DN16: How to explain this WRONG explanation about earthquakes?

[santa100]

I understand your point, santa, and no, I didn't understand what he said.

Good. Honesty is a key prerequisite for success in science. One simply won't be able to b.s. his way thru when it comes to science for every single word of his will be put under the microscope for examination.

I hold this same position about Aggañña sutta. I believe in Darwin's evolution but I don't know how it connects with the devolution of the sutta (Brahma god> ethereal deva> human> (?) animal (?)). It's a quite difficult topic.

Ever heard of that scientific theory called Panspermia? It it's true, we might be direct descendants evolved from the "frozen sperms" of beings from very advanced civilizations in the cosmos transported to earth in those nooks and crannies of space asteroids. So, never say never.

Though, it's now quite obvious that earthquakes are a product of tectonic plates. It has nothing to do with wind or water. Period.

One of the most useful words of wisdom my engineering professor told me which I still memorize by heart til this day: when you're stuck with a difficult problem which you've exhausted all possible pathways to get to a solution, it might be a good time to revisit all your assumptions about the given premises. They might be wrong! So, the problem with your premature conclusion about the text's explanation is due to your premature assumptions about the scope of what earth, water, air, and fire is. Their context is much broader than you thought.

[SarathW]

What do you think about the following?

This great Earth, Ānanda, stands in the water, the water stands in the atmosphere, the atmosphere stands in space.

https://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.p ... &start=120

Isn't water stand on earth and atmosphere stands on water and space stand on the atmosphere?

I voted Buddha is right.

[Mr. Seek]

Realistically speaking, unless you are someone who has researched the topic at hand (with a degree, many on-field studies behind your back), whether you believe a bunch of scientists or a bunch of monks is the same--you are making an assumption, putting belief in a certain idea, using it as a workable hypothesis. But just because it may sound true doesn't make it true, and just because it may sound wrong doesn't make it wrong. It may all be an illusion, e.g. maybe the scientists have been fooled, the monks haven't, or vice-versa; or, someone is trying to fool you, etc. Endless possibilities. Unless you can see it for yourself and realize it for yourself, then it's just a hypothesis... But even then, there's still the fact that it can be an illusion, so...

I voted other. Not conductive to the goal...

[cappuccino]

What do you think about the following?

This great Earth, Ānanda, stands in the water, the water stands in the atmosphere, the atmosphere stands in space.

yes, of course

[rhinoceroshorn]

If you take the stance that the explanation is wrong, then your mind is closed. That is not the right approach to improve one's understanding of the texts.

171. “There are eight root causes, eight conditions, Ānanda, for the appearance of a mighty earthquake. What eight? This great earth, Ānanda, is established on water, the water on wind, and the wind rests upon space. At such a time, Ānanda, as the mighty winds blow, the waters are shaken by the mighty winds as they blow, and by the moving water the earth is shaken. These are the first causes, proximate and remote, of the appearance of a mighty earthquake.

The four elements of earth, water, fire, and air should not be regarded literally. Here, water means fluidity, and even molten rock has the element of fluidity. The element of wind means pressure or motion, and earth refers to solidity. When the pressure of gases increases inside the earth’s mantle, the magma flows being pushed by the high pressures. Wherever there are faults in the solid rock, the pressure forces the rock surfaces apart and earthquakes can occur. The increase of water pressure in saturated ground can also cause liquefaction, and previously solid earth becomes like quicksand. This regular type of earthquake is due to the law of climate (utu niyāma).

An Exposition of the Mahāparinibbāna Sutta

This was already refuted.

https://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.p ... 489#p90489

[cappuccino]

This was already refuted.

why is it important?

[rhinoceroshorn]

This was already refuted.

why is it important?

It's not.
The important thing is ending our suffering, though this mistake in the sutta made me suffer.

[cappuccino]

though this mistake in the sutta made me suffer.

maybe science is mistaken


that wouldn't be a problem


science is often mistaken

[mikenz66]

If you take the stance that the explanation is wrong, then your mind is closed. That is not the right approach to improve one's understanding of the texts.
...

This was already refuted.

https://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.p ... 489#p90489

Actually, I think it's very good advice. I don't agree with much of the linked post, especially:

Hardly. And for all your verbiage there is only one reality. Whether it is described in scientific or religious terms, ....

I think that it is more productive to investigate different knowledge-systems on their own terms, rather than seeking a forced reconciliation (of Dhamma/Science/Art/etc):

Specific to your thesis, I'd be very careful in trying to defend the Dhamma or the Buddha against scientific viewpoints. Frankly, I think fighting science with Dhamma-science misses the whole point of the Dhamma (i.e. liberation), and many attempts to defend the Dhamma against claims rooted in science often come across as very desperate, and do the Dhamma no favours.

Mike

[cappuccino]

This great earth, Ananda, is established upon liquid, the liquid upon the atmosphere, and the atmosphere upon space. And when, Ananda, mighty atmospheric disturbances take place, the liquid is agitated. And with the agitation of the liquid, tremors of the earth arise. This is the first reason, the first cause for the arising of mighty earthquakes.

Earth's outer core


The outer core is not under enough pressure to be solid, so it is liquid

[rightviewftw]

Assuming that one understand what Buddha means there can turn out wrong for the op

[cappuccino]

the initial translation was poor


leading to confusion

[Mr. Seek]

When I shut off this page and continued to read the book I was reading, 'Reexamining Jhana' by G. Polak, I came across the following statement. What a coincidence...

[rhinoceroshorn]

If you take the stance that the explanation is wrong, then your mind is closed. That is not the right approach to improve one's understanding of the texts.
...

This was already refuted.

https://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.p ... 489#p90489

Actually, I think it's very good advice. I don't agree with much of the linked post, especially:

Hardly. And for all your verbiage there is only one reality. Whether it is described in scientific or religious terms, ....

I think that it is more productive to investigate different knowledge-systems on their own terms, rather than seeking a forced reconciliation (of Dhamma/Science/Art/etc):

Specific to your thesis, I'd be very careful in trying to defend the Dhamma or the Buddha against scientific viewpoints. Frankly, I think fighting science with Dhamma-science misses the whole point of the Dhamma (i.e. liberation), and many attempts to defend the Dhamma against claims rooted in science often come across as very desperate, and do the Dhamma no favours.

Mike

Agreed!!

[sunnat]

Other:



Context, see the rest of sutta. It relates events in humans as being causes.



Some 'letting go' results in a realignment of the mind body phenomenon that is experienced as if there has been an earthquake. (A good reason to sit when meditating.) muscles rapidly relax and tighten. Because the mind body phenomenon is easier to detach from as seen as the great elements, solidity, fluidity, movement, temperature and so on. These relaxing realignments particularly are 'great' at the moments of significant realisations, like enlightenment and death.



Many have experienced the moment of falling asleep as being accompanied with a shake akin to a quake. Once I shook awake thinking I must have had a minor seizure only to find much later when returning to civilisation that there was actually an earthquake at that time.