼Œæ…¢æ…¢è¿™ä¸ªæ”¹å�˜ï¼Œæ…¢æ…¢è¿™ä¸ªæ”¹å�˜ã€‚所以，我们现在看到的天空，为什么是è“�色的呢？因为有O2，因为是充满ç�€æ°§æ°”，充满ç�€æ°§æ°”，所以，我们看到的天空是è“�色的，是è“�色的。

   

  Wah, this is the xin xing ming talk he gave in Hong Kong?

• An Eternal Now

  5 Feb 13, 22:33

  Yes, you also heard it ah

• Jui

  5 Feb 13, 22:38

  Yup, someone lent my mom the dvd and I ripped it out to listen to it. Pretty nice, and finally beginning to understanding it.

• An Eternal Now

  5 Feb 13, 22:42

  I see... Bohiruci lent me that series of DVD.
  
  Sorry I probably can't return it until... dunnu when, maybe June when I come back.

• BroInChrist

  11 Feb 13, 10:14

  Originally posted by An Eternal Now:

  You prefer to quote fabrications rather than science.
  
  You are still unable to " find just one expert – by which I mean an actual paleo-anthropologist – who claims that Lucy was just a 3 foot tall chimpanzee"
  
  and

  You still ignorantly think that "there is only one fossil of Homo neanderthalensis;" and ignore the fact that "in fact, there are dozens of them."
  
  Gosh, you really think there are no such thing as neaderthalensis?

  Even if I can find no paleo-anthropologist to claim that, so what? Are they the ONLY people who have the authority to make such claims? Even Wiki can tell us the facts that it is 3ft7 and looked like a common chimpanzee. Well, maybe that's what it is after all! It is the evolutionary-blinkered eyes that want to make a man out of a monkey. I think anatomists like Dr David Menton may be even a better expert to examine what Lucy was. http://www.trueauthority.com/cvse/lucy.htm

  You have misrepresented my beliefs. Since when did I ignorantly think there is only one fossil of neanderthal man? This would be a srawman fallacy on your part. Creationists do not think there is only one fossil of neanderthal man. We just disagree that they are half-man half ape or some transitional missing links between ape and man. http://creation.com/neanderthal-childrens-fossils

• BroInChrist

  11 Feb 13, 10:17

  Originally posted by An Eternal Now:

  Kirk and Ray definitely can't stand up to the scrutiny of real scientists.
  
  I'm not a scientist and I am simply not interested in debating stuff like these with creationist. It gets boring after a while.

  What do you mean by real scientists? Evolutionists? Beware lest you commit the no-true-scotsman fallacy.

  I am not a scientist either. But I think you find it boring because you do not have the information to debate this issue. In your belief system it has already been set aside as an irrelevant issue, so there's nothing to debate about.

• BroInChrist

  11 Feb 13, 10:20

  Originally posted by Jui:

  Actually the correct way to say it is that man evolved from a common ancestor to the apes. We just branched off into a separate species at a certain point in time. So asking why there are still apes around if we evolved "from them" is actually a wrong question.

  Which begs the question, did man evolve from a common ancestor to the apes? You can't just assume the truth of the very thing in question.

• BroInChrist

  11 Feb 13, 10:25

  Originally posted by An Eternal Now:

  I see. Neanderthal is man-like but they are not human, there are clearly distinguishing features between human (as in homo sapiens) and the neanderthals. Neanderthals share a common ancestry with the homo sapiens, but the neanderthals died out later. Either way, Neanderthals have never been considered 'human ancestors'... they are a different evolutionary branch from the Homo Erectus. Neanderthals are however considered to be as or in fact slightly more intelligent than the homo sapiens (they have slightly larger brains than us).
  
  I read one article some time ago, here's something about why they disappeared from the face of Earth, part of their decline is because "the base of the Neanderthal tongue was positioned higher in the throat, crowding the mouth somewhat. As a result, Neanderthal speech would most likely have been slow-paced and nasalized. "... ..."although Neanderthals did have the ability to speak, they were capable of articulating only a smaller number of phonemes. Jared Diamond described this limitation using the following example: imagine how many words you could say if the only sounds you were able to make were a, u, c, p. Imagine trying to say "Trinity College is a fine place to work." All you could say were something like "Capupa Cappap up a cap capupap." (also see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o589CAu73UM)
  
  And also there is a curious fact that some European and Asian races (not all) have a few percentage (1 to 4) of Neaderthal DNA in them due to cross-mixing tens of thousands of years ago. Chinese is included in those races so I'm probably a bit neanderthal and mostly homo sapien myself.
  
  
  See http://news.softpedia.com/news/Neanderthals-were-too-smart-to-survive-15264.shtml

  You said that Neanderthals were NEVER considered as human ancestors. I think you are wrong. The first Neandertal was reconstructed as a “missing link" by famous paleontologist Marcellin Boule (1861–1942). He was called Homo neanderthalensis, implying a primitive evolutionary link to modern man, Homo sapiens.

• BroInChrist

  11 Feb 13, 10:29

  Originally posted by sinweiy:

  
  quite in the middle of farfetched, i mean how come species b stopped evolving while species a continue to evolve. then more dinosaurs species should be around. and another problem i consider quite strange is we should be seeing many or some of the middle species(missing linkS) still around instead of such a big gap between species.  like species A and B should have a smoother transition of species still around, not only man but animal too.

  what i know from a documentry is that the time when Lucy first appeared and the time apes first appeared is too close apart for it to evolve. say u need at least x million of years to evolve for A to B, but the time is less than x.

  /\

  In short, where are the transitional fossils? There should be lots and lots of them. But what we have are only bits and pieces, and with lots of artistic imagination you can turn an ape into a more manlike looking illustration.

• sinweiy

  11 Feb 13, 11:31

  Originally posted by BroInChrist:

  In short, where are the transitional fossils? There should be lots and lots of them. ..

  yeah, indeed a good point! even now mating of two totally different species to produce a new species is out of the question, i think. u cannot mate a cat and a dog. they think that the split happen long time ago. but i think even now we cannot produce a "real" split....the example of the mule that is the product of horse and donkey is just like european human marrying an asian to produce an eurasian. as their geno are similar.   in short u cannot mix/mate two different geno. not now, then not before too(?). hmm.

  in term of mutation like example when a species no longer needed their tail in their living, and through time, they become shorter is ok with me. 

  /\ 

• An Eternal Now

  11 Feb 13, 12:54

  http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liger

• An Eternal Now

  11 Feb 13, 12:56

  You can't mate a cat and dog because they are too far apart genetically but you can mate two different species of the feline family such as tigers and lions.

• An Eternal Now

  11 Feb 13, 12:58

  A real scientist is someone who makes statement based on tested and proven scientific research findings. Not based on one's beliefs and myths. Evolution is based on science, not beliefs and myths.

• sinweiy

  11 Feb 13, 19:44

  yea Liger is same as mule. like human of different color can. Ven ShenKai mentioned that things can be "è¯�å¾—" by yourself. He also wish to return to è¯�å¾— some science stuff.

  The Evolution of Life on Earth

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2_6cqa2cP4

  45billion yrs compress into 24 hrs. 

  quite a few of suddenly appear. the Eukaryotic cells reminded me of 

   

  When a unit of mind gathers more units of abstract elements and forms an animate matter, it will find out that it is easier to sustain itself by eating other smaller animate matters instead of gathering and processing units of abstract element by itself. By this experience, it becomes lazy and greedy. When a specie of animate matter or living beings becomes more intelligent and more cunning, a lot of other smaller beings will be killed.

  For the sake of food, there are always battles between the lower and the higher beings. The higher beings eat the lower beings and the lowest beings like the virus in turn attack the higher beings in their own battlefields, i.e. the bodies. (See Chart 2). The battles become extremely fierce when food is scarce. At one time there are more higher beings and at another time, there are more lower beings. (See Chart 3).

   

  • Killing generates bad kamma. The lower beings do not know killing is bad as it is for their survival; their bad kamma is slight. But for an intelligent being, like a human being, knowing killing is inflicting suffering, the action of killing will bring him down to one of the lower levels of existence. After suffering the bad effects, he will come up again to one of the higher levels again. Due to this killing and other defilements, a unit of mind will forever be existing up and down in different levels of existence until one day it dawns on it that killing is bad and that he must work hard in doing good and eradicating all defilements. It then climbs to the summit with purities and wisdom and will not gather or cling to matters, physical or mental. It will stay on the top and will never descend to the lower levels again.

   

  http://sgforums.com/forums/1728/topics/425491

  narration quote: "..animal life Suddenly erupt in an explosion of inventiveness...plant begin to appear follow by land mammals....first wing insects appear...retiles dominates ...dinosaurs suddenly vanish..." within few "minutes" apes split to old world  monkeys....before midnight human emerge. 

  seems like they are more into chicken come first. lol. i am more into rebirth as a transition between two life forms and the agreement of mutation of geno, which could be the result of karma i think. 

  /\

   

• sinweiy

  11 Feb 13, 20:08

  Originally posted by Jui:

  Let's say there's this species of animal we call "A" that lived 10 million years ago. Over the years this species slowly changed and 5 million years ago groups of them eventually differ from each other enough that you can no longer call them species A any more, and thus we have species b and c and maybe even d.

  We can't say that b evolved from c and then ask how come there's still c around because they're totally seperate species, but we can say that they share a common ancestor named "a".

  now i get it. after reading 

  Missing Links by Gregory Koukl

  http://www.str.org/site/News2?id=5451

  First I need to clear up a common misconception among creationists. This misconception causes them to say things that are foolish, frankly. The misconception is this: Man evolved from apes. Evolution does not teach that man evolved from apes, it teaches that man and apes have a common ancestor. Apes are pongids; men are hominids, in other words, two-legged primates that walk upright. The search for the missing link is the search for this man-like or hominoid ancestor that is a precursor to both modern apes and modern human beings. In other words, where is the transitional form, the fork so to speak, where apes and man went off in different directions and that links man to an earlier precursor. This is the missing link that is spoken of.

   

   it's interesting to see new species found

  http://species.asu.edu/Top10

  no transition link , just apeared or inter-breeding?

• BroInChrist

  23 Feb 13, 11:16

  Originally posted by sinweiy:

  then again, originally we are Buddha, there's no up (non down). 

  /\

   

  This is where I find that it is incoherent, if we were all originally Buddha that would mean an enlightened stage to begin with, or Nirvana. So how come the downward evolution to ignorance?