Why Buddha did not say that the world is round?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Post Reply
santa100
Posts: 6811
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Why Buddha did not say that the world is round?

Post by santa100 »

Mr Man wrote:santa100, you really don't seem to be making a great deal of sense.
Because you avoid answering my question, which is to demonstrate a simple point: just because an event has a low probability doesn't mean one can just eliminate it completely. Actually I didn't even claim that the Buddha knows everything, I simply said that given the suttas' premise about the supernatural powers, if that is true, then it'd be false to rule out His knowledge about the shape of the earth (here). Ven Bodhi's related note about this topic:
MA explains that part of the statement is valid is the assertion that the Buddha is omniscient and all-seeing; the part that is excessive is the assertion that knowledge and vision are continuously present to Him. According to Theravada exegetical tradition, the Buddha is omniscient in the sense that all knowable things are potentially accessible to him. He cannot, however, know everything simultaneously and must advert to whatever he wishes to know. At MN 90.8 the Buddha says that it is possible to know and see all, though not simultaneously, and at AN 4:24/ii.24 He claims to know all that can be seen, heard, sensed, and cognized. This is understood by the Theravada commentators as an assertion of omniscience in the qualified sense. Also see Milindapanha/Miln 102-7.
So my question for you is: do you think it's impossible for the Buddha to know the shape of the earth given that He directs his mind toward investigating it?
User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 4016
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Why Buddha did not say that the world is round?

Post by Mr Man »

santa100 wrote:
Mr Man wrote:santa100, you really don't seem to be making a great deal of sense.
Because you avoid answering my question, which is to demonstrate a simple point: just because an event has a low probability doesn't mean one can just eliminate it completely. Actually I didn't even claim that the Buddha knows everything, I simply said that given the suttas' premise about the supernatural powers, if that is true, then it'd be false to rule out His knowledge about the shape of the earth (here). Ven Bodhi's related note about this topic:
MA explains that part of the statement is valid is the assertion that the Buddha is omniscient and all-seeing; the part that is excessive is the assertion that knowledge and vision are continuously present to Him. According to Theravada exegetical tradition, the Buddha is omniscient in the sense that all knowable things are potentially accessible to him. He cannot, however, know everything simultaneously and must advert to whatever he wishes to know. At MN 90.8 the Buddha says that it is possible to know and see all, though not simultaneously, and at AN 4:24/ii.24 He claims to know all that can be seen, heard, sensed, and cognized. This is understood by the Theravada commentators as an assertion of omniscience in the qualified sense. Also see Milindapanha/Miln 102-7.
santa100, I still don't understand what you are getting at. The only question you asked was
"Now, back to the exceedingly rare odds of us coming back as human beings, you are a human being right now, are you not?"
which doesn't seem to connect with the conversation up until now and didn't imagine that you wanted me to answer it but yes I am a human being.
santa100 wrote:So my question for you is: do you think it's impossible for the Buddha to know the shape of the earth given that He directs his mind toward investigating it?
Your question, in my opinion, is nonsensical but here goes - If the Buddha was able to gain all knowledge by directing his mind towards it that would be something incomprehensible to me and I am happy to leave it that way.
:anjali:
santa100
Posts: 6811
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Why Buddha did not say that the world is round?

Post by santa100 »

Your answer, in my opinion is also nonsensical for I didn't even ask you about whether the Buddha "gains all knowledge". I asked about one specific concrete kind of knowledge, which is the knowledge about the shape of the earth to address the OP. But anyway, thank you for answering.
User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 4016
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Why Buddha did not say that the world is round?

Post by Mr Man »

santa100 wrote:Your answer, in my opinion is also nonsensical for I didn't even ask you about whether the Buddha "gains all knowledge". I asked about one specific concrete kind of knowledge, which is the knowledge about the shape of the earth to address the OP. But anyway, thank you for answering.
Okay, that the Buddha could know the shape of the earth by directing his mind towards investigating it would be something incomprehensible to me and I am happy to leave it that way.
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Why Buddha did not say that the world is round?

Post by chownah »

"So my question for you is: do you think it's impossible for the Buddha to know the shape of the earth given that He directs his mind toward investigating it?"

Some people think that the Buddha could know anything that is knowable......the shape of the earth is not knowable.
chownah
SarathW
Posts: 21226
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Why Buddha did not say that the world is round?

Post by SarathW »

Will Buddha know that the soccer ball is round?
Sorry I am not trying to be smart here but make the point.
Some may argue that the soccer ball is not round.
:thinking:
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Why Buddha did not say that the world is round?

Post by chownah »

Sarath.
What point are you wanting to make? It doesn't seem to be about the earth or soccer balls or roundness.
chownah
walkart
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 6:13 pm

Re: Why Buddha did not say that the world is round?

Post by walkart »

I suppose that he suggested that earth is round by saing that it is impossible to attain the end of the world by walking.
SarathW
Posts: 21226
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Why Buddha did not say that the world is round?

Post by SarathW »

"Or he might say: 'Whereas some recluses and brahmins, while living on the food offered by the faithful, earn their living by a wrong means of livelihood, by such debased arts as predicting: there will be an eclipse of the moon, an eclipse of the sun, an eclipse of a constellation; the sun and the moon will go on their proper courses; there will be an aberration of the sun and moon; the constellations will go on their proper courses; there will be an aberration of a constellation; there will be a fall of meteors; there will be a skyblaze; there will be an earthquake; there will be an earth-roar; there will be a rising and setting, a darkening and brightening, of the moon, sun, and constellations; such will be the result of the moon's eclipse, such the result of the sun's eclipse, (and so on down to) such will be the result of the rising and setting, darkening and brightening of the moon, sun, and constellations — the recluse Gotama abstains from such wrong means of livelihood, from such debased arts.'

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .bodh.html
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
lyndon taylor
Posts: 1835
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 11:41 pm
Location: Redlands, US occupied Northern Mexico
Contact:

Re: Why Buddha did not say that the world is round?

Post by lyndon taylor »

So much for a Buddhist society with astronomers and weathermen!!
18 years ago I made one of the most important decisions of my life and entered a local Cambodian Buddhist Temple as a temple boy and, for only 3 weeks, an actual Therevada Buddhist monk. I am not a scholar, great meditator, or authority on Buddhism, but Buddhism is something I love from the Bottom of my heart. It has taught me sobriety, morality, peace, and very importantly that my suffering is optional, and doesn't have to run my life. I hope to give back what little I can to the Buddhist community, sincerely former monk John

http://trickleupeconomictheory.blogspot.com/
SarathW
Posts: 21226
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Why Buddha did not say that the world is round?

Post by SarathW »

lyndon taylor wrote:So much for a Buddhist society with astronomers and weathermen!!
I see your point. :)
I think this is for monks.
:thinking:
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6594
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: USA

Re: Why Buddha did not say that the world is round?

Post by Mkoll »

lyndon taylor wrote:So much for a Buddhist society with astronomers and weathermen!!
SarathW wrote:"Or he might say: 'Whereas some recluses and brahmins, while living on the food offered by the faithful, earn their living by a wrong means of livelihood, by such debased arts as predicting: there will be an eclipse of the moon, an eclipse of the sun, an eclipse of a constellation; the sun and the moon will go on their proper courses; there will be an aberration of the sun and moon; the constellations will go on their proper courses; there will be an aberration of a constellation; there will be a fall of meteors; there will be a skyblaze; there will be an earthquake; there will be an earth-roar; there will be a rising and setting, a darkening and brightening, of the moon, sun, and constellations; such will be the result of the moon's eclipse, such the result of the sun's eclipse, (and so on down to) such will be the result of the rising and setting, darkening and brightening of the moon, sun, and constellations — the recluse Gotama abstains from such wrong means of livelihood, from such debased arts.'
~~~

Clearly, you didn't read the sutta carefully. Why such vitriol, Lyndon?
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
User avatar
Ben
Posts: 18438
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: Why Buddha did not say that the world is round?

Post by Ben »

SarathW wrote:Why Buddha did not say that the world is round?
Apologies if this has already been asked and answered, but...

Why does it matter?
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR

e: [email protected]..
User avatar
Jetavan
Posts: 191
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 12:45 am
Contact:

Re: Why Buddha did not say that the world is round?

Post by Jetavan »

Kusala wrote: So it seems that, given the problems of measurement of atoms and without a really accurate estimate of an angula, we can conclude that the fifth century assessment of the size of the paramanu is at least on the same order of magnitude as the twentieth century assessment of the size of the atom..."
The statement assumes that the modern scientific definition of "atom" (the smallest unit of an element) is the same as the ancient definition of "paramu", whereas that is not necessarily the case at all. It could be that the "paramu" corresponds not to the modern scientific "atom" but to the "quark", or some other even smaller particle science has not yet discovered -- assuming, of course, that it is possible to scientifically discover whatever truly corresponds to the "paramu".
User avatar
BlueLotus
Posts: 437
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2011 7:46 am

Re: Why Buddha did not say that the world is round?

Post by BlueLotus »

daverupa wrote:Saying that the Buddha left simsapa leaves on the tree in order to only teach the Path is one thing; saying that the Buddha's simsapa tree had all possible simsapa leaves, of which only some were taught as the Path, is saying another thing.

This latter doesn't seem to be warranted: a spherical earth (imperfect oblate spheroid, actually), the periodic table of the elements, some Feynman diagrams, the Yijing... why assert any of this to be known by the Buddha? As though somehow He could not have known dukkhanirodha if he didn't also know how to tie a midshipman's hitch...
:clap:
I really enjoy your posts
Post Reply