Reflections on the pre Big Bang
may show echoes of events before Big Bang -
That's a BBC science article. I have a BBC
RSS feed I think it's called and always am eager to read the brief science
articles, in fact, if I'm in a hurry they may be the only ones I read.
When I said this to Baker the Roshi he said that
Stuart the Brand
says that's the only news worth reading - or something like that.
Anyway, this is the first time I've seen a notice of events before the Big
Bang. Reflecting on this makes me want to wax on the subject of science
and religion and the Big Bang.
Pre Big Bang? Bout time. Who will have trouble believing that? I've always seen it that way - in a way. The way I see it, this is always here, always has been, always will be. By this I mean phenomena in various form - space, time, other dimensions, this universe, multiple universes, the six realms - as the juvenile cognoscenti say, whatever. So I think if there's a Big Bang then maybe it's just part of a pulse. Or not.
I have all sorts of vague cosmic ideas like form is emptiness and mind only and no mind and no no mind and I am that I am with the undeniable I am feeling we have being the Big I Am, the Big Kahuna, the Naz Beyond, or it's all delusion, or should that be all illusion, or like a dream, a mouse darting in the grass, a bubble, beyond comprehension, neti neti - not this, not that.
But it's fun to read physics stuff though I grok and retain almost nothing of it. The idea of the Singularity, everything starting off with an infinitesimally small dot, has always seemed sort of ridiculous to me, but I can't really comprehend any of this stuff so if it's true then okay. Who knows? And it really doesn't matter to me how things are in the macro and micro - this way or that way. Scientific opinion will keep growing and changing. Maybe there's a stopping point in it but we sure are not there.
What gets me is people getting their religious views hooked up to phenomena being a certain way - the earth is flat, the sun revolves around it. The Pope told a group of top physicists that they could speculate on what happened after the Big Bang but not on the instant of its inception. I can't find that on the Net but it was in a documentary I saw about Stephen Hawking and other physicists. That's being awfully literal and narrow. He should read Meister Eckhart (know nothing) or Pseudo Dionysius (not to think of the first cause in terms of being) etc. And the fundamentalists who are tied into the world being six thousand years old. Why? What does it matter? I remember a lunch with a couple of fundamentalist Christian friends in Fort Worth and the stiffening that occurred when I said something about fossils. I just learned that Plato and Aristotle were upset about Democritus' theory of atoms and wanted his books burned (not quite like present day atoms but good for his time) - I guess because they were tied into another view of basics like earth, water, wind, and fire which did go on minus one member to become a musical group.
I don't know what other Buddhists or Advaits or mystics of any color say, but to me there is absolutely no scientific finding that could conflict with any perennial philosophy, or anyway with my understanding which, come to think of it, is no understanding.
|Go to What's New|