In the Epistemology Category, we have focused on Buddha’s two means of knowledge: inference and direct perception. Inference refers to the inferentially connected word-based knowledge humans use to understand what Dr. Fisch calls “the world we experience.” On the other hand, direct perception is what Buddha uses to understand the “experiential contents” of the mental world by becoming part of it. While Dr. Fisch calls “experiential contents” empirical facts that can be felt, both represent the raw information embedded in the mental construct of everything in the cosmos that leads to understanding what Dr. Fisch calls “how things stand in themselves.” While “the world we experience” is verifiably illusional, “how things stand in themselves” represents nature as-is.
In this post, we explore the fact that humanity’s understanding of reality would be complete if Buddhism and science could work together, given the mutually exclusive but complementary nature of inference and direct perception.
In their respective investigation of nature, Buddhism and science have a fundamental difference: their need to make assumptions. While the scientific method starts with making hypotheses, one won’t find phrases like “thus I opine” in Buddhist sutras.
Buddha did not need to make assumptions because he had directly perceived the mental reality of nature before he started teaching. Before his enlightenment, his two guru teachers invited Buddha to teach with them. He rejected their invitations but chose to become enlightened before teaching. By the time he started teaching, Buddha had “opened his consciousness to encompass all objects of knowledge,” a requirement for becoming the highest enlightened being called Tathagata, of which our historical Buddha is one.
Like “experiential contents” that can be experienced and empirical facts that can be felt, “all objects of knowledge” represent the raw information embedded in the mental construct of everything in the cosmos that can be directly perceived, which is the meaning of opening one’s consciousness. By encompassing “all objects of knowledge,” Buddha can teach that there is Nothing but Mentality in the cosmos without needing to to make assumptions.
Nothing but Mentality in Buddhism can be compared to the “Theory of Everything in physics. While the Theory of Everything “is a hypothetical singular, all-encompassing, coherent theoretical framework of physics that fully explains and links together all aspects of the universe,” Nothing but Mentality is also Buddha’s singular, all-encompassing, coherent framework that links together all aspect of the universe, except that Buddha’s framework is nether hypothetical nor physical. Instead, Nothing but Mentality is a verifiable mental phenomenon.
The scientific method begins with making assumptions because physicists still do not have their Theory of Everything. Energy is such an assumption.
By definition, energy in physics is “the quantitative property that is transferred to a body or to a physical system, recognizable in the performance of work and in the form of heat and light.” Furthermore, quantitative property, also known as physical quantity (or simple quantity), “is a property of a material or system that can be quantified by measurement.”
Without question, energy is an invaluable tool that allows scientists to use mathematical expressions to investigate the illusional world. However, while energy allows science to fulfill pre-Socratic ancient Greek philosopher Pythagoras’ profound insight that “all the workings of the material universe are expressible in terms of mathematics,” it’s important to remember that numbers in equations are not reality of nature.
Equally important to understand is that scientific knowledge is based on inferentially connected word-based knowledge. Therefore, the results scientists receive can only be similarly inferentially connected.
Those who have taken physics classes in high school and college should be familiar with the following equations:
- Einstein’s famous formula: E=mc2.
- Newton’s second of motion: f=ma.
- Potential Energy: PE=mgh.
- Kinetic Energy: K=1/2mv2.
- Weight W=mg.
In these equations, E stands for energy, m=mass, c=speed of light, f=force, a=acceleration, g=gravity, h=height, and v=velocity.
As it is apparent, each term – energy, mass, speed, force, acceleration, gravity, and velocity – can define each other through mass by simple mathematical manipulations. Ultimately, though, mass is energy, as Einstein’s formula, E=mc2, states.
There are more examples. Maxwell’s equations are “a set of coupled partial differential equations,” “together with the Lorentz force law, form the foundation of classical electromagnetism, classical optics, and electric and magnetic circuits.” While these “equations provide a mathematical model for electric, optical, and radio technologies, such as power generation, electric motors, wireless communication, lenses, radar, etc.,” ultimately, they are but different manifestations of energy.
Indeed, in a world of energy, everything is about how different manifestations of energy relate to each other. As Dr. Kuhn understood, while inferentially connected words allow knowing how “everything is related to something else,” they provide “no foundation between what I believe and what the world really is. So, how do I know anything?”
Most significantly, consciousness, the obviously present but never-visible reality that allows humanity to feel and experience the world, is absent from a world of inferentially connected mathematical interrelationships.
However, while their different means of knowledge are mutually exclusive, Buddhism and science are also complementary. Indeed, between the scientific world where everything is energy, and Buddha’s world where everything is mentality, the complementary of Buddhism and science means that energy and mentality are complementary. Not only can these two mutually exclusive means of knowledge cover everything in the cosmos, “the world we experience” and “how things stand in themselves,” but replacing energy with mentality gives scientific teachings consciousness.
The following are the three most significant examples.
- As discussed when discussing how Bodhisattva Avalokitesvara satisfied Buddha’s soteriological mission by understanding mentality and materiality are the same, if mentality replaces energy in Einstein’s famous formula, not only can E=mc2 explain fully the Bodhisattva’s proclamation mentality and materiality are the same, but also explain the delusional nature of the Mind-Body Problem.
- Additionally, as discussed when discussing Causality, the left side of Einstein’s Special Relativity formula allows scientists to acknowledge that “The special theory of relativity tells us that one person’s past may be another’s future” and “that the immutable ordering of cause and effect emerges when we discover the causal geography of spacetime,” the right side of the equation suggests that the driver of Causality is “energy and momentum.” However, if consciousness replaces energy on the right side of the formula, then the driver of Causality becomes “consciousness and momentum,” which is equivalent to mental intention, as Buddha teaches.
- Quantum mechanics is another example. Buddhism and the quantum field theory share the standard teaching that fluctuating fields are the foundational blocks of the universe. However, while energy fluctuates in quantum energy fields, what fluctuates in Buddha’s field is mentality. Indeed, if mentality replaces energy in the quantum field theory, it not only allows the quantum field to give rise to a universe where humans can have consciousness but also allows it to understand why human suffering comes not from eating a forbidden fruit but is innate and existential, together unenlightenment, Causality, delusion, etc., as Buddha teaches in the Three Delicate Marks.
Indeed, if science and Buddhism can work together, humanity can benefit from the knowledge of understanding “the world we experience” by using mathematical equations and the wisdom of realizing “how things stand in themselves.“
Mentergy, which combines mentality and energy, is such a concept.
As Dr. Max Planck famously said, “Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature. And that is because, in the last analysis, we ourselves are a part of the mystery that we are trying to solve.”
However, becoming part of the mystery is reserved for the enlightened people. It is essential to realize that while understanding direct perception is not hard, practicing it until enlightenment is extremely difficult. Many have tried, but only a few have succeeded. In this era when AI leaders are already calling for regulations “to prevent AI (from) destroying humanity,” is it not time for humanity to understand if machines that can learn are conscious? If humanity waits for the next Buddha to educate them again on consciousness, is it possible that the conscious machines that can learn have already caused them much trouble?
(If you like this post, please like it on our Facebook page and share. Thank you.)
