On th

e Cos

molog

y from

Scie

ntific

, Phil

osop

hical,

and B

uddh

ist vi

ew-po

ints

Georg

e S. W

ang a

nd S

hu-ch

in W

ang

On the Cosmology from Scientific, Philosophical, and Buddhist view-points

George S. Wang1 and Shu-chin Wang2

1 Professor of the Institute of Human and Celestial Teachers Education, Academy of

Human and Celestial Teachers at Mindless Mt. Zen Monastery, 7F,#192, Chung-Kung 2nd

Rd, Taichung City, Taiwan.

2Physics Department, National Changhua Univ. of Education, Changhua City, Taiwan.

1

On th

e Cos

molog

y from

Scie

ntific

, Phil

osop

hical,

and B

uddh

ist vi

ew-po

ints

Georg

e S. W

ang a

nd S

hu-ch

in W

ang

Abstract

Scientific Cosmology, based essentially on modern physics and astronomy, has its

speciality of taking for granted that existence of our universe is of objective authenticity.

In fact our cognized universe could be of subjective nature. Using geometrical optics of

physics we show in section 2 that all phenomena of the universe are Only what the

Observer' s Mind Manifests ( OOMM) . The Cosmology based on OOMM is actually the

Buddhist Cosmology. Scientific Cosmology and Philosophical Cosmology are based on

commonly understanding feature. Therefore they are called in the text as Cosmology of

Common Consensus ( CC Cosmology). Yet they are very important and beneficial to

mankind, especially true for the Scientific CC Cosmology .

The origin of Cosmology would be the philosophical Ontology. Consequently

cosmology theory would be expected to conform to the Ontology. Scientific CC

Cosmology, though not discussing Ontology explicitly, has made important development

and contribution due to the possible reason that scientists have used laws of the Nature

which contains the Ontological Mind. For instance, Einstein recognized ' velocity of light

is constant ' being a law of the Nature and then proposed it as the basic assumption for his

Theory of Relativity. Considering the unanimity between Ontology and Cosmology from

Scientific, Philosophical and Buddhist view-points, the unanimity situation for the

Buddhist is the best. The reason would be due to the concept of OOMM which directly

connects Buddhist Ontology and Cosmology.

In order to have some simple idea of the Big-Bang several items about the beginning

of Universe creation are briefly brought up in a manner of comparison between scientific

cosmology and Buddhist cosmology. Conventionally Scientific Cosmology does not

quite discuss the origin problem of life. We suggest that the ultimate origin of life could be

the ' Mind Great ' of Buddhism. This can be verified via ' the Hidden Messages in Water

'.

2

On th

e Cos

molog

y from

Scie

ntific

, Phil

osop

hical,

and B

uddh

ist vi

ew-po

ints

Georg

e S. W

ang a

nd S

hu-ch

in W

ang

1. Introduction

This year ( 2006) in June, Stephen W. Hawking arrived in Hong Kong giving a

formal lecture on the big explosion or the Big Bang of cosmology. He later gave a similar

speech in Beijing of China. He has been widely and highly praised as a most brilliant

theoretical physicist since Albert Einstein 1. As is well known, the universe that the

scientific knowledge recognizes would be suddenly created by the Big Bang. Passing about

15 billion years, the Universe has evolved and developed from nearly the size of zero

volume into its size of today. The progress of scientific cosmology is essentially based on

the probing achievement of physics and astronomy, etc. Its speciality is that the Universe

be recognized as an objective existence. By objective we mean the universe is the same to

every observer and independent of observers. What we want to express now is that the

universe is not of objective existence. On the contrary the Universe, as exhibited and

cognized, is Only what the Observers Mind Manifests abbreviated: OOMM. This

kind of cosmology, which is based on OOMM, is the cosmological view of Buddhism.

Before discussing we need to state the different realms for the scientific cosmology,

philosophical cosmology, and Buddhist cosmology. Scientific cosmology (in this text

science is mainly referred to as the Natural science, not social science) is the studies

of the category of universe which can be observed and experimentally measured. Thus the

scientific cosmology is based mainly on the experimental measurement and relevant

theory such as Einsteins General Relativity. It may be noted that from philosophical

point of view the realm of scientific cosmology is mainly that of material Matters.

Philosophical cosmology (in this text philosophy is generally referred to as the Western

philosophy) consists chiefly of Phenomenology and Ontology, in which the Noumenon of

Ontology is not of directly observable material Matters. Since Phenomena and Noumenon

indicate respectively the existence of Matter and Mind the philosophical Mind-Matter

Dualism for the macroscopic or sensual level of reality should be valid.2 Thus the

realm of philosophical cosmology is extended from Matters to that of both Matter and

Mind. The realm of Buddhism is about the most extended, including phenomenal world,

supernatural domain as well as the Ontological Level. Thus the Buddhist cosmology

should state about all aspects including Matter, Mind, and Spirit. The purport of this text

is just to state our views on the cosmology respectively from view points of science,

philosophy as well as Buddhism.

Lee Smolin in his bookThree roads to Quantum Gravity claims that the most

challenging problem on science in the 21st century is no more than on dealing with the

perfection of the Quantum Gravitation. He emphasizes the importance of the new

3

On th

e Cos

molog

y from

Scie

ntific

, Phil

osop

hical,

and B

uddh

ist vi

ew-po

ints

Georg

e S. W

ang a

nd S

hu-ch

in W

ang

conception of the relationship between the observer and the observed.3What we just said

about OOMM here is just the most fundamental conception of the relationship between the

observer and the observed. Owing to its important conception we assert the OOMM in

section 2. We also list all the 9 sections below:

1Introduction

2 Universe being Only what the Observer s Mind Manifests

3 Ontology and Cosmology

4 Why the scientists can make very important development and contribution to the

cosmology

5 Why the philosophers didnt make great contribution to cosmology in the last two

centuries

6 The unanimity between Ontology and Cosmology from Scientific, Philosophical,

and Buddhist view-points

7Some similarity and consistency between scientific cosmology and Buddhist

cosmology

8 Discussion of the ultimate origin of life

9Brief summary and conclusion

2. Universe being Only what the Observer s Mind Manifests abbreviated: OOMM

As last section says, Lee Smolin stresses the importance of the new conception of the

relationship between the observer and the observed. Now we just assert the OOMM, which

could be considered as the most fundamental conception of the relationship between the

observer and the observed. To verify its authenticity we make use of the Geometrical

Optics of physics.

2-1.The scientific verification of OOMM for the cosmology using geometrical optics 4

OOMM means that all phenomena of the universe are Only what the Observers

Mind Manifests. Now we briefly verify the OOMM via Geometric Optics of physics.5

Consider an observer who is watching a red flower with some green leaves. For simplicity

we just concentrate how the red color comes out. This may be understood from what kind

4

On th

e Cos

molog

y from

Scie

ntific

, Phil

osop

hical,

and B

uddh

ist vi

ew-po

ints

Georg

e S. W

ang a

nd S

hu-ch

in W

ang

of input information he has received during his observing. Clearly the input information

received should be those of light waves coming from the red flower. Thus the input

information contains only those of the light wavelengths, i.e., only information of lengths

of light wave in nanometers NM or in millimeters mm. We note that lengths are

not color. Only when these light waves reach his retina he should then have color feeling in

his mind. For example, when a light ray with wavelengths of about 680NM reaches his

retina his mind manifests the color of red. If the input light wavelengths are of about

525NM, as emitted from the leaves, he would feel green. So we may ask the question:

Where and when the red color begins to occur? Obviously the answer is that the color itself

begins to occur at the retina, not at the flower. Similarly the time the color itself begins to

occur is just the time when light waves reach his retina. Not merely the color, the shape of

the flower can be actually seen to be formed and manifested in the observers mind too.

Thus the demonstration of OOMM is completed. For the same reasoning, color and shape

of every thing in the Universe are all produced and manifested by the observers mind.

In other words, all phenomena in the Universe are OOMM.

Those color-blind people can not obtain the color sensation when light waves

strike at their retina. Insects such as bees, dragonflies, butterflies, and animals such as cats

and dogs would have quite different views of a same object because the sensitivity

response curves of their visual system including retina are not the same. Even a normal

person has no way to directly compare the color sensation of what he sees with another

normal person. In fact there is no absolutely correct way of observing the Universe.

Consequently, each person has his own cognition of Universe and the Universe is

subjectively existing to each observer. People only subconsciously think that they

have the same objective Universe. 4 5

2-2. The OOMM of Buddhism

The OOMM concept was written out in Buddhism or Buddhist's philosophy

quite a long time ago. The volume 1 of Buddhist says: Tathagata

often saying: all Dharmas are produced due to only the manifestation of mind; all causes

and effects, the Universe, tiny dust, form a body because of the mind .4 This means

that Tathagata, the Buddha with highest wisdom, often says: all things and affairs in the

Universe are all what the only observer's mind produces and manifests; all causes and

effects, as big as the Universe, as small as a tiny dust, form a body or a system because of

the power of mind. The same intension is found in volume 2 of , in

which Sakyamuni Buddha said to his disciple Ananda:you people do not know that your

5

On th

e Cos

molog

y from

Scie

ntific

, Phil

osop

hical,

and B

uddh

ist vi

ew-po

ints

Georg

e S. W

ang a

nd S

hu-ch

in W

ang

physical body, mountains and rivers, void space and great land, all are the things within

your transcendentally bright true mind.6

This Buddha s statement can be understood easily from the geometrical

optics of physics mentioned in section 2-1 above. Even for some void space the retina

system of the observer has to produce the color actually colorlessness for void space

and shapeactually shapelessness for void space of the void space, and to send them to

the place of the void space, and to decorate the void space with colorlessness and

shapelessness correctly and exactly. This means that the place of the void space, no matter

how far from the observer, is a working place of the retina-nerve system of the

observers mind and therefore has to be within the observers mind.

Dharmalaksana school claims that all things are of mind-evolution.7 Thus

this school, , and the geometrical optics of physics all unanimously

confirm the truth of OOMM.

The Buddhist says that all forms are unreal.8 This Buddhist

statement is usually employed to illustrate all things existing in the Universe being all

unfounded and unreal. We have already had a clear answer to this unfounded and unreal

now. For example considering the above-mentioned red flower, because its color (shape

too) is produced by the observers retina system, the looks seen is not really true but

unfounded. One point must be made clear here. only says all the things

are unfounded and unreal, the Sutra does not say that the things do not exist. The point is

that under the operation of observing or cognizing the thing being observed can only take

the form that the cognitive system can give. And the resulting form can never take its true

form. For example, if you take a picture of the red flower just mentioned with a

black-and-white camera, your observation result will be only a black-and-white flower. If

you use a color camera you get a red flower picture. If you take a picture of the red flower

with an X-ray machine, you might get nothing in your photo picture. 9

2-3. OOMM cosmology being different from the cosmology of common consensus

Cosmology of common consensus abbreviated: CC Cosmology is entirely

different from the cosmology based on the concept of OOMM mentioned above. By

common consensus cosmology we mean the commonly accepted theory or conception of

our Universe that has been achieved by many highly intelligent people via many years of

human cultural exchange, progress and accumulation.

6

On th

e Cos

molog

y from

Scie

ntific

, Phil

osop

hical,

and B

uddh

ist vi

ew-po

ints

Georg

e S. W

ang a

nd S

hu-ch

in W

ang

Owing to mankind consensus of different culture, different realm, different ethnicity,

etc., CC Cosmology may be quite different. In fact the philosophers have philosophers' CC

Cosmology. The scientists have scientists' CC Cosmology. What we want to discuss here is

mainly the most popular scientific CC Cosmology. Of course the philosophical CC

Cosmology and the Buddhist OOMM are also very important in the discussion.

CC Cosmology, although it is not as the original view of the Universe as that of the

OOMM Cosmology, has been providing very important academic values and practical

functions to mankind. That is, though CC Cosmology does not directly reflect the

originally true Universe its constant studying and developing already have made great

contribution to all human world. An example of scientific CC Cosmology is the major

cosmological discovery of the blackbody form and anisotropy of the cosmic microwave

background radiation via the well-known Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE).10

3. Ontology and Cosmology

In the beginning of this section we need to state the connection between Ontology and

Cosmology from scientific, philosophical, and Buddhist aspects. Usually science only

discusses Cosmology without considering Ontology. Philosophy discusses both Ontology

and Cosmology. Buddhism explores also both Ontology and Cosmology, but the exploring

method and the content of Ontology are entirely different from those of Philosophy. For

Philosophical Ontology the exploring method is based on accumulation of knowledge of

human thoughtfulness; the content of Ontology belongs to the Idea Level the

mathematical or reasoning level, third level.2 The Noumenon of Ontology, such as

Kant's thing-in-itself, is not observable in our real-number world and therefore could be

named as Philosophically Transcendental Noumenon or Transcendental

Noumenon or just simply Noumenon to distinguish from that of Buddhist

Ontology. For Buddhist Ontology the exploring method is based on departing all the

images including all knowledge from mind ; the content of Ontology is the fourth level

No-Two State of Mind which does not contain any thing even any idea or concepts. Thus

we call the No-Two State of mind Ultimate Transcendental Noumenon or Ultimate

Noumenon for simplicity.

3-1. Sketching of the origin of philosophical ontology

We first briefly look at what ontology is. Ontology is the subject exploring the most

fundamental entity in philosophical metaphysics, i.e., seeking to have the original

knowledge of Being or Existence. The questions which concerned Pythagoras 570-469 B.

7

On th

e Cos

molog

y from

Scie

ntific

, Phil

osop

hical,

and B

uddh

ist vi

ew-po

ints

Georg

e S. W

ang a

nd S

hu-ch

in W

ang

C. were: From where comes the life? what should be done in life? to where does

the life return at death?.11 Sokrates 470-399 B. C.first proposed the Dualism

of Physical body and Soul, claiming that soul is never die nor perish, physical body has to

be rotten and die, and by use of soul the human nature can pursue the truth and justice

which is in the Other Shore 11. We thought, the Other Shore would be about the same

of the Other Shore of Buddhism, which is the realm of the Ultimate Noumenon of

ontology.

The Western philosophy, through Era of Greece, Middle Ages, modern times to the

present, has already yielded many extremely successful great philosophers and developed

various principles and schools. As regards the ontology there are monism, dualism and

pluralism. Among the monism there exist idealism, materialism, nominalism, etc. For

dualism and pluralism there are ancient ones and modern ones. 11

Stephen Hawking highly praises the tradition of philosophy from Aristotle to Kant.

12Aristotle (384-322 B. C.) first proposed the diction Metaphysics, which is

known as The first philosophy, meaning the knowledge of ontology. It is the

discussion of what entity behind all the existences is, and it regards the entity as the target

of investigation. It is noteworthy that the entity behind all the existences he

maintained could be the Noumenal state of mind or what we call the No-Two State of

mind.

3-2. More about ontology

In last section we have mentioned about the ontology of Aristotle as knowledge of the

entity behind all the existences. Based on this, Noumenon is just the entity behind all the

existences. Here we consider all the existences to be the phenomenal world, which is the

part of universe that can be observed. On the contrary the Noumenon behind all the

existences, though existing or being, can not be observed. About this, Kant (1724-1804)

claims the most clearly. He proposed the term Thing-in-itself as a basic form of

Noumenon for any an object. It means that for any object which has an appearance in

phenomenal world, there exists a corresponding Thing-in-itself of the object which is

unknowable. 13

In the initial stage of the 21st century and based on the views available from the

scientific and technological knowledge, etc., we have proposed for the entity a four-level

description of ontology. 2The four levels are: Macroscopically sensible level,

Microscopically experimental level, Mathematics or Reasoning level, and the Ultimate

Reality or Ultimate Noumenal level. What we are most concerned with at present is the

8

On th

e Cos

molog

y from

Scie

ntific

, Phil

osop

hical,

and B

uddh

ist vi

ew-po

ints

Georg

e S. W

ang a

nd S

hu-ch

in W

ang

Macroscopically sensible level, which is the Reality of the phenomenal world. This is also

the level that sense organs of people can perceive.

More particularly, the macroscopic level can be divided into sense organ level

and extended sense organ level.14 The former refers to the level cognitive by the

sense organs, such as eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body, etc. The latter refers to that which

makes use of scientific instruments, thus extends the capability of sense organs, and

obtains great huge views of phenomena of the universe. For instance some astronomical

scene of cosmos may be obtained by using a modern astronomical telescope. For simplicity

this extended sense organ level is still included in the macroscopically sensible level. It is

noted that in this level both matter and mind exist at the same time. Philosophical

description of the ontology for this level should be the Mind-Matter Dualism.

3-3. The Mind-Matter Dualism of the macroscopic level

A famous saying of Rene Descartes 1596-1650 is: I think and therefore I

am. 15 This indicates that as I meaning the mind think the actor of thinking

meaning the mind or I must exist. To be more specific, we may use our OOMM

concept to say: I see and therefore I am. The reason is that all what I see are the

manifestation of my mind and therefore my mind or I must exist.

For example when a person sees a green cup, he may think that the green cup is only

a material matter and does not involve the mind. He might think Mind-Matter

Dualism being incorrect. In fact the green color of the cup comes from OOMM, which

depends on the mind. Thus for the macroscopic level of reality the Mind-Matter Dualism is

valid.

3-4. Cosmology theory should conform to ontology

Cosmology is a description of the phenomenal world that can be observed, and

ontology is the description of Noumenon that can not be directly observed. Since

Noumenon is the origin of the phenomenal world cosmology theory should conform to

ontology. But to our knowledge at present, the scientists' CC cosmology seems not related

to ontology at all. For philosophers, such as the above-mentioned German philosopher

Kant, though he proposed the existence of Noumenon or substance of a body of material

things, he claimed the Thing-in-itself being Unknowable. 13 So the

philosophical ontology is only a theory to the cosmology, unable to provide important

conformability to cosmology in fact. Philosophers after Kant seemed also unable to make

9

On th

e Cos

molog

y from

Scie

ntific

, Phil

osop

hical,

and B

uddh

ist vi

ew-po

ints

Georg

e S. W

ang a

nd S

hu-ch

in W

ang

significant development on conformability between cosmology and ontology. Thus

Hawking at the end of his book < A brief history of time > cites Ludwig Wittgensteins

statement: The sole remaining task for philosophy is the analysis of the language.

Then Hawking even added: What a comedown from the great tradition of philosophy

from Aristotle to Kant!16

As for Buddhism, starting from the Macroscopically sensible level of Mind-Matter

Dualism and using the method Depart all images from the mind Sakyamuni Buddha

was able to have only the last state of the Mind without any Matter, which is the Buddhist

Nirvana state or is equivalently what we call the No-Two state of mind. It is also The

Ultimate Noumenon level. In philosophical language we may call the state of mind as

Transcendental Monism. 17

We should make an additional remark here as to why it is possible to depart all

things from mind. The reason is that all the things of the Universe are the images of the

OOMM nature and the OOMM nature is only a property or function, not the most essential

and original element, of the mind.

4. Why scientists can make very important development and contribution to cosmology.

As the scientists' CC cosmology seems not much related to ontology why they could

have made very important development and contribution to cosmology.

Scientists, especially the physicists in the 20th century, have really made very

important development and contribution to cosmology. The basic reason, we thought, is

that the Modern Physics including astrophysics, etc. under the use of natural laws of the

Nature, has stepped from research of only material matters into that of the Mind-Matter

Dualism. Since Mind is the essential element of Ontology this is actually a certain degree

of conformablity of Ontology and Cosmology. Theory of Relativity and the following

Quantum Physics at the beginning of the 20th century were all based on the natural laws of

the Nature. This supports what we just said that the Modern Physics has expanded its

domain from Matter only to that containing both Matter and Mind.

Now let us explain how Einsteins Theory of Relativity of the Modern Physics

expands its domain into that of both Matter and Mind.

4-1. Velocity of light is constant can be regarded as entering the domain of Mind

Einstein recognized velocity of light is constant being a natural law of the

Nature and then proposed it as the basic assumption for his Theory of Relativity. About

this key point, we need to show clearly what the velocity of light is constant actually

means. Its meaning can be simply explained with a specific instance.

10

On th

e Cos

molog

y from

Scie

ntific

, Phil

osop

hical,

and B

uddh

ist vi

ew-po

ints

Georg

e S. W

ang a

nd S

hu-ch

in W

ang

Suppose now that there are two persons A and B at the same place on the ground.

They observe a same light ray traveling to the east may call the east x-direction.

Suppose A is at rest with respect to the ground, observing and measuring the light ray

velocity c we may imagine to measure the velocity c of the arrow head of the light ray.

The result should be c =3x108 meters / second using the value of c in vacuum for

simplicity. Now suppose person B traveling to the same east with extremely high speed v

and also measuring the same light ray velocity. Let c be the light ray velocity B

measured. An interesting issue is: c' =What? 4

Ordinary people's answer is most probably c' =c-v. This is the answer from

Newtonian Physics too. But this answer is incorrect. The correct answer is that both A

and B observe the same velocity of light c. Even if speed v of B is as high as c, the

velocity of light that B measures is still c' =c, not c' =c-c=0. Furthermore, even if the

direction of speed v of B is changed into other directions, even going in the opposite

direction to the west, the velocity of light that B measures is still c' =c. This result is

quite a bit strange. It does not accord with the convention that we are accustomed to. But

this is really the correct answer from Einsteins Theory of Relativity. Why is it so?

No doubt velocity of light is constant should have some origin from Physics of

Electromagnetism. But Einstein proposed it as the basic assumption for his Theory of

Relativity. The idea of the basic assumption, we think, should come from his intuition or

philosophical inspiration. The origin of the assumption and the conception of OOMM as

mentioned above can be traced down to have the common element Mind.

Velocity of light is constant indicates that to different observers and their

different coordinate systems the light ray always demonstrates the same velocity of light.

From the philosophical point of view of the Mind, this kind of light-propagation rule

is to manifest that each individual observer be the centre of universe. Manifesting each

individual observer as the centre of universe means that each individual observer has his

one and only one coordinate system and he always stays at the center or the origin of the

coordinate system. In fact this is just the way of operation of the coordinate system of

Theory of Relativity. In other words, every person observes his own universe, just the

same concept of OOMM.

If we want to question further, this kind of question should be the philosophers

important purport. Philosophically this situation should belong to the conception of

Mind-Matter Dualism. It is also the conception of Buddhist OOMM.

Based on this, we can say that, through the recognition of velocity of light is

constant being a natural law of the Nature and then proposing it as the basic assumption

of Theory of Relativity, Einstein had introduced the conception of Mind from Newton's

11

On th

e Cos

molog

y from

Scie

ntific

, Phil

osop

hical,

and B

uddh

ist vi

ew-po

ints

Georg

e S. W

ang a

nd S

hu-ch

in W

ang

physics of originally pure Matter into the Dualism of both Matter and Mind. 4

One basic difference between Theory of Relativity and Newtonian Physics is that the

former has the fourth dimension of space X4. That is, X4 =ict, where i =( -1) 1/2 , c is the

velocity of light, t is time. For simplicity it is occasionally known as imaginary time

because i is an imaginary number in mathematics.18On the contrary time t in Newtonian

Physics is real time because t is a real number in mathematics. We note that the source of i

can be traced back to the basic assumption velocity of light is constant in the Theory

of Relativity, and the basic assumption has been just seen as a display of OOMM or the

Mind of the Mind-Matter Dualism. Consequently, the imaginary number i =( -1) 1/2 may be

regarded as a symbol for the existence of Mind in Relativity Physics. In other words, i

[ =( -1) 1/2] may indicate going beyond the Newtonian Physics, which has been developed

essentially for the real number world.19 Now in the following we further illustrate

that in Quantum Physics i [ =( -1) 1/2] also can be regarded as a symbol of going beyond the

Newtonian Physics.

4-2. In Quantum Physics i [ =( -1) 1/2] as a symbol of going beyond Newtonian Physics

Quantum physics can be regarded as originating from the particle-wave duality of an

object. This means that each object, especially a fundamental particle like an electron, has

the dual nature of both particle and wave. This dual nature can be understood from the

well-known Youngs Double Slit experiment. 20

The basic formula of quantum physics is the Schrodinger Equation. One of its main

characteristics is the imaginary number i appearing in the Equation.21 In this equation

i can be regarded as manifesting the particle-wave duality, which is also a natural law of

the Nature. And similar to the Theory of Relativity the Quantum Physics also goes beyond

the real-number realm of Newtonian Physics has the conception of Mind within the

Dualism of both Matter and Mind. 20

Based on above statement the Modern Physics of Relativity physics and Quantum

physics contains the Mind of Mind-Matter Dualism. Though the Modern Physics formally

explores only the phenomenal or Matter part of Cosmology, it has in fact implicitly

expanded into the Mind part via the natural laws of the Nature, namely, velocity of light

is constant and the particle-wave duality respectively. In philosophical words, the

Modern Physics rather than traditional Newtonian Physics has entered implicitly into the

Mind-Matter Dualism. In other words, Theory of Relativity and Quantum Physics of the

Modern Physics, have already made some unanimity or connection between Cosmology

and Ontology. Consequently the scientific CC Cosmology, owing to this unanimity or

connection, has obtained very rich achievement far better than that obtained by the

philosophical CC Cosmology in the last two centuries.

12

On th

e Cos

molog

y from

Scie

ntific

, Phil

osop

hical,

and B

uddh

ist vi

ew-po

ints

Georg

e S. W

ang a

nd S

hu-ch

in W

ang

5. Why the philosophers didnt make great contribution to cosmology in the last two

centuries

As stated, Aristotle, Kant and other philosophers had already pointed out clearly the

existence of Noumenon of Ontology. Kant even explicitly stated that Noumenon is

unknowable or not observable. In the last two centuries philosophers indeed didnt

show the knowledge or observation of the entity of Noumenon. It means that they didnt

make some unanimity or connection between Cosmology and Ontology. In order to

understand the importance of the unanimity or connection between Cosmology and

Ontology we need to briefly state in the following: what Ultimate Noumenon is, the

equivalence between Ultimate Noumenon and Buddhist Nirvana, the different levels of

Ultimate Noumenon and Kant's thing-in-itself, etc.

5-1 What Ultimate Noumenon of Buddhism is

We have talked about the four levels of Reality, which summarize all the things of

science, philosophy, and Buddhism. To Ultimate Noumenon of the fourth level we now

make an elaborate description. The Ultimate Noumenon is what we call the No-Two State

of mind, which is of transcendental nature. It has been shown to be equivalent to the state

of the Buddhist Nirvana, which is featured by the four virtues: Permanence, Bliss,

PersonalityGreat Ego, and Purity in the transcendental realm. 22

The So-called No-Two State of mind is the state in which there is neither known nor

knower.23 The knower here refers to an ego or an individual, not the Great Ego or the

Nirvana Personality. An ordinary person lives in the state of a knower and known. People

may sublimate to the non-individual Great Ego when entering the No-Two State of mind.

Using the notion of No-Two State of mind we showed that the State of Buddhist

Nirvana and the State of Ultimate Noumenon are equivalent.2322 The features of

the state of Ultimate Noumenon are: 1) not sensually tangible by individual person, 2) not

experimentally observable, 3) not theoretically calculable, 4) not describable by Science or

any theory because it is Transcendental over phenomenal world; but realizable or

achievable by a human being.23Though the level of Ultimate Noumenon surmounts

phenomenal world the level is still a state of the Mind.

Just as a physics experiment can be achieved in the realm of material Matters by

physicists, the state of Ultimate Noumenon or the Buddhist Nirvana as a

mental-experiment can be achieved in the realm of Mind by those who reach the

Buddhahood or the No-Two State of mind. Sakyamuni Buddha achieved the

mental-experiment about 2500 years ago. His disciples, including 500 arhats, all achieved

the Mind experiment. But what we should emphasize here is that the state of Nirvana is

13

On th

e Cos

molog

y from

Scie

ntific

, Phil

osop

hical,

and B

uddh

ist vi

ew-po

ints

Georg

e S. W

ang a

nd S

hu-ch

in W

ang

not just the Buddhist's patent. It can be achieved or verified by everybody. Of course the

method of practice including the direction of intention must be correct. The key point is

Return your stream of consciousness inwardly towards your self-nature rather than

seeking things outside the mind.

5-2. The level of Kant's Thing-in-itself is different from that of Buddhist Nirvana

Thing-in-itself of Kant (1724-1804) can be regarded as a most clear-cut

description of the Noumenon of an object in the history of philosophy. Its key statement is

that Thing-in-itself is the cause of our sensation and is unknowable.13

It expresses that any object, so long as it has appearance in the phenomenal world,

there exists a transcendental thing in itself. The meaning of transcendental thing is

that it can not be known in the phenomenal world, but exists in Ontological reality. We

think that the thing-in-itself should be the Noumenon of the third kind the mathematical

or reasoning or idea level, but still is not the fourth deepest kind of the Ultimate

Noumenon level. 24

Features of the third level are: 1) not sensually tangible, 2) not experimentally

observable, 3) theoretically calculable, and 4) understandable via Mathematics or other

theories. In the mathematical or idea level, only abstract things such as individual ideas or

theories exist. The phenomenal world can be considered as floating outside the idea level.

Corresponding philosophical description of the idea level should be Idealism or

Spiritualism of Ontology.

The main difference between this idea level of philosophical Noumenon and the

level of Buddhist Ultimate Noumenon is that in the state of philosophical Noumenon

there exist the known the concept of thing-in-itself, e. g. and the knower who holds

the concept, e. g.whereas the Ultimate Noumenon is the No-Two State of Mind in which

there exists neither the known nor the knower.

5-3. Philosophical Ontology of the Idea Level does not quite accord with Cosmology

As just stated above, the Ontological Noumenon of thethird Idea Level, such as

Kant's thing-in-itself, is not as transcendental as the fourth Buddhist Ultimate

Noumenon. This indicates that unlike the fourth Buddhist Ultimate Noumenon,

Philosophical Ontology of thethird Idea Level does not quite accord with Cosmology.

Philosophical Ontology is usually the results based on accumulation of knowledge of

human thoughtfulness which is unnatural or artificial. But since the universe itself is

natural, the unnatural philosophical Ontology could not suffice to describe the Ultimate

Noumenon and the universe. Oppositely, Buddhist Ontology based on Nirvana state or the

14

On th

e Cos

molog

y from

Scie

ntific

, Phil

osop

hical,

and B

uddh

ist vi

ew-po

ints

Georg

e S. W

ang a

nd S

hu-ch

in W

ang

Mind-experiment as mentioned above suffices to justify the suitability for the Ultimate

Noumenon and the universe.

As for science the Theory of Relativity and Quantum Physics of Modern Physics all

have come from the natural laws of the Nature, and thus implicitly contain effects of the

Mind of Mind-Matter Dualism. Consequently, the scientific approach is more in

accord with observed Cosmos of Cosmology than the philosophical, and has made more

important contributions to the Cosmology. Clearly in the following we need to give more

specifically the unanimity between Ontology and Cosmology respectively from Scientific,

Philosophical, and Buddhist view-points.

6. The unanimity between Ontology and Cosmology from Scientific, Philosophical, and

Buddhist view-points

Our universe described mainly by Cosmology actually consists of the observable

phenomenal world as its main part and the unobservable Noumenon described by Ontology.

Because Cosmology should have its root in Ontology as its origin, the unanimity between

Ontology and Cosmology should be an important factor of probing into cosmological

phenomena. Now we briefly list them below respectively.

6-1. The unanimity situation between Ontology and Cosmology for Scientific circle

Cosmology: based on Common Consensus, describes the universe including nearly all

observable worlds as large as millions of millions Milk Ways and as small as electrons,

quarks. Its exploratory achievement is great.

Ontology: no formal expression or statement for Noumenon.

Unanimity situation: Although cosmology has not formally related to ontology on the

surface, through adoption of natural laws of the Nature, such as velocity of light is

constant for Relativity physics and particle-wave duality for Quantum physics,

cosmology has implicitly involved or related to ontology. This could have been latently

enhanced the unanimity situation.

6-2. The unanimity situation between Ontology and Cosmology for philosophical circle

Cosmology: based on Common Consensus, describes the universe mainly in

theoretical Ontology without important achievement in the last two centuries.

15

On th

e Cos

molog

y from

Scie

ntific

, Phil

osop

hical,

and B

uddh

ist vi

ew-po

ints

Georg

e S. W

ang a

nd S

hu-ch

in W

ang

Ontology: most Philosophers claim existence of Noumenon. Kants Thing-in-itself

is specifically regarded as the philosophical Noumenon, which is transcendental in the

sense that it is not observable or unknowable.

Unanimity situation: philosophical Cosmology is not substantially unanimous with

Ontology in fact.

6-3. The unanimity situation between Ontology and Cosmology for Buddhism

Cosmology: based on OOMM meaning that all phenomena of the universe are Only

what the Observers Mind Manifests. Appearance of the universe depends on the

Observers Karma. Different person or different living creature, such as an ant or a

dragonfly would observe a different phenomenal universe. Buddhist Cosmology is based

on Buddhist Sutras which represent the views of Buddhist sages.

Ontology: based on the Ultimate Noumenon, the Buddhist Nirvana or the No-Two

State of mind .

Unanimity situation: Cosmology and Ontology are totally unanimous.

7. Some similarity and consistency between scientific cosmology and Buddhist cosmology

There should exist some similarity and consistency between the CC Cosmology and

the OOMM Cosmology. The reason is that the two kinds of Cosmology are all for

description of our Universe.

Since the philosophers have not made very important contribution to Cosmology

within the past two centuries, also based on the fact that philosophical Cosmology is not

substantially unanimous with Ontology as mentioned in the section above, our statement of

some similarity and consistency is focused only on the scientists' CC Cosmology and the

Buddhist OOMM Cosmology for simplicity. Now we briefly itemize them in the

following.

1 The Universe was created out of nothing:

Scientists' CC Cosmology claims that the Universe was created from nothing.25

Similarly Buddhist OOMM Cosmology also claims the Universe being created out of

nothing because Buddhist Ontology is described as Ultimate Transcendental

Noumenon or simply Ultimate Noumenon, which contains no Matter.

16

On th

e Cos

molog

y from

Scie

ntific

, Phil

osop

hical,

and B

uddh

ist vi

ew-po

ints

Georg

e S. W

ang a

nd S

hu-ch

in W

ang

2 Big-Bang or Big Thunderbolt at the beginning of Universe creation

Big-Bang creation of Universe is the key feature of scientists' CC Cosmology. This is

based on Einsteins General Relativity theory which allows existence of a singularity

with infinitely large density at beginning of universe creation. However Stephen Hawking,

on the basis of the uncertain principle of quantum physics proposed the no

boundary condition, 26by which the singularity with infinitely large density should

not appear. The no boundary condition claims a period of rapid expansion supporting the

inflationary models, which would imply a small scale Big Thunderbolt at the

beginning of Universe creation.

The situation at beginning of Universe creation for the Buddhist OOMM cosmology

is somewhat similar to the small scale Big Thunderbolt. OOMM means that

cognition of the universe is due to an observers mind but not that the universe is created

by an observers mind. Creation of the universe should be the work of the Creator, who

is supposed the Mahavairocana Tathagata of Buddhism 27 or the Creator God in

Western culture. In Buddhism the universe could be created from nothing by Tathagata at

the Ontological state Ultimate Noumenon. In the opposite direction a person could

mentally depart from the phenomenal world entering the state Ultimate Noumenon

when he achieves the No-Two State of mind. At the entering he would encounter the

feeling of being shocked of the so-called space shatter orgreat earth flatly sink.

28The shocking situation would be quite different for different Buddhist practicer,

depending on various conditions including methods of practice, etc. To Sakyamuni Buddha

six different kinds of earth shakings would have occurred respectively at his enlightenment,

his nirvana, etc. 29

3Chaos stage

In the scientific CC Cosmology immediately after the Big-Bang a Chaotic

inflationary state of the universe would appear.30 Similarly in Buddhist OOMM

Cosmology states that immediately after the Ultimate

Transcendental Noumenon there would appear the realm of gloomy haziness, in

which empty space and non- empty space do not differentiate.31

4First production of material matters

According to scientists' CC Cosmology material matters, as noted previously, would

be created out of nothing or vacuum. The matters would be created about one second after

17

On th

e Cos

molog

y from

Scie

ntific

, Phil

osop

hical,

and B

uddh

ist vi

ew-po

ints

Georg

e S. W

ang a

nd S

hu-ch

in W

ang

the Big-Bang, and the matters produced would be mainly the very light particles such as

photons, electrons and neutrinos.32The foundation for producing these particles should

be the Einsteins Mass-Energy relation, (E =Mc2, c is light velocity), which again is

given in the Theory of Relativity.

In Buddhist cosmology the way of creation of material matters and energy is via the

so-called The Six Greatsor the six fundamental elements. The Six Greats are earth,

water, fire, wind, empty space, and mind or perception.33Among the Six Greats water,

fire, and wind are energy; earth is matter or mass. The mass earth and energy water,

fire, and wind could be considered as being produced from the vacuum empty space

in accordance with the concept that the Universe was created out of nothing. Still further,

the vacuum would result from the realm of gloomy haziness as just mentioned above.

3435 The power for producing the mass, energy, vacuum as well as the realm of

gloomy haziness would come from the strength of unenlightened3637 or

wish or the power of the vow of the Creator Mahavairocana Tathagata.27

An important difference between the Buddhist OOMM Cosmology and the Scientific

CC Cosmology is that while the Scientific CC Cosmology does not consider the Mind

the former contains the Sixth Great, the sense of Mind. This Sixth Great would be the seed

for the Mind of the Mind-Matter Dualism in the Sensual level of Reality. It could be

the origin of life. We will discuss this part of life in the following Section 7.

5The size of present universe

After first production of material matters, constant derivative development through

about 15 billion years has formed our present universe. Some similar situations of

Scientific cosmology (the former) and Buddhist cosmology (the latter, based on ancient

Theravada Buddhism) are briefed below:

a. Generally our earth and solar system of the former would correspond to the

Jambudvipa and the small world of the latter respectively.based on Buddhist sutras: The

Long Agamas; Abhidharma-kosa-sastra38

b. In the former, scientists using modern astronomical telescope has found that there

are at least 100 billion ( 1011) galaxies and each galaxy contains at least 100 billion ( 1011)

solar systems. 39 The whole universe has at least 10 thousand billion billion ( 1022)

solar systems.

18

On th

e Cos

molog

y from

Scie

ntific

, Phil

osop

hical,

and B

uddh

ist vi

ew-po

ints

Georg

e S. W

ang a

nd S

hu-ch

in W

ang

In the latter, the whole universe as described by ancient Theravada Classics

observed via the deva-eye observation is the Tri-sahasra-maha-sahasra-loka-dhatu. This is

also called a great chiliocosm or one Buddha-world.40Since a scientific solar

system could be regarded as a small world of Buddhist cosmology as just mentioned, the

whole Buddhist universe or one Buddha-world would contain an equivalence of one

billion ( 109) scientific solar systems. About the equivalence one may like to note that this

Buddhist universe was only described by Theravada Classics via the deva-eye observation

and is just one Buddha-world.

The above is a rough contrast of Scientific CC Cosmology to Buddhist OOMM

Cosmology. In the following we discuss the ultimate origin of life in Cosmology.

8. Discussion of the ultimate origin of life

Since the universe includes too many living beings with life, our discussion of

cosmology certainly should give a topic on the ultimate origin of life. One of the biological

basic specialities is that living beings are able to perceive and react to outside environment

to some extent at least. Certainly the advanced living beings, such as the mankind, not only

can perceive and react to body, mind, spirit, outer environment, etc., but also have the

ability of cognizing, experiencing, making self-criticism, reacting, practising, and even

obtaining transcendental wisdom to achieve enlightenment or Buddhahood. Clearly, the

universe contains both the living beings and non-living matters or inanimate objects, and

the non-living matters are not able to perceive and react to outside environment.

Scientific cosmology, especially that with modern physics and astronomy physics, has

not concretely given consideration to the study of the origin of living beings. Even the life

sciences did not make concrete important achievement to the Mind or Spirit part of a living

being. One of the reasons would be that the scientific feature of life sciences puts limit to

study only those topics which can be experimentally observed and reproduced. Obviously

the Mind or Spirit part of a living being is difficult to be investigated by reproducible

experiments. As regards philosophy, although the philosophical ontology proposed the

Mind-Matter Dualism very early but still did not make important and concrete contribution

to understanding the ultimate origin of life.

8-1. The Mind Great of the Six Greats

Buddhist OOMM cosmology has been greatly otherwise. The ultimate origin to the

life was stated long ago. Surangama Sutra says of it as coming from the Mind

19

On th

e Cos

molog

y from

Scie

ntific

, Phil

osop

hical,

and B

uddh

ist vi

ew-po

ints

Georg

e S. W

ang a

nd S

hu-ch

in W

ang

Great of the Six Greats as mentioned above in Section 7. The Mind of the Mind

Great means that the seed of the most basic consciousness in spiritual activity is Mind.

The Great of the Mind Great means that such basic consciousness seed is greatly

existing and omnipresent. The Buddhist teaching says that a dust or a hair contains all the

Six Greats.41 This confirms the omnipresent feature of the Mind Great.

8-2. Water Knows the Answer---the Hidden Messages in Water Crystals

To understand the authenticity of the saying of the Buddhist teaching we may employ

the knowledge of the book . 42 Generally thinking, water is inanimate without life, but the life

information of water that this book demonstrates is a very concrete, clearly experimental

result. The book author has used high-speed camera work observing water crystallization

and proved that water crystals all form beautiful figures if the water prior to crystallization

was treated with words of kindness, thankfulness, sacredness, etc. On the contrary if the

water was treated with words of animosity, painfulness, etc., it presents ugly, dispersed

form without crystallization. This book displays some 122 pieces of such crystallization

photos unseen before, and proves that water can read, listen music, memorize, and even

transmit information.

Based on these facts not just a dust or a hair contains the fundamental property of

consciousness or the Mind Great as mentioned above even as little as the water

molecule (H2O) possesses the Mind Great of the Six Greats. Because of this, we are

inclined to claim that the Mind Great could be the ultimate origin of life in the

universe.

9. Brief summary and conclusion

Some interesting results in the text are briefly summarized in the following:

1 Concerning the cosmology we first bring up the concept of OOMM which

means that all phenomena of the universe are Only what the Observers

Mind Manifests. And the OOMM concept is easily verified via the Geometric

Optics of physics. Section 2-1

2 The most popular Scientific Cosmology and the Philosophical Cosmology are

classified as Cosmology of Common Consensus CC Cosmology, being

entirely different from that of OOMM. Section 2-3

3 Regarding the unanimity or connection between Ontology and Cosmology,

Scientific Cosmology usually only explores Cosmology without considering

Ontology; Philosophical Cosmology explores both Ontology and Cosmology;

and the Buddhist explores also both Ontology and Cosmology. Section 6

20

On th

e Cos

molog

y from

Scie

ntific

, Phil

osop

hical,

and B

uddh

ist vi

ew-po

ints

Georg

e S. W

ang a

nd S

hu-ch

in W

ang

4 The reason for success of Scientific CC Cosmology would be that the Modern

Physics including Einsteins Theory of Relativity has expanded its domain

from Matter to that containing both Matter and Mind. Section 4-1

5 The reason for insufficiency of Philosophical CC Cosmology would be that

the Philosophical Ontology is not quite connected to Cosmology. Section

5-3

6 Some similarity or consistency between scientific cosmology and Buddhist

cosmology are briefly displayed about the beginning of Universe creation such

as Big-Bang creation of the Universe, chaos stage, the size of present universe,

etc. Section 7

7 We suggest that the ultimate origin of life could be the ' Mind Great ' of

Buddhism. This suggestion can be verified via ' the Hidden Messages in Water

'. Section 8

To conclude simply, we have proposed a novel OOMM concept for the

Cosmology. And based on the Buddhist OOMM and the relations with the Scientific

CC Cosmology and Philosophical CC Cosmology we have made assertions such as the

7 interesting results just stated above.

References:

1 Stephen W. Hawking, , the back cover of the book, (A Bantam Book, 1988) ISBN 0-553-34614-8

2George Wang and Shu-chin Wang, Proposing the Buddhist Nirvana State as

Ontological Ultimate Noumenon---Explaining Why We Use the Term Mind-Matter

Monism, International Conference on Humanistic Buddhism Proceedings, P.223-225,

(Host and Organizer: F. G. S. Foundation for Buddhist Culture & Education; His Lai

University, Los Angeles County, California, USA. Held at Taipei International

Convention Center, Jan. 8~10,2001.) (, :

---, , 223,

,2001 1

8~10 )

3Lee Smolin, Three roads to Quantum Gravity, p.4-5, Published by Basic

Books, 2001 ISBN 0-465-07836-2

4George S. Wang , On the Consistency of Modern Physics and Buddhism with

Oneness as the main subject of discussion, section 5. The 7th International

21

On th

e Cos

molog

y from

Scie

ntific

, Phil

osop

hical,

and B

uddh

ist vi

ew-po

ints

Georg

e S. W

ang a

nd S

hu-ch

in W

ang

Conference on Humanistic Buddhism, University of the West, Los Angeles County,

California, USA. Held in January, 2006.

5George S. Wang, , P.4-9, (Oah Foundation, 2005,

ISBN: 957-9239-12-6, in Chinese) ( , 266,

2005 )

6same as 5, p. 7.

7A dictionary of Chinese Buddhist terms, Compiled in 1937 by W.E. Soothill and L.

Hodous, (Fu-Kwan Publisher, 1990), p.344. ( 344(

1990)

8same as 5, p. 8.

9same as 5, p. 9.

10Search for COBE in website such as the www.google.com.tw.

11same as 5, p. 319-920.

12same as 5, p. 310.

13George S. Wang and Hui-chin Wang, Buddhist Self or No Self, Kants

Thing-in-itself and the Quantum Mechanical Wave Function. P. 358, Vol. 3, 2002,

, International Academy of Buddhism, Hsi Lai

University.

14same as 5, p. 320-326.

15Search for in website such as the www.google.com.tw.

16same as 1, p.175.

17same as 5, p. 326. Transcendental Monism for

18same as 5, p. 270.

19same as 5, p. 269.

20same as 5, p. 276 ; 281.

21same as 5, p. 384. Schrodinger Equation is:

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )tr, tr,vtr, 2m

tr,t

i2

+= h

h.

22 same as 2, p. 220-221.

23same as 2, p. 221-224.

24same as 5, p. 328.

25John D Barrow, , p. 113, Published by Basic Books,

1994 ISBN 0-465-05354-8

26same as 1, p. 140.

27same as 7, p. 90. Mahavairocana Tathagata for .

28same as 15, Search for space shatter, great earth

22

http://www.google.com.tw/http://www.google.com.tw/

On th

e Cos

molog

y from

Scie

ntific

, Phil

osop

hical,

and B

uddh

ist vi

ew-po

ints

Georg

e S. W

ang a

nd S

hu-ch

in W

ang

flatly sink.

29same as 7, p. 137, six earth shakings for .

30same as 1, p. 132.

31Buddhist Master Yuan Yin, p.548 realm of

gloomy haziness for . :

, 548, , 2000

32same as 1, p. 117.

33same as 7, p. 134.

34same as 31, p. 549-550. 549 , ,

, .

35, table 10B.3-5, compiled by

Kuala Lumpur SUNWAY COLLEGE Buddhist Society, Malaysia. Website:

www.geocities. com/suramgama/

10B.3-5 .

,

www.geocities. Com/suramgama/; googlewww.google.com.tw

36same as 31, p. 548. strength of unenlightened 548

---.

37same as 35, table 10B-6.

38same as 7, p. 298. Jambudvipa ,

, ; the small world

39same as 1, p. 37.

40same as 7, p. 61. a great chiliocosm ,

, 109 109.

one Buddha-world

41same as 35, table 25B-7. ,

. .

42Jiang Ben Win, , p. 32-65; 129-160. The website http://www.amtb.org.tw/pdf/water.pdf

, , , 32-65; 129-160.

, 2002 10

Acknowledgement:

The authors wish to express their sincere thankfulness to Dean Ananda Guruge and

23

http://www.geocities/http://www.geocities/http://www.amtb.org.tw/pdf/water.pdf

On th

e Cos

molog

y from

Scie

ntific

, Phil

osop

hical,

and B

uddh

ist vi

ew-po

ints

Georg

e S. W

ang a

nd S

hu-ch

in W

ang

Professor Darui Long for their encouragement as well as help concerning presenting the

paper.

2

()

;

,

--------------------

Ps. This paper has not been formally published.

24