Dalai Lama on Science

This is an article written by the 14th Dalai Lama of Tibet and published in New York Times on 12 November 2005, entitled "Our Faith in Science". Strange title, considering who the author is.

Our Faith in Science
By TENZIN GYATSO
Washington

SCIENCE has always fascinated me. As a child in Tibet, I was keenly curious about how things worked. When I got a toy I would play with it a bit, then take it apart to see how it was put together. As I became older, I applied the same scrutiny to a movie projector and an antique automobile.

At one point I became particularly intrigued by an old telescope, with which I would study the heavens. One night while looking at the moon I realized that there were shadows on its surface. I corralled my two main tutors to show them, because this was contrary to the ancient version of cosmology I had been taught, which held that the moon was a heavenly body that emitted its own light.

But through my telescope the moon was clearly just a barren rock, pocked with craters. If the author of that fourth-century treatise were writing today, I'm sure he would write the chapter on cosmology differently.

If science proves some belief of Buddhism wrong, then Buddhism will have to change. In my view, science and Buddhism share a search for the truth and for understanding reality. By learning from science about aspects of reality where its understanding may be more advanced, I believe that Buddhism enriches its own worldview.

For many years now, on my own and through the Mind and Life Institute, which I helped found, I have had the opportunity to meet with scientists to discuss their work. World-class scientists have generously coached me in subatomic physics, cosmology, psychology, biology.

It is our discussions of neuroscience, however, that have proved particularly important. From these exchanges a vigorous research initiative has emerged, a collaboration between monks and neuroscientists, to explore how meditation might alter brain function.

The goal here is not to prove Buddhism right or wrong - or even to bring people to Buddhism - but rather to take these methods out of the traditional context, study their potential benefits, and share the findings with anyone who might find them helpful.
After all, if practices from my own tradition can be brought together with scientific methods, then we may be able to take another small step toward alleviating human suffering.

Already this collaboration has borne fruit. Dr. Richard Davidson, a neuroscientist at the University of Wisconsin, has published results from brain imaging studies of lamas meditating. He found that during meditation the regions of the brain thought to be related to happiness increase in activity. He also found that the longer a person has been a meditator, the greater the activity increase will be.

Other studies are under way. At Princeton University, Dr. Jonathan Cohen, a neuroscientist, is studying the effects of meditation on attention. At the University of California Medical School at San Francisco, Dr. Margaret Kemeny has been studying how meditation helps develop empathy in school teachers.

Whatever the results of this work, I am encouraged that it is taking place. You see, many people still consider science and religion to be in opposition. While I agree that certain religious concepts conflict with scientific facts and principles, I also feel that people from both worlds can have an intelligent discussion, one that has the power ultimately to generate a deeper understanding of challenges we face together in our interconnected world.

One of my first teachers of science was the German physicist Carl von Weizsäcker, who had been an apprentice to the quantum theorist Werner Heisenberg. Dr. Weizsäcker was kind enough to give me some formal tutorials on scientific topics. (I confess that while listening to him I would feel I could grasp the intricacies of the full argument, but when the sessions were over there was often not a great deal of his explanation left behind.)

What impressed me most deeply was how Dr. Weizsäcker worried about both the philosophical implications of quantum physics and the ethical consequences of science generally. He felt that science could benefit from exploring issues usually left to the humanities.

I believe that we must find a way to bring ethical considerations to bear upon the direction of scientific development, especially in the life sciences. By invoking fundamental ethical principles, I am not advocating a fusion of religious ethics and scientific inquiry.

Rather, I am speaking of what I call "secular ethics," which embrace the principles we share as human beings: compassion, tolerance, consideration of others, the responsible use of knowledge and power. These principles transcend the barriers between religious believers and non-believers; they belong not to one faith, but to all faiths.

Today, our knowledge of the human brain and body at the cellular and genetic level has reached a new level of sophistication. Advances in genetic manipulation, for example, mean scientists can create new genetic entities - like hybrid animal and plant species - whose long-term consequences are unknown.

Sometimes when scientists concentrate on their own narrow fields, their keen focus obscures the larger effect their work might have. In my conversations with scientists I try to remind them of the larger goal behind what they do in their daily work.

This is more important than ever. It is all too evident that our moral thinking simply has not been able to keep pace with the speed of scientific advancement. Yet the ramifications of this progress are such that it is no longer adequate to say that the choice of what to do with this knowledge should be left in the hands of individuals.

This is a point I intend to make when I speak at the annual meeting of the Society for Neuroscience today in Washington. I will suggest that how science relates to wider humanity is no longer of academic interest alone. This question must assume a sense of urgency for all those who are concerned about the fate of human existence.

A deeper dialogue between neuroscience and society - indeed between all scientific fields and society - could help deepen our understanding of what it means to be human and our responsibilities for the natural world we share with other sentient beings.

Just as the world of business has been paying renewed attention to ethics, the world of science would benefit from more deeply considering the implications of its own work. Scientists should be more than merely technically adept; they should be mindful of their own motivation and the larger goal of what they do: the betterment of humanity.

Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama, is the author of "The Universe in a Single Atom: The Convergence of Science and Spirituality."

I was afraid to fail you, so I fail you

"I was afraid to fail you, so I fail you". It took me a while to understand this sentence. It means that the standard is so high and so exacting that I dare not to perform the task, fearing that it would not meet the standard. Since the task is not performed, I also failed.

But our Lord Jesus has taken upon himself the task of meeting God's high and exacting standard so that all we need is to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and we shall be saved (Acts 16:31).

Negative criticism is also needed

A friend once mentioned this to me, “We should not criticize other religions. We should just emphasize the positive points of our own religion.” When the banks sold the Lehman Brothers mini-bonds, they emphasize on the positive points of the product. Many people are unable to see the short coming of the products by just looking at the positive points.
Religions are an equally complex subject. Not many people can see the positives and negatives of a religion, unless it is pointed out to them. When the pros and cons are listed, then a person is in a better position to make sound judgment.

Buddha's injured leg

This is an English summary of my earlier post, for the benefit of those who cannot read Chinese.
This is a story about Buddha, which is meant to proof that the Law of Cause and Effect is the fairest and most impartial in the Universe. It is so powerful, that even Buddha is subject to it.
One day, Buddha injured his leg. His disciples were shocked. Buddha has already attain Enlightenment, why would he be injured? Buddha explained that in his past life, he injured the foot of his friend. This is his retribution.
When I read this story, I felt that Buddha was pulling a fast one. Having told everyone he has attained Enlightenment and became a Buddha, but now he was hurt, like an ordinary guy. So he came up with a story about some incidents in his past life, which nobody can be prove whether it is true or not. Since he is Buddha, all his disciples accept what he said by faith.

佛陀的腳傷

This is a story about Buddha, which is meant to proof that the Law of Cause and Effect (因果律) is the fairest and most impartial in the Universe (是宇宙間最公正最無私).

This version is from 因果律的公正性[佛網Life論壇]
QUOTE
就連佛陀也是一樣不能違背因果的法則，有一天佛陀不小心被一根木棍傷到腳了，眾弟子在傷心之餘不禁納悶著，佛陀不是有無邊的神通嗎？佛陀不是已經成佛了嗎？怎麼還會輕易的被一根木棍所傷呢？

佛陀微笑的安慰弟子說，他雖然已經成佛了，但身體還是四大和合的肉身，自然和一般眾生一樣，有生老病死的現象，況且儘管神通再大還是敵不過業力的，因此佛陀就為他們解釋腳傷的因緣。

原來在久遠的宿世以前，佛陀為了勸他的一個朋友，而朋友不聽，因此兩個人就吵了起來，因為那是攸關朋友生命安全的事，儘管佛陀當時如何的力勸，朋友總是不聽，因此佛陀在焦急時，就用木棍打傷了他朋友的腳，就因為曾經有傷害人家腳的宿世業力，所以等到機緣成熟，儘管相隔那麼長遠的時間，還是逃不了傷腳的果報。
UNQUOTE

Another version from 居士學佛100問（做一個合格和如法的佛門弟子）
QUOTE
是一個晴朗的早晨，竹林精舍的比丘們剛從城裏乞食回來，各人在寮房裏整理衣物，忽然感到房子和地面無端地搖動起來。接著，聽到外面有人傳說佛陀受傷。大家不由一怔，急忙放下工作，相繼趕到佛陀的住處。
佛陀端坐在房中，傷口在腳上，阿難尊者正細心地為他敷藥包紮，一根沾有鮮血的木棍橫臥在地上。大家都明白，一定是被木棍所傷。可是就不明白，為什麼一支木棍能傷及佛陀的身體，佛陀不是有無邊的神通法力嗎？
佛陀的腳傷並不輕，眾弟子都守侍在旁邊，有不少人竟躲在人後啜泣。佛陀看著，內心很感動，微笑著安慰他們道：「大家不必擔憂，些微的創傷很快就會好的。」
「佛陀金剛不壞的身體，為什麼一根木棍能傷害呢？」有幾個弟子齊聲問道。
「這就是業緣。凡是地、水、火、風四大和合的眾生，都有這樣的苦受。說起來已經是很多世前的事了……」
說到這裏，阿闍世王也聞訊帶了名醫耆婆趕到，國王滿面焦急，邊跑邊喘來至佛陀面前。
「佛陀！傷勢可要緊嗎？」阿闍世王的聲音在顫抖，顯然，他的內心非常焦急。
「沒什麼，你放心！」佛陀笑答道，一邊叫他坐下，繼續說道：「當時我是個商人，有一次和朋友合夥渡海到外埠經商，我們的計畫很周到，也進行得很順利，所以不多久就賺得一大筆錢。歸途中，我們的船停靠在一處港口，那是個很繁華都市。一上岸，就忘記回家，尤其是那兒的美女，我的朋友被迷惑得六神無主。這時，有個好心的船夫告訴我們，再不離開此地，危險就要降身了。原因是，這個地方每年都要遭受海嘯的襲擊。海嘯的季節就將到來，不走，將會人財兩亡。我的朋友全無動於衷，我勸他，嚇他都沒有用。他完全失去了理智，一味迷戀那城市和女人。船隻有一隻，我不能忘卻道義，拋棄他，獨自先走。一天晚上，我們為此爭吵起來。在生命存亡的關頭，我急昏了，怒火上升，顧不了許多，抓起身邊的木棍向他揮打過去，他的腳被我打傷。
「現在，你們不難知道我受傷的理由了吧？如你們說，佛陀還會受傷嗎？應該知道，不會受傷的，那是佛陀的法身和報身。佛陀的應身105和眾生一樣，有生老病死。佛陀的神通法力雖然不可思議，但敵不過業力。種如是因，就應承受如是果，佛陀也不能違背因果法則。
「四大假合的肉身，本來就不真實，成住壞空在所必然。一切事物的法性原是這樣，順應法性才能稱佛陀。
「不錯，我已經證得真如法性成為佛陀，但現在我也是人，我由父母生養，和你們一樣具有人相。佛陀的應身除了三十二相八十種好，和眾生並沒有兩樣，沒有什麼玄奧。」
大家聽佛陀這麼一說，才瞭解業力因果最勝的道理。（摘自《佛教故事選集》第八輯）
UNQUOTE

But unfortunately, when I read this, I felt that Buddha was pulling a fast one. Having told everyone he has 金剛不壞的身體, and now he is hurt. So he came up with a story which cannot be proven. Since he is Buddha, all his disciples accept what he said by faith.

The Christian's weapon

The Christian's only weapon for offensive attack is the Word of God, which is Truth and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God (Ephesians 6:17).

Right belief

Right belief leads to right values. Right values lead to right judgment. Right judgment leads to right action. Right action leads to right results. Right results produces assurance in the right belief.

In Christ, there is always employment

In Christ, there is always employment. We are called to be fishermen and ambassadors. You can even do this as a part-time job.
And he saith unto them, Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men. (Matthew 4:19 KJV)
And Jesus said unto them, Come ye after me, and I will make you to become fishers of men. (Mark 1:17 KJV)
Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God. (2 Corinthians 5:20 KJV)

Our jobs are prepared in advance for us.
For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them. (Ephesians 2:10 KJV)

Our pay is assured.
But my God shall supply all your need according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus. (Philippians 4:19 KJV)

We do not have to pay any tax.
He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:25-26 KJV)