Translate Pali Book To Khamer Language

Preah Bhikkhu Khantijatiko Thai Phirum

Translater From Pali Language to Khmer Language

Time and Space
It should be noted that Buddhism has not produced any advanced methodologies for the study of the physical world like those found in modern science. From one perspective, this may be due to the fact that the study of the physical world was not part of the rubric of traditional areas of learning and mastery. According to one classification, Buddhism divides the domains of learning into the religious and secular – a division made explicitly evident in the rubric of knowledge according to five major and five minor “sciences.” [4] The five major sciences consist of the “inner science” [5] of Buddhist study and contemplation proper, and the “outer sciences” of logic, [6] grammar, [7] medicine, [8] and the artistic crafts. [9] Five minor sciences are also mentioned consisting of poetics, metrics, lexicography, drama, and astrology/astronomy. To reiterate, of these ten domains of learning, only Buddhism proper is considered a “supramundane” inner science, [10] while the remaining nine are described as the mundane outer sciences. While the Buddhist saint is encouraged to master all ten disciplines for the sake of benefiting all beings, there is evidence that monastics in Tibet pursued Buddhist learning and practice to the exclusion of the outer sciences. [11] From a Buddhist perspective, the reason for this is easy to understand: the inner sciences provide a direct track to liberation from the world of suffering and conditioned existence, while the outer sciences, though they may contribute to one’s wealth of positive spiritual merit, lead only to continued rebirth in the higher realms. In fact, contemporary Tibetan meditators and teachers often express ambivalence toward modern science – for it is only one more system of mundane knowledge. [12]
Although Buddhists developed no rigorous methodology for studying the physical world, it was not the case that Buddhist scholars and contemplatives did not develop views on these matters or share in more general Indian formulations of the universe and its contents. The discussion of these phenomena are found most noticeably (though certainly not exclusively) in Abhidharma literature, the Kālacackra Tantra, the literature on Buddhist and Hindu philosophical tenets (Skt. siddhānta, Tib. grub mtha’), and in the literature on Buddhist epistemology. Without going into the details of these texts here, a survey of the contemporary cross-cultural exchanges will allow us to get a sense of the Buddhist and scientific views of the universe and its contents. Particularly, we will focus on Buddhist and scientific concepts of time and space.
In both the Buddhist and scientific traditions, time has been a topic extensive analysis. As Trinh Xuan Thuan explains, [13] Galileo was the first scientist to work with the concept of time. In studies he conducted later in his life rolling balls down inclined planes, he used a simple water clock to measure relative passages of time. Despite these pioneering efforts, he provided no systematic or functional definition of time. A clear definition of time did not come until Newton, who not only universalized time but employed the concept of time in mathematical frameworks.
Long before Galileo or Newton, many of the Ancient philosophers speculated on the nature of time. One view that is relevant to the history of non-mathematical concept of time is Augustine’s suggestion that the only time is lived-time. [14] This theory reflects what is sometimes called “psychological time;” the sense of time that we all normally experience. It is psychological, rather than the mathematical or scientific concept of time, that has most recently and notably explored by the German phenomenologist Martin Heidegger. As we will see, psychological time has been discussed by Buddhists as well.
Beyond Newton, time eventually became important to two other areas of physics: thermodynamics and Einstein’s theory of relativity. In the context of the second law of thermodynamics, with the continuance of time comes greater and greater disorder in the universe: organized structures like suns, people and computers become star dust, dirt, and rubble. For these objects, time can not be reversed so that they reassemble after they have dissipated into greater states of disorder. Given this irreversibility or asymmetry between the past and future, it has been argued that a tendency toward disorder (entropy) strongly suggests that time is uni-directional. This is sometimes referred to as “time’s arrow,” an idea which – for many – is also associated with the experience of psychological time. The concept of the uni-directional nature of time is not without controversy. As astrophysicist Thuan notes, Einstein felt the uni-directionality of time (and time in general) to be an illusion.
Einstein’s contribution to the understanding of time was revolutionary. For Newton, time was universal and unchanging, a kind of backdrop with space where events took place. Newton’s time was also completely unrelated to space and uni-directional. In Einstein’s theory of relativity, time (with space) becomes relative and contingent both on speed and gravity. The faster one travels or the closer one is to an object with a very strong gravitational pull, time elapses more slowly. Many people are familiar with Langevin’s twin paradox: one twin traveling through space at great speeds will age much more slowly than her twin who is living on earth. A similar concept has been described in our psychological experience of time: sometimes time feels like it flies by and in other situations, time feels to move very slowly.
The Buddhist concept of time is equally diverse. Like “psychological time” described in Western contexts, Buddhists recognize that time can be experienced as moving faster or slower in certain situations. From the viewpoint of Buddhist mysticism, Buddhist contemplatives are said to be able to alter their experience of time so that for what others may experience as only an instant is experienced by the meditator as a much longer period of time. Beyond these claims, Buddhist texts have discussed time in a variety of other ways. First, much like Einstein’s feeling that time is illusory, from the Buddhist perspective, when one actually analyzes time; it is found to not really exist. Put technically, time is a “conventional truth”: a verbal or conceptual designation which is imputed onto experiences of a past, present, and future. It is called “conventional” because it is only established nominally on the basis of words and thoughts. If you actually try to point to an instant of time, the moment you to try to pinpoint has already passed and a future moment is now the “present.” In this way, we can not technically speak of there being a fixed, locatable present; it always vanishes upon close examination. Because of its conventional or dependent nature, time is an excellent example of the Buddhist concept of interdependence. The present only exists in dependence upon the concepts of past and future – none of these make sense without the others.
Further, in a yet more scholastic and technical context, time is considered an imputed entity. As the present Dalai Lama has recently explained in conversations with physicists, [15] time is an imputed entity because it is identified on the basis of something that is other than itself. A substantial entity, by contrast, is something that can be pointed to and identified directly. For example, when we speak of time, we point to a clock (a substantial entity) and as we watch the second hand go by, we say we are watching “time” pass. We have not pointed to time, but rather must understand time through designations on things that are not time – in this case, the clock. These things which serve as the basis for designations of time can be physical or mental; however, time itself is neither physical nor mental. Instead, time fits in a third class of phenomenon technically referred to as “non-associated composite phenomena.” [16] “Non-associated” means that it is neither physical nor mental and “composite” means that time is dependent on other factors and is impermanent. [17]
Beyond these technical understandings of time, Buddhists traditionally speak of the “three times” [18] consisting of past, present, and future. They also speak of shortest possible divisions of the time it takes to perform an act and the shortest division of time in general. An example of the former is the time it takes to blink your eye. The shortest division of time is considered to be 1/60th (or even 1/365th, depending on the source) the duration of a finger snap, a number which one Buddhist scholar has calculated roughly as one millisecond. [19]
Finally, there are other more immediate ways Buddhist think of time. From a contemplative perspective, a major practice is abiding in the “present moment.” In other contexts, time is discussed as an accessible way to introduce the Buddhist concept of dependent-origination. [20]
Another major area of discussion for Buddhists, physicists, and cosmologists is the nature of empty space and cosmogony. In Buddhist literature, empty space is an important concept in understanding the origins of the universe. It is traditionally taught that at the beginning of a cosmic cycle, the various elements arise from empty space catalyzed by the karmic winds of sentient beings. From space comes wind or kinetic energy. From wind comes fire or thermal energy. From fire comes water or fluidity. Finally, from water comes earth or solidity. These five elements (space, wind, fire, water, and earth) make up the basis for matter in the universe. As mentioned, the whole process of cosmo-genesis is catalyzed by the actions of living beings or karma. Karma is understood in Buddhist contexts as emotionally-infused action which arises from spiritual ignorance. From a Buddhist perspective, all beings in the universe are subject to a never ending cycle of birth and death. This continuous cycle of organization and dissipation has to be driven by some process of causality. In Buddhism, this causal process is explained by karma. The concept of karma is central to the Buddhist understanding of existence and the world. During the night of his enlightenment, the Buddha reported that he had developed the ability to see the past lives of himself and others, and how the all maladies and fortune, as well as the process of creation and dissipation, are due to the actions enacted by sentient beings.
The cause of action (karma), the Buddha explained, depends on the active misperception of reality. Not knowing the nature of reality, we ignorantly act based within a dualistic framework consisting of a strong sense of “I” or self and “other” colored by emotional distortions such as lust, craving, disgust, and hatred. When an action or karma is performed by an individual based on lust, anger, hatred, jealousy and so forth, that action creates an imprint on one’s consciousness. This karmic imprint can be thought of as a seed that lies dormant within consciousness until someday maturing into a fully ripened fruit or experience. When conditions are right, that imprint will manifest and stir into creation some experience.
In the context of cosmogony, karma is what catalyzes the formation of a new universe. From the Buddhist perspective, there are said to be multiple world systems which constantly go through a process of formation and dissipation across vast expanses of space and since time without beginning. After a world system is destroyed at the end of a cosmic cycle, along with its inhabitants, what remains is karma in its state of potentiality. When the karmic winds in the emptiness of space begin to stir up, it brings about formation of a new universe.
As just mentioned, in Buddhist literature, the cosmos are explained to be oscillating or continuously forming, enduring for a time, and then undergoing a final period of destruction. Drawing on scientific vocabulary, modern Buddhists have described the Buddhist perspective of cosmology and eschatology as a series of Big Bangs followed by Big Crunches.
An important area of conflict in the Buddhist and scientific views of cosmogony is the Buddhist claim that the present Big Bang is only one in a series of Big Bangs that have continued without beginning. The rationale for this claim is in response to the question of a Divine Creator. A divine creator implies that the universe did not exist until a creator decided to bring it into existence. Buddhists object that if this were the case, does not the creator himself need to have been created? Where did the creator come from? If the creator is eternal, how can something arise causelessly? Rather than asserting origination without a cause, Buddhists argue that causality extends infinitely back into time and therefore, the universe has no beginning, just an endless duration of cause and effect. In short, in the metaphysical realm, Buddhists strongly maintain an emphasis on reasoning based on the principles of impermanence and causality.
The Buddhist concept of space also has several technical definitions. One definition of space is that is it is the absence of obstructing contact. In a more scholastic context, this kind of space is understood as a “negative phenomenon,” [21] or something which is established by the process of negation. The opposite of this is an affirmative phenomenon: something which you can comprehend without negation, such as “time” or “cow.” [22] This type of uncomposite space is variously understood as permanent and without origination.
Another type of space is composite or compounded space. This type of space changes and depends on causes and conditions in order to arise. Composite space, alternatively known as the intervening illumination, [23] can be visually perceived and serves as the basis for light and dark. It is this composite space which receives yet more elaboration in the esoteric teaching of the Kālacakratantra. According to the Kālacakra tradition, the space that exists at the origin of a cosmic-cycle actually consists of empty particles that remain in isolation until karmic-winds act on them to bring the cosmos into being. [24] As was mentioned earlier, karma is what catalyzes the origin of a new universe. It does so, according to the Kālacakra tradition, by acting on these empty space particles.
Lastly, space is intimately connected to the Buddhist concept of śūnyatā or emptiness. Just as nothing can exist without space, so too can nothing exist without emptiness. Because all phenomena are empty of a static, independent, and permanent existence, they can come into being, change, and pass on. Emptiness is alternatively understood through the concept of dependent-origination (Skt. pratītyasamutpāda; Tib. rten ’brel). It is because things arise by depending on other things that they can exist. A theoretical permanent and independent phenomenon could not interact with anything without itself thereby being changed (i.e. without it no longer being impermanent and independent), and therefore can never exist. By realizing that emptiness/interdependence is the nature of reality, the Buddhist practitioner is able to eliminate ignorance and free oneself from the ocean of conditioned, karmic-driven existence.
What connection does the Buddhist concept of space have to modern cosmology? In physics, there are highly developed mathematical theories which suggest the empty space of a vacuum actually contains an infinite amount of energy. If true, it is speculated that this energy has a role in the evolution in the universe. While this is still an area of controversy and mystery within theoretical physics, it makes for a rough parallel to the Buddhist concept of empty-particles and the universe arising out of space. [25] Of course, this parallel need not be overemphasized. Other religions could equally interpret the infinite energy of a vacuum in their own terms. Moreover, according to other mathematical theories, the empty space of a vacuum is calculated to contain no energy. [26] Given the wide range of unusual ideas freely entertained by physicists, the conversations tracing the parallels between Buddhism and physics has made for a fun and interesting, if not highly theoretical, pursuit.
So far we have looked at just a fraction of what Buddhists and scientists have discussed about the contents and processes of the physical world. Completely absent from our discussion has been the Indian and Buddhist science of astronomy, an area which Indians had a high degree of expertise. [27] While we will not explore these and other interesting areas of discussion, presently there is a fair amount of Western scholarship which can give the reader a rich and detailed account of the Buddhist perspective on the physical world, its origination, and destruction, such as Wallace’s The Inner Kālacakratantra, Kloetzli’s Buddhist Cosmology, and Pruden’s English translation (from the French) of Vasubandhu’s Abhidharmakośa.
Notes
[4] Tib. rigs gnas, Skt. vidyā.
[5] Tib. nang ba’i rig gnas, Skt. adhyāmatmavidyā.
[6] Tib. gtan tshigs rig pa, Skt. hetuvidyā.
[7] Tib. sgra rig pa, Skt. śabdavidyā.
[8] Tib. gso ba’i rig pa, Skt. cikitsāvidyā.
[9] Tib. bzo rig pa, Skt. karmasthānavidyā.
[10] See Georges B. J. Dreyfus, The Sound of Two Hands Clapping (Berkeley, Calif: University of California Press, 2003), 102.
[11] Dreyfus, Sound of Two Hands Clapping, 101-2.
[12] José Cabezón characterizes this as “conflict/ambivalence” about the interface between Buddhism and science. As was mentioned earlier, Cabezón has highlighted the additional theme of construing the relationship between Buddhism and science as one of identity. The third motif that he has highlighted is that of complementarity. Perspectives arguing for the complementarity between Buddhism and science have suggested that each tradition has mastered separate and exclusive domains of knowledge based on their own methodologies and that Buddhism and science do not conflict so much as they illuminate different aspects of reality and invariant processes. In this way, they can complement one another: Buddhism reveals the nature of the inner world, while science tells us about external and objectifiable phenomena.
[13] The following discussion on time is based heavily on Trinh Thuan’s explanation of time in physics from Matthieu Ricard and Trinh Xuan Thuan, The Quantum and the Lotus: A Journey to the Frontiers Where Science and Buddhism Meet, 1st American ed. (New York: Crown Publishers, 2001), 127-39. See also Victor Mansfield, “Time in Physics and Buddhism” (Vic Mansfield’s Pages, http://www.lightlink.com/vic/tricycle_final.html, 2001; accessed 27 March 2005).
[14] Ricard & Thuan, The Quantum and the Lotus, 130-31.
[15] Bstan-’dzin-rgya-mtsho, Arthur Zajonc, and Zara Houshmand, The New Physics and Cosmology: Dialogues with the Dalai Lama (Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press, 2004), 85-100.
[16] Tib. ldan min ’du byed.
[17] Another example of a non-associated composite phenomenon is the concept of “life.” In fact, this is a simplification. “Thing” (Tib. dngos po) or “horse” are also non-associated composite phenomenon from a certain perspective. See Jeffrey Hopkins and Elizabeth Napper, Meditation on Emptiness, rev. ed. (Boston: Wisdom Publications, 1996,) 268-71.
[18] Tib. dus gsum.
[19] See Alan Wallace, Principles of a Buddhist Science of Mind (forthcoming, Tibetan and Himalayan Digital Library, http://thdl.org).
[20] Tib. rten ’brel, Skt. pratītyasamutpāda. See for example Bstan-’dzin-rgya-mtsho, Ethics for the New Millennium (New York : Riverhead Books, 1999), 35-47.
[21] Skt. pratiṣedha,Tib. dgag pa.
[22] This is a simplfication based on the Dalai Lama’s explanation in The New Physics and Cosmology, 87. Some argue that conceptuality apprehends cow through a process of negating everything that is “non-cow” – thus making “cow” a negative rather than affirmative phenomenon. In fact, to be yet more specific, it is an affirming negative (Tib. ma yin dgag).
[23] Tib. bar snang. See Bstan-’dzin-rgya-mtsho et al., The New Physics, 87.
[24] See Khedrup Norzang Gyatso, Ornament of Stainless Light: An Exposition of the Kālacakra Tantra, tr. Gavin Kilty (Somerville, MA: Wisdom Publications, 2004), 79.
[25] This issue is discussed in detail in B. Alan Wallace, Choosing Reality: A Buddhist View of Physics and the Mind (Ithaca, N.Y.: Snow Lion Publications, 1996), 18-27.
[26] Wallace, Choosing Reality, 18-27.
[27] See W. Randolph Kloetzli, Buddhist Cosmology: From Single World System to Pure Land: Science and Theology in the Images of Motion and Light (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1983). See also John Ronald Newman. The Outer Wheel of Time: Vajrayāna Buddhist Cosmology in the Kālacakra Tantra (Diss., University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1987) for a discussion of Indian astronomy in exoteric and esoteric Buddhist literature.
Back to top

This is 2nd picture

This is a term work

Term Work

This picture of term work

First Buddhist council

First Buddhist council

According to the scriptures of all Buddhist schools, the first Buddhist Council was held soon after the nirvana of the Buddha under the patronage of king Ajatasatru, and presided by the monk Mahakasyapa, at Rajagaha (today's Rajgir). Its objective was to preserve the Buddha's sayings (sutta) and the monastic discipline or rules (Vinaya). The Suttas were recited by Ananda, and the Vinaya was recited by Upali. According to some sources, the Abhidhamma Pitaka, or its matika, was also included. Also the Sangha made the unanimous decision to keep all the rules of the Vinaya, even the lesser and minor rules.
According to the Macmillan Encyclopedia of Buddhism (2004),[1]
"... its historicity is questioned by virtually all Buddhist scholars. They argue that while it was not unlikely that a small group of Buddha's intimate disciples gathered after his death, a council in the grand style described in the scriptures is almost certainly a fiction."

The Decline Of Buddhism in India

We don't know why Buddhism declined in the last half of the first millenium AD. By the time the Muslims began conquering India in the twelfth century, the number of monasteries had severely declined. Buddhism, which once had spread across the face of India, was a vital force only in the areas of its origins. Scholars believe that the monasteries became detached from everyday life in India. After centuries of patronage, the monasteries had amassed a wealth of endowments. Life inside the monasteries was very good. So the monasteries became very selective in admitting monks to the brotherhood. For the everyday Indian, Buddhism increasingly became indistinguishable from Hinduism, which had undergone a transformation itself. The average Hindu thought of Buddha as a god among their gods; we find numerous indications that Buddha was worshipped by Hindus as any other god. In fact, Hinduism eventually construed Buddha as a manifestation, or avatar , of the god Vishnu (Krishna is another avatar of Vishnu). Finally, the Buddhists lived in separate communities; Buddhism wasn't an integral part of everyday life in India, such as the rituals associated with Hinduism. When the Muslims began their conquest of India in 1192, they energetically set about trying to convert the regions to Islam. Part of this conversion process involved suppressing indigenous religions. Since Hinduism was so fundamentally a part of Indian life, they didn't succeed in suppressing it. But when they destroyed the Buddhist monasteries and either executed or drove out the Buddhist monks, there was no-one left to take up the religion. From 1192 to the present day, Buddhism ceased to be an organized religion in India, the fertile soil from which the religion grew.

Tantrism & The Vehicle Of the Thunderbolt

The final developments of Buddhism in India involve the growth of Tantric thought in both Buddhism and Hinduism. Vedism had always based itself on magic and ritualistic magic; in the fourth and fifth centuries BC, a new form of Hinduism, Tantrism, focussed primarily on magic. As applied Buddhism, Tantrism focussed on the the use of the physical world. Mahayana Buddhism divided into two central schools, the Madhyamika, or "Doctrine of the Middle Position," and the Vijnanavada, or "Doctrine of Consciousness." Each of these schools believed that all of physical reality was an illusion. The only thing that existed was Void or Emptiness. The Vijnavadans believed that everything we perceived was self-generated and that all our perceptions were caused by previous perceptions in an elaborate chain of causation. This would explain why our perceptions tend to be uniform throughout our lives and why we tend to share our perceptions with others. But, in the end, it's all illusion. The world needs to be rejected as a world of illusion. The Tantric Buddhists, on the other hand, developed a different methodology from this insight that the world is unreal. Just because the physical world doesn't exist doesn't mean that one should reject it. On the one hand, if the physical world doesn't exist, that means that one cannot commit right or wrong. As a way of proving that one is enlightened, all sorts of forbidden acts should be engaged in: fornication, thieving, eating dung, and so forth. A similar movement occurred in England in the seventeenth century. A group of radical Protestants, called the "Ranters," took the Protestant notion of divine election to its farthest extreme. If one is saved and one knows it, that means that one can't sin no matter what one does. In fact, committing all sorts of heinous acts can serve to demonstrate one's salvation. So the ranters would fornicate in the streets and curse and do all sorts of obnoxious things in order to demonstrate their salvation. One form of Tantric Buddhism was similar to this. On the other hand, if the physical world was unreal, one could still use the physical world and one's perceptions of it as a means towards enlightenment. All activities, including sex, can be used as a meditative technique. This was called Vajrayana, or "The Vehicle of the Thunder-Bolt." The Vajrayanans believed that each bodhisattva had consorts or wives, called taras . These female counterparts embodied the active aspects of the bodhisattva , and so were worshipped. One learned the teachings of Tantrism from a master, and then one joined a group of others who had been trained. There one would practice the rituals learned from the master. For the Tantrists, the physical world was identical with the Void and human perception was identical with Nirvana . Buddhism, however, was slowly fading off of the Indian landscape; Tantrism came on the scene just as Buddhism began to slowly lose its vitality.