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