If samsara is beginning-less, why are we not all enlightened

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
Nicolas
Posts: 1295
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2014 8:59 pm
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

Re: If samsara is beginning-less, why are we not all enlight

Post by Nicolas »

Infinity does not imply "all possibilities will be accomplished". If I take a sine wave, which goes between -1 and 1 in amplitude, it never reaches 2, but goes through an infinity of states. A rational number may have an infinite amount of decimals (1/3 = 0.333...), but all of those are threes.
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: If samsara is beginning-less, why are we not all enlight

Post by Alex123 »

David N. Snyder wrote: wouldn't there have been some alien species somewhere, sometime in the past that would have colonized us, finished us off at some point?
Maybe it is practically impossible to travel from star system to star system in short enough period of time. Maybe warp drives, FTL travel, etc is fiction.
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10184
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: If samsara is beginning-less, why are we not all enlight

Post by Spiny Norman »

Alex123 wrote:
David N. Snyder wrote: wouldn't there have been some alien species somewhere, sometime in the past that would have colonized us, finished us off at some point?
Maybe it is practically impossible to travel from star system to star system in short enough period of time. Maybe warp drives, FTL travel, etc is fiction.
The distances involved are literally astronomical, billions of light years, so even with warp drive journeys could take millions of years.

One light year is approximately 10 trillion kilometres, and universe diameter is thought to be around 28 billion light years.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
Digity
Posts: 1445
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:13 am

Re: If samsara is beginning-less, why are we not all enlight

Post by Digity »

All I know is that I'm currently *NOT* enlightened and that the path the Buddha laid out makes sense and I can see how it would lead to enlightenment so I do the practice to the best of my ability. I guess this is why the Buddha said to avoid questions such as the origin of the universe, etc. It leads to such speculation and in the grand scheme of things it's a distraction. Remember that the Buddha knew a lot more than he taught, but he only taught what was important and that was the origination and ending of dukkha. Other things the Buddha knew he understood were extraneous and would only distract people from the real goal, which is to put an ending to dukkha. I think a big part of being on this path is understanding what's worth focusing on and what isn't. Questions like this aren't worth speculating over.
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17192
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: If samsara is beginning-less, why are we not all enlight

Post by DNS »

Nicolas wrote:Infinity does not imply "all possibilities will be accomplished". If I take a sine wave, which goes between -1 and 1 in amplitude, it never reaches 2, but goes through an infinity of states. A rational number may have an infinite amount of decimals (1/3 = 0.333...), but all of those are threes.
However, some philosophers have countered that mathematics is not real and is a human construct. Numbers and abstract mathematical principles are man-made.
Alex123 wrote:
David N. Snyder wrote: wouldn't there have been some alien species somewhere, sometime in the past that would have colonized us, finished us off at some point?
Maybe it is practically impossible to travel from star system to star system in short enough period of time. Maybe warp drives, FTL travel, etc is fiction.
Yes, I agree that is the most plausible explanation to answer the paradox. However, given infinite possibilities; why wouldn't there be some solar system, somewhere where there is a planet that can support life that is say, 20,000 times the size of Jupiter where the dominant species is some 700 meters tall or more. Their space ships would naturally be much larger than ours and be able to travel at much faster speeds, reaching other solar systems quicker. Wild speculation, I know . . .
Digity wrote:I think a big part of being on this path is understanding what's worth focusing on and what isn't. Questions like this aren't worth speculating over.
:thumbsup:

:meditate:
Dr. Dukkha
Posts: 123
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2013 3:02 am

Re: If samsara is beginning-less, why are we not all enlight

Post by Dr. Dukkha »

Thank you all for the insight.

:anjali:
"There are only two mistakes one can make along the road to truth; not going all the way, and not starting."
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: If samsara is beginning-less, why are we not all enlight

Post by Alex123 »

David N. Snyder wrote: However, given infinite possibilities; why wouldn't there be some solar system, somewhere where there is a planet that can support life that is say, 20,000 times the size of Jupiter where the dominant species is some 700 meters tall or more. Their space ships would naturally be much larger than ours and be able to travel at much faster speeds, reaching other solar systems quicker. Wild speculation, I know . . .
Can a huge truck go as fast as small race car?

One of the problems with long distance travel is that the spaceship needs to carry all the food, water, supplies, etc, that can lasts for years (or even more). The larger the spaceship, the stronger engine is required, and more fuel...

Also, without atmosphere, there is nothing to shield against deadly radiation. If spaceship needs to carry "insulation" or "shield", then it is additional weight for engines to push...
User avatar
Nicolas
Posts: 1295
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2014 8:59 pm
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

Re: If samsara is beginning-less, why are we not all enlight

Post by Nicolas »

David N. Snyder wrote:
Nicolas wrote:Infinity does not imply "all possibilities will be accomplished". If I take a sine wave, which goes between -1 and 1 in amplitude, it never reaches 2, but goes through an infinity of states. A rational number may have an infinite amount of decimals (1/3 = 0.333...), but all of those are threes.
However, some philosophers have countered that mathematics is not real and is a human construct. Numbers and abstract mathematical principles are man-made.

Agreed, but the same concept can be explained and grasped in a non-mathematical way; infinity does not necessarily equate with totality.
Ng Xin Zhao
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2016 6:58 am

Re: If samsara is beginning-less, why are we not all enlight

Post by Ng Xin Zhao »

David N. Snyder wrote: For those of us interested in philosophy, it is natural to examine these things and question the possibilities. The Fermi paradox is pretty interesting and I have wondered myself that if time was infinite, wouldn't there have been some alien species somewhere, sometime in the past that would have colonized us, finished us off at some point? And then we shouldn't even be here right now. A potential answer to that (although not completely satisfying) is that as an intelligent species becomes technologically advanced for space travel, they sooner rather than later finish themselves off in some nuclear war or some other type of event that causes the virtual extinction of the dominant, intelligent species on the planet (before reaching the potential of quick space travel to distant planets).
To answer this, our universe has a beginning, or if it is cyclic model, at least there was a time when the universe was too hot for any lifeforms to exist as we know it. Thus it is not surprising that aliens has not finished us off. Although as according to some science fiction like the Dark Forest by Cixin Liu, it is always a possibility.

To get back to the topic, If samsara is beginning-less, why are we not all enlightened. We should set up a simple mathematical model to explore this.
Assumptions:
  1. The multiverse/ cyclic universe/ samsara has no beginning.
  2. The no. of unenlightened sentient beings in samsara does not increase, randomly out of nowhere.
  3. There has always been Fully Enlightened Buddha arising in the past.
  4. When a Fully Enlightened Buddha arises in the world, he will be always be able to bring a finite amount of Arahants across the stream along with inspiring a finite amount of people to be future Private and Fully Enlightened Buddhas.
From 1 and 3, the no. of Fully Enlightened Buddhas is infinite.
Thus the no. of sentient beings in samsara must be infinite or else it could not fulfill the condition that there has been infinite Buddhas in the past.
From 4, infinity sentient beings minus a finite amount of sentient beings who realize that there is no inherent sentient beings means that the total amount of sentient beings remains infinite.

Conclusion A: Thus it is not surprising that not all are enlightened. We simply haven't choose to practice the path fully (hopefully yet). There will always be a chance for people to be enlightened, but it is also possible to always remain in samsara.

Rejecting no. 3, conclusion B: If we don't like conclusion A, then suppose we drop no.3 from the list and allow that there was a first Buddha in samsara. Thus the no. of Buddha need not be infinite, the no. of sentient beings can be also not infinite, we are not enlightened yet because there was a beginning to the practice to enlightenment.

Rejecting no. 1, conclusion C: If we just say that the beginning is indiscernible, but that there was ultimately a beginning and then it goes on to infinity. Our present is like picking a point in the semi-finite structure of time, thus we are very likely to be close to infinity along the timeline of the history of samsara that for all practical purposes, samsara has no discernible beginnings. Thus the no. of sentient beings can be finite, there was a first Buddha and the rest of conclusion B follows.

Please tell me if I missed something.
Last edited by DNS on Fri Jan 29, 2016 3:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: fixed quote
Post Reply