This is exactly the kind of thread a cherry picking believer in Buddhism should refrain from participating in ... butJavi wrote: What do you guys think? Is Paṭicca-samuppāda a Theory of Everything? Or, an even broader question, is the Dhamma supposed to explain "everything" as some seem to hold or is it more a limited epistemological theory which remains about the field of one's experience.
Is it not self evident that paticca samuppada or dhamma is not ToE?
How exactly does paticca samuppada throw any light on ToE (ToE of physics which should be able to reconcile general relativity and quantum mechanics and explain gravity, magnetism, weak interaction, strong interaction). How is paticca samuppada/dhamma/Buddhism related to gravity or magnetism or sub atomic particles?
Imagine a universe where there is no life .. only stars, planets, comets, black holes and so on .. ToE would still be applicable in that universe but paticca samuppada or dhamma will not because there are no intelligent life forms (I take it as given that paticca samuppada only works with intelligent life forms).
How can one even propose it? Is it not like stating "The Rain in Spain is a sign of dollar's imminent collapse" .. stringing together two disjoint phrases to form a sentence that is grammatically coherent but little else. I have trouble understanding how the question even arises.