It is impossible that two rightfully Enlightened Ones should be born in the same world element at one and same time. It is possible that a single rightfully Enlightened One should be born in the world element at one time. (M115)
Rhino wrote:It is impossible that two rightfully Enlightened Ones should be born in the same world element at one and same time. It is possible that a single rightfully Enlightened One should be born in the world element at one time. (M115)
clw_uk wrote:I think it means universe, the general point is one buddha at a time, from what i understand
The picture of the world presented in Buddhist cosmological descriptions cannot be taken as a literal description of the shape of the universe. It is inconsistent, and cannot be made consistent, with astronomical data that were already known in ancient India. However, it is not intended to be a description of how ordinary humans perceive their world; rather, it is the universe as seen through the divyacakṣus (Pāli: dibbacakkhu), the "divine eye" by which a Buddha or an arhat who has cultivated this faculty can perceive all of the other worlds and the beings arising (being born) and passing away (dying) within them, and can tell from what state they have been reborn and into what state they will be reborn. The cosmology has also been interpreted in a symbolical or allegorical sense (see Ten spiritual realms).
Stefan wrote:Rhino wrote:It is impossible that two rightfully Enlightened Ones should be born in the same world element at one and same time. It is possible that a single rightfully Enlightened One should be born in the world element at one time. (M115)
So does 'world element' mean the 'Universe' or 'planet Earth'?
Do Theravadins consider Buddhist cosmology to be a literal representation of our universe? According to Wikipedia, they don't.
TheDhamma wrote:I think it is open to interpretation. The Suttas also refer to the 10,000 world systems, meaning the innumerable solar systems. Thus, one samma-sam-buddha per solar system is most likely the case. There are numerous, uncountable solar systems, but most likely just one planet per solar system with life on it, since we are in the 'perfect' range from the sun, not too close, not too far away. Interpreting a world system as a solar system would fit with science and this teaching.
Chris wrote:The Buddha spoke of aeons without a Sammasambudda appearing in the world.
He spoke of how precious and difficult it is to even gain a human rebirth.
When describing an aeon, it is taken to be the time from the first formation of the ingredients to create new planets, through their formation, population with life, and eventual slow disintegration, one can see how very precious this human life is, how wonderful to live when the Teachings are extant.
TheDhamma wrote:The interpretation would depend upon what the Buddha meant when referring to the world and world system, perhaps just this world, perhaps this solar system, or perhaps the universe.
Santeri wrote:The brahma realms are non-physical realms. Now if the universe collapses and the brahma realms are destroyed then this means that the whole physical universe collapses as well.
Macavity wrote:Firstly, the Brahma realms are not non-physical, but are composed of matter that is not visible to the fleshly eye of humans but only to those who have developed the appropriate abhiñña.
Thirdly, the Buddhist universe doesn't comprise a single world system, but rather multiple world-systems, each with its own set of thirty-one planes.
If there was only one world-system, then at times of cosmic destruction where would the beings go who didn't have the kamma to be reborn in the Brahma realms?
The Tathagata — the worthy one, the rightly self-awakened one — is the one who gives rise to the path (previously) unarisen, who engenders the path (previously) unengendered, who points out the path (previously) not pointed out. (SN 22.58)
Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 4 guests