[MD] spirituality

[ADRIE KINTZIGER]

Here they are referring implicitly to Eisteins so called biggest
mistake, the cosmological constant.
It's bashed since he gave up on it.

nowadays science is turning around, very carefully it is assumed now, but
hypothetical that there is a cosmological constant to be found, a mechanis
sm behind it all.

I think it will be found some day.

Pay attention to the parts as where the authors are calling any subject or
object
statement meaningless.
ggod book , btw, for a change.

2010/12/2 MarshaV <valkyr at att.net>

>
> M:
>     "The Buddhist view does not, however, exclude the possibility of the
> unfolding of the world.  Obviously the phenomena we all see around us aren't
> nonexistent, but if we examine _how_ they exist, then we soon see that they
> can't be viewed as a set of independent entities, each with its own
> existence.  Thus, phenomena exist only as a dream, an illusion or mirage.
>  Like mirror images, they can clearly be seen, but have no separate
> existence.  Nagarjuna, the great second-century Indian philosopher, said,
> "The nature of phenomena is that of mutual dependence; in themselves,
> phenomena are nothing at all."  Their evolution is neither random nor fixed
> by divine intervention.  Instead, they follow the laws of cause and effect
> in a global interdependence and reciprocal causality.  The problem of an
> "origin" comes about only from a belief in the absolute reality of phenomena
> and the existence of space and time.
>
>     "In terms of absolute truth, there is no creation, no duration, and no
> end.  The paradox is a good illustration of the illusory nature of the world
> of phenomena.  It can reveal itself in an infinite number of ways because
> its final reality is emptiness.  In terms of the relative truth of
> appearances, we say that the conditioned world, called samsara, is "without
> beginning" because each state must have caused by the previous one.  So,
> with the Big Bank theory, do we have an _ex nihilo_ creation, a creation out
> of nothingness, or the expression of some kind of preexisting potential that
> is not yet manifested in the universe?  Is it seen as a real beginning, or
> as a stage in the universe's evolution?"
>
>
> 'Mathieu Ricard & Trinh Xuan Thuan, 'The Quantum and the Lotus: A Journey
> to the Frontiers Where Science and Buddhism Meet',p.29)
>
>
> ___
>
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>



-- 
parser