Just watched a youtube video of Ajahn Brahm doing a talk called 'Big bang Buddhism'. I'm sure some of you have probably seen it, but it's left me in tears. What a beautiful, compassionate, wise man he is.
Big Bang Buddhism
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xPeLspRBHc" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Big bang Buddhism
-
- Posts: 263
- Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 6:40 pm
Big bang Buddhism
Last edited by bodom on Sun Mar 11, 2012 3:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Link added
Reason: Link added
"The original heart/mind shines like pure, clear water with the sweetest taste. But if the heart is pure, is our practice over? No, we must not cling even to this purity. We must go beyond all duality, all concepts, all bad, all good, all pure, all impure. We must go beyond self and nonself, beyond birth and death. When we see with the eye of wisdom, we know that the true Buddha is timeless, unborn, unrelated to any body, any history, any image. Buddha is the ground of all being, the realization of the truth of the unmoving mind.” Ajahn Chah
Re: Big bang Buddhism
Do you have a link? Thanks.
Re: Big bang Buddhism
Youtube search function, 1st result:
Re: Big bang Buddhism
Isn't Brahm breaking some sort of rule by blabbing that he had meditative insight into the cyclicality of the universe?
Also, Brahm has talked about 'The Boy with no Brain' a couple times.. but I'm pretty sure it's more of a myth than reality..
A blogger has already done the legwork in arguing this:
Also, Brahm has talked about 'The Boy with no Brain' a couple times.. but I'm pretty sure it's more of a myth than reality..
A blogger has already done the legwork in arguing this:
http://hinessight.blogs.com/church_of_t ... icant.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;some blogger wrote:The original story of this clinical curiosity was published in the well-respected journal, Science, back in 1980. Though provocatively titled "Is Your Brain Really Necessary?" the article doesn't suggest that the boy in question, who functioned normally, actually had no brain.
Rather, neuroanatomist John Lorber reported that the university student had hydrocephalus, resulting in "a cranium filled mainly with cerebrospinal fluid." This finding was based on the rather crude CT brain scans available in the 1970's. Nobody opened up the boy's head and peered inside.
The article contains cautionary interpretations from other experts. The boy could have more brain tissue than was evident in the scan. Other areas of his brain could have taken over functions usually performed by a normal cerebral cortex.
What's indisputable is that the boy definitely did have a brain, albeit a damaged one. Yet on Yahoo Answers, someone asked how a young man could live without a brain. This was a response from a Ph.D. in Biochemistry/Neuroscience.One should certainly be careful about accounts such as these, as I think it is pretty well documented, and proven, that a human cannot survive without a brain. The individual referred to in this question, and examined by Lorber, more than likely has sufficient gray matter and a brain stem, to support normal function. Probably even has cortical matter to support cognition and intellect.
The criticism of the study is that Lorber mis-interpreted the CAT scan, as CAT scans can be tricky to read. Lorber himself admits that reading a CAT scan can be tricky. He also has said that he would not make such a claim without evidence. In answer to attacks that he has not precisely quantified the amount of brain tissue missing, he added, "I can't say whether the mathematics student has a brain weighing 50 grams or 150 grams, but it is clear that it is nowhere near the normal 1.5 kilograms."
"What holds attention determines action." - William James
-
- Posts: 263
- Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 6:40 pm
Re: Big bang Buddhism
One of the things I like about him is that he goes against the grain. Buddhism is so boring when we are all just clones of each other, agreeing on everything and not having our own opinions.
"The original heart/mind shines like pure, clear water with the sweetest taste. But if the heart is pure, is our practice over? No, we must not cling even to this purity. We must go beyond all duality, all concepts, all bad, all good, all pure, all impure. We must go beyond self and nonself, beyond birth and death. When we see with the eye of wisdom, we know that the true Buddha is timeless, unborn, unrelated to any body, any history, any image. Buddha is the ground of all being, the realization of the truth of the unmoving mind.” Ajahn Chah
Re: Big bang Buddhism
Hello Viscid,
I am curious regarding that story, I've read it before.
I am not very convinced by the rebuttal you've posted. Yes, the measurement was imprecise, but even considering the margin of error, it still doesn't account for how could a person even function with that amount of brain. According to standard scientific theory, the person would be a vegetable, even considering that measurement was too low.
I am curious regarding that story, I've read it before.
I am not very convinced by the rebuttal you've posted. Yes, the measurement was imprecise, but even considering the margin of error, it still doesn't account for how could a person even function with that amount of brain. According to standard scientific theory, the person would be a vegetable, even considering that measurement was too low.
- Skeptics have claimed that it was an error of interpretation of the scans themselves. Lorber himself admits that reading a CAT scan can be tricky. He also has said that he would not make such a claim without evidence. In answer to attacks that he has not precisely quantified the amount of brain tissue missing, he added, "I can't say whether the mathematics student has a brain weighing 50 grams or 150 grams, but it is clear that it is nowhere near the normal 1.5 kilograms." http://flatrock.org.nz/topics/science/i ... essary.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Re: Big bang Buddhism
Regardless, this case, and other similar cases, are not of patients with 'no brains' as he describes it to his audience. Brahm has repeatedly used this single case from an article in 1980, which is not very credible, as evidence for his idea that the mind is not dependent on the brain to exist. There are far, far more cases of people with brain malformation being quite severely disabled. If the mind was not dependent on the brain, there would be many cases where we could blatantly see that. I think it's rather ironic that later in the talk Brahm decries people who bend the truth to fit their beliefs, when he's clearly not being nearly as scrupulous as he would be if this were a case of something which contradicted his beliefs.Alex123 wrote:In any case, even with 150g rather than 50g of brain mass, the person would basically be a vegetable... And this case is not the only one.
"What holds attention determines action." - William James
Re: Big bang Buddhism
While "no brain" as an expression might be exaggerated, it still shows us something interesting. That a person can be normal (or better) and still have very little brain mass, the amount that could make one (according to standard idea) a vegetable.Viscid wrote:Regardless, this case, and other similar cases, are not of patients with 'no brains' as he describes it to his audience.
The only materialistic way out could be that we can use about 10% of the brain for normal functioning.
I wonder if people can have NDE while the brain is totally shut off.Viscid wrote: If the mind was not dependent on the brain, there would be many cases where we could blatantly see that.
- Cittasanto
- Posts: 6646
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
- Location: Ellan Vannin
- Contact:
Re: Big bang Buddhism
Yes, he is either committing a Pācittayā 8 if a truth or a Pārājika 4 if a lie (humour is not a mitigating factor), he is known for doing this if that is really what he is doing, I have not seen the video, nor intend to, though so would not say he is or isn't.Viscid wrote:Isn't Brahm breaking some sort of rule by blabbing that he had meditative insight into the cyclicality of the universe?
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.
He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
- DarwidHalim
- Posts: 537
- Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2011 11:49 am
- Location: Neither Samsara nor Nirvana
Re: Big bang Buddhism
Mind is mind, brain is brain.
If we use human perspective to see the whole universe, we will think if you have mind, you must have brain. This is absurd.
In all formless realm, you cannot find any single brain. So, are you saying they have no mind? Are you saying their mind is defect or crazy?
How about Buddha? When he was a human, yes he has brain, but his brain has nothing to do with his mind. Nothing.
When he taught abidharma in Tushita, did he carry his brain with him?
If we use human perspective to see the world, our view is limited.
If we use human perspective to see the whole universe, we will think if you have mind, you must have brain. This is absurd.
In all formless realm, you cannot find any single brain. So, are you saying they have no mind? Are you saying their mind is defect or crazy?
How about Buddha? When he was a human, yes he has brain, but his brain has nothing to do with his mind. Nothing.
When he taught abidharma in Tushita, did he carry his brain with him?
If we use human perspective to see the world, our view is limited.
I am not here nor there.
I am not right nor wrong.
I do not exist neither non-exist.
I am not I nor non-I.
I am not in samsara nor nirvana.
To All Buddhas, I bow down for the teaching of emptiness. Thank You!
I am not right nor wrong.
I do not exist neither non-exist.
I am not I nor non-I.
I am not in samsara nor nirvana.
To All Buddhas, I bow down for the teaching of emptiness. Thank You!
Re: Big bang Buddhism
Ajahn Brahm is a great storyteller.
Re: Big bang Buddhism
Curious, what stops you from watching the video?Cittasanto wrote: I have not seen the video, nor intend to, though so would not say he is or isn't.
Metta
forestmat
Hartridge Buddhist Monastery, Devon, England