Sunday, March 17, 2024

If early Buddhism emerged from the ancient India, especially the Hinduism and the vedic tradition, then in what way was Buddhism ‘innovative’ compared to the Vedic tradition? (ChatGPT, 2024-3-17)

Buddhism represented a significant departure from certain aspects of the Vedic tradition prevalent in ancient India, despite emerging within the same cultural and philosophical milieu. Some of the key innovations of Buddhism compared to the Vedic tradition include:

  1. Rejection of Vedic rituals: The Vedic tradition placed a strong emphasis on ritualism, including sacrificial rituals (yajnas) performed by priests (brahmins) to appease gods and ensure prosperity. Buddhism rejected the efficacy of such rituals as a means of attaining liberation or spiritual progress. Instead, Buddhism emphasized ethical conduct (sila), mental cultivation (samadhi), and wisdom (panna) as the path to enlightenment.

  2. Social inclusivity: The Vedic tradition was hierarchical, with society divided into four varnas (castes), with the brahmins occupying the highest position. Buddhism challenged the caste system and emphasized the potential for spiritual realization in people from all social backgrounds. The Buddha welcomed people from all castes and even ordained people from the lowest caste (such as outcasts or untouchables) into the monastic community.

  3. Concept of karma and rebirth: While both Buddhism and the Vedic tradition share the concepts of karma (the law of cause and effect) and rebirth, Buddhism introduced innovative interpretations of these concepts. The Buddha rejected the authority of the Vedic scriptures and provided alternative explanations of karma and rebirth based on his own teachings. In Buddhism, karma is understood as volitional action that shapes future experiences, and rebirth is seen as a continuous process driven by karma, without a permanent self or soul (anatta/anatman).

  4. Middle Way: Buddhism introduced the concept of the Middle Way (Majjhima Patipada), which advocates for a balanced approach between extremes. The Buddha encouraged his followers to avoid the extremes of sensual indulgence and self-mortification, advocating for a path of moderation and mindfulness. While the Vedic tradition also valued balance, Buddhism articulated this principle in a distinct philosophical context.

  5. Emphasis on impermanence and suffering: Buddhism highlighted the impermanent and unsatisfactory nature of worldly existence (samsara) and the pervasiveness of suffering (dukkha). While these concepts were not entirely absent from the Vedic tradition, Buddhism placed greater emphasis on them as fundamental aspects of human experience and as the starting point for spiritual inquiry and liberation.

In summary, Buddhism was innovative compared to the Vedic tradition in its rejection of ritualism, social inclusivity, reinterpretation of karma and rebirth, advocacy of the Middle Way, and emphasis on impermanence and suffering as the basis for spiritual practice. While Buddhism emerged within the broader context of ancient Indian philosophy, it represented a distinct philosophical and religious movement with its own unique teachings and practices.

Can we say that Advaita Vedanta was the main inspiration for the birth of Buddhism? (ChatGPT, 2024-3-17)

It's not accurate to say that Advaita Vedanta was the main inspiration for the birth of Buddhism. Buddhism emerged in the 5th century BCE in ancient India, predating the formal development of Advaita Vedanta by several centuries.

Siddhartha Gautama, later known as the Buddha, founded Buddhism based on his own spiritual experiences and insights, which were independent of the Vedic traditions prevalent in ancient India at the time. While Buddhism arose in a cultural and philosophical milieu influenced by Vedic thought, it also represented a departure from certain aspects of Vedic religion and philosophy.

Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta share some similarities, particularly in their critique of ritualism and emphasis on personal spiritual transformation. Both traditions also emphasize the importance of transcending suffering and attaining liberation or enlightenment. However, they have distinct philosophical frameworks and methods of practice.

Advaita Vedanta is rooted in the Vedanta school of Hindu philosophy, which emerged later in Indian history and was influenced by earlier philosophical traditions, including Buddhism. Advaita Vedanta specifically emphasizes the non-dualistic understanding of reality, asserting the identity of the individual soul (atman) with the ultimate reality (Brahman).

While there may have been cross-fertilization of ideas between early Buddhism and the broader philosophical landscape of ancient India, it's more accurate to view Buddhism as a distinct tradition with its own unique teachings and practices, rather than as directly inspired by Advaita Vedanta.

Is the non-dualism of Advaita Vedanta against the dualism of science? (ChatGPT, 2024-3-17)

Advaita Vedanta and science approach reality from different perspectives, but they are not necessarily in direct opposition to each other.

Advaita Vedanta is a philosophical school within Hinduism that emphasizes the concept of non-duality (advaita), asserting that the ultimate reality is Brahman, which is beyond all distinctions and dualities. According to Advaita Vedanta, the perceived multiplicity and diversity of the world are illusory, and the ultimate truth is the unity of all existence.

Science, on the other hand, is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe. While science operates within the realm of empirical observation and experimentation, it does not necessarily concern itself with metaphysical questions about ultimate reality.

The apparent differences between Advaita Vedanta and science mainly lie in their methodologies, domains of inquiry, and the types of questions they seek to answer. Advaita Vedanta deals with metaphysical questions about the nature of reality and the self, while science focuses on understanding the physical world through empirical evidence and logical reasoning.

However, it's essential to note that many scientists and philosophers recognize the limitations of science in addressing certain metaphysical questions, such as the nature of consciousness or the ultimate origins of the universe. Some aspects of Advaita Vedanta, particularly its emphasis on subjective experience and consciousness, may provide insights that complement scientific understanding.

In summary, while Advaita Vedanta and science may approach reality from different perspectives, they need not be seen as inherently contradictory. They operate in different domains of inquiry and can potentially offer complementary insights into the nature of reality.

Mahāvākyas (The Great Contemplations)

These mahavakyas, in the light of which the Upanisads should be understood according to the hermeneutical tradition of Advaita Vedanta, are the following:

I. All this is verily Brahman. 

II. I am Brahman.

III. This Atman is Brahman. 

IV. That thou art.

To this a fifth is sometimes added:

V. Brahman is spirit (or consciousness). (Arvind Sharma, 2004, pp. 18-19)


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mah%C4%81v%C4%81kyas


Mahāvākyas 是《奧義書》中的“偉大聖言”,以吠檀多不二論學派為特徵,其中 mahā 意為“偉大”,vākya 意為“句子”。最常見的是,大佛家的數量被認為是四位, 與其他大佛一樣,它也解釋了梵與阿特曼的統一,這是吠檀多不二論的基本原則

The Mahāvākyas (sing.: mahāvākyam, महावाक्यम्; plural: mahāvākyāni, महावाक्यानि) are "The Great Sayings" of the Upanishads, as characterized by the Advaita school of Vedanta with mahā meaning great and vākya, a sentence. Most commonly, Mahāvākyas are considered four in number,[1][2]

Like other Mahāvākyas, it also explains the unity of Brahman and Atman, which is the basic principle of Advaita Vedanta.[3]

  1. Tat Tvam Asi (तत् त्वम् असि) - traditionally interpreted as "That Thou Art" (that you are),[4][5][6] (Chandogya Upanishad 6.8.7 of the Sama Veda, with tat in Ch.U.6.8.7 referring to sat, "the Existent"[7][8][9]); correctly translated as "That's how [thus] you are,"[4][6][10][11] with tat in Ch.U.6.12.3 referring to "the very nature of all existence as permeated by [the finest essence]"[12][13]
  2. Ahaṁ Brahmāsmi (अहं ब्रह्मास्मि) - "I am Brahman", or "I am Divine"[14](Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 1.4.10 of the Yajur Veda)
  3. Prajñānaṁ Brahma (प्रज्ञानं ब्रह्म) - "Prajñāna[note 1] is Brahman"[note 2], or "Brahman is Prajñāna"[web 2] (Aitareya Upanishad 3.3 of the Rig Veda)
  4. Ayam Ātmā Brahma (अयम् आत्मा ब्रह्म) - "This Self (Atman) is Brahman" (Mandukya Upanishad 1.2 of the Atharva Veda)

Those statements are interpreted as supporting the insight that the individual self (jīvá) which appears as a separate existence, is in essence (ātmán) part and manifestation of the whole (Brahman).


https://www.swamij.com/mahavakyas.htm

Mahavakyas: The Great Contemplations

婆羅門(Brahmin)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmin

https://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-tw/%E5%A9%86%E7%BD%97%E9%97%A8

Brahmin (/ˈbrɑːmɪn/; Sanskrit: ब्राह्मण, romanized: brāhmaṇa) is a varna as well as a castewithin Hindu society. The other three varnas are the Kshatriya, Vaishya, and Shudra.[1][2][3][4][5] The traditional occupation of Brahmins is that of priesthood (purohit, pandit, or pujari) at Hindu temples or at socio-religious ceremonies, and the performing of rite of passage rituals such as solemnizing a wedding with hymns and prayers.[6][7]


Varna (Hinduism)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varna_(Hinduism)

Varṇa (Sanskrit: वर्ण), in the context of Hinduism,[1] refers to a social class within a hierarchical traditional Hindu society.[2][3] The ideology is epitomized in texts like Manusmriti,[1][4][5] which describes and ranks four varnas, and prescribes their occupations, requirements and duties, or Dharma.[1][6]

Pravrajika Vrajaprana (b 1952)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pravrajika_Vrajaprana

Masahito Hayashi(林正人)(b 1971)

https://sds.cuhk.edu.cn/teacher/927

羅大佑宜花東鹿紀 (2020)

https://blog.myvideo.net.tw/lo-ta-yu-2021-taipei-concert/

Generative AI in Healthcare

https://www.siemens-advanta.com/featured-articles/generative-ai-healthcare

How will generative AI impact healthcare?

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2023/05/how-will-generative-ai-impact-healthcare/

Generative AI for doctors: an introduction

https://mobius.md/2023/11/22/generative-ai-for-doctors-an-introduction/

Learn How Generative AI and Data Will Change Healthcare IT in 2024

https://virtelligence.com/blog/learn-generative-ai-data-will-change-healthcare/

The Future of Generative AI in Healthcare

https://youtu.be/yOWqIbzj8gs?si=CyDiqkBxvJWQ5hHz

How generative AI and large language models can close the gap between data and outcomes in healthcare

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2024/01/generative-ai-large-language-models-data-outcomes-healthcare/

Generative AI will profoundly change healthcare operations

https://www.cio.com/article/1293399/generative-ai-will-profoundly-change-healthcare-operations.html

Three examples of how AI is going to change medicine

https://www.medicaleconomics.com/view/three-examples-of-how-ai-is-going-to-change-medicine

How Generative AI Will Change The Jobs Of Doctors And Healthcare Professionals

https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2024/03/13/how-generative-ai-will-change-the-jobs-of-doctors-and-healthcare-professionals/

Disturbing the Bones (Andrew Davis, Jeff Biggers, 2024-10-15)

https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/761646/disturbing-the-bones-by-andrew-davis/

你要理解,Andrew Davis 知道,什麼是動作,什麼是驚悚,當然那是,一九九零年代的動作和驚悚,意思是說,過去廿年,我們已無動作,亦無驚悚,

我(atman)(negativity vs vitality)

https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%88%91_(%E5%8D%B0%E5%BA%A6%E6%95%99)

我(梵語:आत्मन्,Ātman),梵文名詞,意為真正的我,內在的自我,與自我(Ahaṃkara)、心(citta)及具身存在(Prakṛti)不同,此詞指純粹的意識,為了獲得解脫,人須要獲得自我知識。這個術語起源自古印度宗教,在各宗派中普遍被接受(除佛教),被視為是輪迴的根基,後被印度教承襲。在印度哲學中,特別是在印度教中的吠檀多派,梵與我合一,是古印度所指的終極實在,是超越和不可規範的唯一實在,被視為是精神與物質的第一原理、第一因。佛教不認可這種學說,主張一切法無我(anatta)。

梵我是否可以視為 vitality > negativity (似中國古人喜歡講的天人合一,意思是說,你要注意,人在天地的比例,比如說,只是泛著孤舟的一個模糊的點,意思是說,逝于山水之間)(這是為什麼我說,給人帶來靜謐的風景,是不要求人回應的風景,因為人的存在,只是微不足道的,在風景中)(這也是為什麼我說,中國人必須滅共,因為共匪破壞了天與人的比例,意思是說,諾大天地,只剩下習近平的屁眼,意思是說,中國人被允許看到的風景,只剩下習近平的屁眼)(你要理解,Jack Reacher 說過,一個人看不到自己的屁眼,Jack Reacher 沒有說過,一個人看不到另一個人的屁眼,當然 Jack Reacher 沒有想到,中國人的悲慘的命運,竟然淪為只能看到另一個人的屁眼)(你要理解,天九哥為了阻止阿旺參賽雀聖,派黎明綁架自摸西,飛姐爆牙阿旺搭救,黎明飛刀偷襲自摸西屁眼,自摸西以為自己不行了,跟飛姐懺悔,每天偷她一千元按摩,飛姐大怒,遂將飛刀塞進自摸西的屁眼,這是發生在香港的關於屁眼的故事,意思是說,香港屁眼,比中國屁眼,有趣多了,當然,如果中國人民把十四億飛刀塞進習近平的屁眼,那就贏過香港),無我是否可以視為 negativity > vitality (畫中無人,陽光遂灑在空蕩房間,sun in an empty room,Edward Hopper,1963),意思是說,無我連遊南鎮的先生,和他的友人,都捨之棄之,諾大天地,遂只留巖中花樹,草木瓦石,意思是說,無我比梵我更極端,

你要理解,以極端立論者,意在宣稱,「來到路的盡頭」,有點像阿甘西行,跑到太平洋海邊,聖塔莫尼卡,片刻後,轉頭東行,意思是說,以極端立論者,無法久留于漁人碼頭,有點像登山者,來到山巔,片刻後,只好下山,意思是說,極端就是山巔,景觀不可思議,但是無法久駐,以音律言之,在極端高音處,亦無法停滯,意思是說,極端就是絕爽 (jouissance),就是你所能趨近真實的極致,意思是說,你上得了山,不見得能夠,活著下山,意思是說,你脫得了褲,不見得能夠,活著穿褲,

梵 (bráhman)

https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%A2%B5

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahman

梵(梵語:ब्रह्मन्,bráhman),印度宗教概念,最初指的是自祭祀儀式所得的神秘力量,後來被用以指稱萬物的本源和終極實在,現世相對來說則只是不真的現象。又如:梵心(清淨之心)、梵志(以清靜為志)、梵門(清淨的法門)、梵事(清淨的法事)。

一些佛學研究人聲稱早期的佛教透過宣揚無我論,完全棄絶了奧義書中的梵我論[9]。

Upanishads (奧義書)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upanishads

https://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-tw/%E5%A5%A5%E4%B9%89%E4%B9%A6

奧義書中兩個最重要的概念是「我」和「梵」。奧義書用各種奇妙的比喻(很多在現代人看來是不可理解的)來說明,梵就是一切,也就是最高存在;人類的我(個體靈魂)來自宇宙的我,即梵(宇宙靈魂)。總之,宇宙就是梵,梵就是我;「梵我一如」這個最高真理就是奧義書主要的觀點。在奧義書的思想基礎上產生了吠檀多派,後來直接影響到印度教大改革者商羯羅。

Vedas (吠陀)

https://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-tw/%E5%90%A0%E9%99%80

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedas

There are four Vedas: the Rigveda, the Yajurveda, the Samaveda and the Atharvaveda.

四部吠陀本集是:

四部吠陀本集中以《梨俱吠陀》最早,最初的部分可以追溯到公元前2000年時代,正值印度河文明的時期,雅利安人大體居住在印度的西北印度河兩岸的時期。其他三卷吠陀經皆是《梨俱吠陀》的衍生作品,相繼成書於後,最晚集結完成的為《阿闥婆吠陀》。後三卷吠陀經中的神曲,不是部分《梨俱吠陀》神曲的復述,便是在它基礎上的發展而來。吠陀神曲有長有短,長曲是一曲多頌。短曲是一曲數頌或僅有一頌。多數頌由四句構成,少數由三句構成。


Saturday, March 16, 2024

Andrew Davis (director) (b 1946)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Davis_(director)#Filmography

Long COVID or Post-COVID Conditions

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/long-term-effects/index.html

Arvind Sharma (b 1940)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arvind_Sharma

Advaita Vedanta

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advaita_Vedanta

The term Advaita (literally "non-secondness", but usually rendered as "nondualism",[5][6]and often equated with monism[note 3]) refers to the idea that Brahman alone is ultimately real, while the transient phenomenal world is an illusory appearance (maya) of Brahman. In this view, jivatman, the experiencing self, is ultimately non-different ("na aparah") from Ātman-Brahman, the highest Self or Reality.[3][7][8][note 4] The jivatman or individual self is a mere reflection or limitation of singular Ātman in a multitude of apparent individual bodies.[9]


Vedanta



Vedanta (/veɪˈdɑːntə/; Sanskrit: वेदान्त, IAST: Vedānta), also known as Uttara Mīmāṃsā, is one of the six orthodox (āstika) schools of Hindu philosophy. The word "Vedanta" means "conclusion of the Vedas", and encompasses the ideas that emerged from, or were aligned with, the speculations and enumerations contained in the Upanishads, with a focus on knowledge and liberation. Vedanta developed into many schools, all of which base their ideas on the authority of a common group of texts called the Prasthānatrayī, translated as "the three sources": the Upanishads, the Brahma Sutras and the Bhagavad Gita.[1]

Ramesh S. Balsekar (1917-2009)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramesh_Balsekar

Advaita Vedanta to Quantum Physics: A Cosmic Tapestry of Consciousness (2023)(negativity vs vitality)

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/advaita-vedanta-quantum-physics-cosmic-tapestry-ashish-h-k-jha

See also 

https://youtu.be/N4Ho3DQYp-8?si=5uiBtmw0wj_-MKGy

https://www.utpjournals.press/doi/full/10.3138/uram.38.1-2.73

http://www.ignaciodarnaude.com/textos_diversos/Advaita%20Vedanta%20and%20Quantum%20Physics.pdf

https://ijrpr.com/uploads/V4ISSUE1/IJRPR9350.pdf

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330485417_Philosophy_of_Advaita_Vedanta_Science_Consciousness_and_beyond

https://sonaliranade.substack.com/p/advaita-vedanta-and-quantum-entanglement

吠檀多不二論 Advaita Vedanta