In Buddhism, Dependent Arising (Pratītyasamutpāda) is a core concept, described as:
“if this exists, that exists; if this ceases to exist, that also ceases to exist.”
It is interesting that Planck echoes Buddhist belief in Dependent Arising — also known as dependent origination, interdependent co-arising, conditioned arising or conditioned genesis. It is equally interesting that he specifically used the concept of a “mind matrix” in 1944, almost as if he was predicting the hit movie The Matrix, which contains within it similar concepts of observed-observer, mind matrix and the illusory nature of reality.
NOTE: Dependent Arising does not assert that there is nothing without consciousness, rather that consciousness and all phenomenon (all dharmas) are inter-dependent on each other.
Planck may have postulated this early on in the history of science, but Shakyamuni Buddha taught Pratītyasamutpāda 25 centuries ago. Buddhism has “dependent-arising” and “Emptiness”. Science has “observer-observed” and “conscious realism.” Buddhism has Karma; science has cause-effect. Modern Physics, Quantum Physics and Neuroscience have also circled around (both enthusiastic and wary at the same time) to the concept of observer-observed. Physicist John Wheeler put it:
“Useful as it is under ordinary circumstances to say that the world exists ‘out there’ independent of us, that view can no longer be upheld.”
emphatically understood if we experience it — as Buddha achieved under the Bodhi tree, and as we aspire to in our Buddhist practice. We visualize ourselves as a deity until we can almost believe we are (with divine pride!), then we dissolve it all into the Emptiness (or Oneness with all phenomenon) that it really represents. Max Planck would be delighted.
Donald Hoffman, professor of cognitive science at the University of California, puts both our normal perceptions and our imaginary (visualized) perspectives into perspective (although here he is speaking of ordinary perspective):
“We’ve been shaped to have perceptions that keep us alive, so we have to take them seriously. If I see something that I think of as a snake, I don’t pick it up. If I see a train, I don’t step in front of it. I’ve evolved these symbols to keep me alive, so I have to take them seriously. But it’s a logical flaw to think that if we have to take it seriously, we also have to take it literally.”
Seeing reality as it truly is — as derivative of consciousness, perception and interdependent arising — is one of the main goals of Vajrayana deity meditation, where one visualises oneself as a deity of choice. It’s one thing to know something; it is much more
Likewise, Buddha taught that we don’t have to take it literally. Buddha taught us that Samsara (the illusory world we think is real) is nothing more than incorrect perception created by “conditioning” and attachment to that conditioning. Or put in more definitive terms, that all phenomenon are dependent-arising (Pratītyasamutpāda in Sanskrit) Cognitive scientists would speak in similar ways, using such language as “Evolution conditioned us to have perceptions that help us survive.”
Buddhism speaks in terms of “Innate Enlightened Potential” or “Buddha Nature”. Cognitive Science speaks in terms of “Unified Single Mind.” Emptiness, or Shunyata, is also a Oneness perception of reality. Removing “ego” from our perception results in Oneness (Emptiness) which Buddhists would say is the ultimate, true nature of reality.
Professor Hoffman puts the Cognitive Science take on this in different — yet similar — terms:
“I call it conscious realism: Objective reality is just conscious agents, just points of view. Interestingly, I can take two conscious agents and have them interact, and the mathematical structure of that interaction also satisfies the definition of a conscious agent. This mathematics is telling me something. I can take two minds, and they can generate a new, unified single mind.
No comments:
Post a Comment