What do you think?
Rate this book
Die Welt In Einem Einzigen Atom
Tenzin Gyatso, His Holiness the Fourteenth Dalai Lama, is the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize and is both the temporal and spiritual leader of the Tibetan people. The Dalai Lama travels the world speaking on peace and interreligious understanding, giving Buddhist teachings, and meeting with political leaders as he works tirelessly on behalf of the Tibetan people. He resides in Dharamsala, India, and is the head of the Tibetan government-in-exile.
Hardcover
First published January 1, 2005
934 people are currently reading
16795 people want to read
About the author
Dalai Lama XIV
1,554 books6,207 followersJetsun Jamphel Ngawang Lobsang Yeshe Tenzin Gyatso (born Lhamo Döndrub), the 14th Dalai Lama, is a practicing member of the Gelug School of Tibetan Buddhism and is influential as a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, the world's most famous Buddhist monk, and the leader of the exiled Tibetan government in India.
Tenzin Gyatso was the fifth of sixteen children born to a farming family. He was proclaimed the tulku (an Enlightened lama who has consciously decided to take rebirth) of the 13th Dalai Lama at the age of two.
On 17 November 1950, at the age of 15, he was enthroned as Tibet's ruler. Thus he became Tibet's most important political ruler just one month after the People's Republic of China's invasion of Tibet on 7 October 1950. In 1954, he went to Beijing to attempt peace talks with Mao Zedong and other leaders of the PRC. These talks ultimately failed.
After a failed uprising and the collapse of the Tibetan resistance movement in 1959, the Dalai Lama left for India, where he was active in establishing the Central Tibetan Administration (the Tibetan Government in Exile) and in seeking to preserve Tibetan culture and education among the thousands of refugees who accompanied him.
Tenzin Gyatso is a charismatic figure and noted public speaker. This Dalai Lama is the first to travel to the West. There, he has helped to spread Buddhism and to promote the concepts of universal responsibility, secular ethics, and religious harmony.
He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989, honorary Canadian citizenship in 2006, and the United States Congressional Gold Medal on 17 October 2007.
Tenzin Gyatso was the fifth of sixteen children born to a farming family. He was proclaimed the tulku (an Enlightened lama who has consciously decided to take rebirth) of the 13th Dalai Lama at the age of two.
On 17 November 1950, at the age of 15, he was enthroned as Tibet's ruler. Thus he became Tibet's most important political ruler just one month after the People's Republic of China's invasion of Tibet on 7 October 1950. In 1954, he went to Beijing to attempt peace talks with Mao Zedong and other leaders of the PRC. These talks ultimately failed.
After a failed uprising and the collapse of the Tibetan resistance movement in 1959, the Dalai Lama left for India, where he was active in establishing the Central Tibetan Administration (the Tibetan Government in Exile) and in seeking to preserve Tibetan culture and education among the thousands of refugees who accompanied him.
Tenzin Gyatso is a charismatic figure and noted public speaker. This Dalai Lama is the first to travel to the West. There, he has helped to spread Buddhism and to promote the concepts of universal responsibility, secular ethics, and religious harmony.
He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989, honorary Canadian citizenship in 2006, and the United States Congressional Gold Medal on 17 October 2007.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 654 reviews
February 25, 2008
very few people are able to give me hope about mankind and our future as a species. the dalai lama delivers that and so much more in all his books, but this one stands out to me because of my interest in science, and especially my fascination with (if complete misunderstanding of) the universe and quantum physics, etc. this book contains all those big universe questions that are usually way too scary to ask (where did time begin? how big is space? what existed before the big bang?) but presents them in conjunction with religion, and not in contrast to it, like pretty much everyone else likes to see those 2 institutions. this is the kind of book where I read 10 pages, then have to close the book and just think for about a half hour, then pick up and start reading again.
January 2, 2017
A thought-provoking analysis and exposition on why the subjective, first person investigative methodology of spiritual tradition without its fundamentalist trappings and the objective third person investigative methodology of scientific tradition without its reductionist trappings are both indispensable and must go hand-in-hand if we are to fully comprehend reality and genuinely alleviate suffering. The ease and sharpness with which the Dalai Lama draws parallels and acute phenomenological similarities between modern scientific disciplines like cosmology, quantum Physics and neurobiology and the foundational tenets of the Buddhist spiritual tradition and the epistemological and ontological bricks and mortar of Buddhism that were put in place by Indian logicians like Nagarjuna, Asanga,Dharmakirti and Vasubandhu - was the most captivating part of the book for me.
That isn't to say the exposition was very lucid(atleast for me with no prior knowledge of Buddhist epistemology) - but with some application you could think them through and self-verify and assimilate. The book also has a lot of autobiographical snippets on the Dalai Lama's troubled political life, the daily rigors of his contemplative practice, and interesting details from his meetings with several other world leaders and scientists in Dharamsala and elsewhere.
Overall an immersive and appealing read, which has done enough to get me looking to read more of Dalai Lama XIV.
That isn't to say the exposition was very lucid(atleast for me with no prior knowledge of Buddhist epistemology) - but with some application you could think them through and self-verify and assimilate. The book also has a lot of autobiographical snippets on the Dalai Lama's troubled political life, the daily rigors of his contemplative practice, and interesting details from his meetings with several other world leaders and scientists in Dharamsala and elsewhere.
Overall an immersive and appealing read, which has done enough to get me looking to read more of Dalai Lama XIV.
November 18, 2008
This is a brilliant book. The Dalai Lama's theme is that science's emphasis on non-personal, "third-person" study and religion's emphasis on "first person" experience and awareness could be complementary.
If you have heard the Dalai Lama speak in his non-native tongue (English), he is a fantastic personality and he smiles a lot, but his communication is limited. It is a pleasure to read his ideas written first and then translated into English. This book reveals a mind that sparkles with wit, intelligence and an ability to pierce through to the heart of an issue.
He tells the story of his discovery and fascination with Western science. He writes of Buddhism's need to update some of its teaching methods and mythologies in the light of mankind's recent discoveries. He also writes of science's need to address issues of personal awareness and the need to be more open-minded concerning an attitude of total materialism. He also points out how akin Buddhism and science really are, as they have applied similar experimental methods to study awareness and the material world respectively.
Throughout, the Dalai Lama's logical process is a pleasure to read, and he comes across as always being open to new input, striving not to color it with preconceptions. This book is highly recommended to anyone interested in the relationship between science and religion.
If you have heard the Dalai Lama speak in his non-native tongue (English), he is a fantastic personality and he smiles a lot, but his communication is limited. It is a pleasure to read his ideas written first and then translated into English. This book reveals a mind that sparkles with wit, intelligence and an ability to pierce through to the heart of an issue.
He tells the story of his discovery and fascination with Western science. He writes of Buddhism's need to update some of its teaching methods and mythologies in the light of mankind's recent discoveries. He also writes of science's need to address issues of personal awareness and the need to be more open-minded concerning an attitude of total materialism. He also points out how akin Buddhism and science really are, as they have applied similar experimental methods to study awareness and the material world respectively.
Throughout, the Dalai Lama's logical process is a pleasure to read, and he comes across as always being open to new input, striving not to color it with preconceptions. This book is highly recommended to anyone interested in the relationship between science and religion.
February 25, 2017
This book might seem a strange reading choice since I am an atheist. During my years of life and travels around the world, I have found that of all the world's multitude of religious beliefs it is generally Buddhism that seems most comfortable with the concept of a coterminous relationship, if not a synergistic symbiosis, with science. This is not meant to imply that Buddhists make better scientists than say a Hindu or a Muslim, rather that the religion itself seems comfortable with the concepts of science. Other religions, primarily Christianity and Islam, have had a contentious and oft abhorrent relationship with science. Thus this book was an interesting insight into how a very religious man, the Dalai Lama, views science.
Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama, has had a very interesting life. After having to leave Tibet due to the Communist Chinese invasion, the Dalai Lama had opportunities to meet and study with some eminent scientific minds. This book is his attempt to explain how a Buddhist monk entered into the world of modern science and concepts such as bubble chambers, particle accelerators and quantum physics.
It is not often, though there are some Jesuits I can think of, that I hear a religious leader express such comfort with the reality of science. He admits that this is not an attempt to unite the two spheres. They can not be united as one is the realm of myth and belief, while the other is an empirical discipline (or multi-disciplinary if you wish to look at all the various specialties of science) meant to explain how the world,I prefer the term reality, around us truly works. What I appreciate about the Dalai Lama's book was his very unassuming and simple take on many of the more esoteric concepts. He admits that his, knowledge of the mathematics underlying the science is poor. So when the scientists explained things to him they used general concepts which would be readily understood by a Tibetan monk and his translator. That's fine, this is not a technical book at all. It attempts to juxtapose traditional Buddhist thought with rationalism. It's the Dalai Lama's disarming honesty, humility and respectful tone that truly drew me to this book.
Rare is it for a major religious figure to say the following:
"...scientific investigation proceeds by experiment, using instruments that analyze external phenomena........if science shows something to exist or to be non-existent (which is not the same as not finding it), then we must acknowledge that as a fact. If a hypothesis is tested and found to be true, we must accept it. Likewise, Buddhism must accept the facts-whether found by science or found by contemplative insights. If, when we investigate something, we find there is reason and proof for it, we must acknowledge that as reality-even if it is in contradiction with a literal scriptural explanation that has held sway for many centuries or with a deeply held opinion or view."
That last line would be considered anathema, if not outright heresy, by many of the world's leading religious leaders. They fear science and thus have a confrontational view of it. I found no such undercurrent in this book. The Dalai lama makes clear that science is reality, though there are elements such as quantum physics that have some elements of spirituality about them. This book then shows how certain aspects of Buddhist thought, and the various schools of the philosophy underlying the lore, have been able to find some similarities in broad concepts, especially in the field of quantum physics.
In the end this book gets a 3 star rating because while it is an interesting story about how this Tibetan monk was introduced to the world of science and his attempts to balance the modalities of both types of thought. But, in the end I find the usefulness of trying to justify any particular religion and that religion's dogma/beliefs to actual science as about as useful as discussing how the Force from Star Wars "works" in or with science. Well it doesn't. At all.
Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama, has had a very interesting life. After having to leave Tibet due to the Communist Chinese invasion, the Dalai Lama had opportunities to meet and study with some eminent scientific minds. This book is his attempt to explain how a Buddhist monk entered into the world of modern science and concepts such as bubble chambers, particle accelerators and quantum physics.
It is not often, though there are some Jesuits I can think of, that I hear a religious leader express such comfort with the reality of science. He admits that this is not an attempt to unite the two spheres. They can not be united as one is the realm of myth and belief, while the other is an empirical discipline (or multi-disciplinary if you wish to look at all the various specialties of science) meant to explain how the world,I prefer the term reality, around us truly works. What I appreciate about the Dalai Lama's book was his very unassuming and simple take on many of the more esoteric concepts. He admits that his, knowledge of the mathematics underlying the science is poor. So when the scientists explained things to him they used general concepts which would be readily understood by a Tibetan monk and his translator. That's fine, this is not a technical book at all. It attempts to juxtapose traditional Buddhist thought with rationalism. It's the Dalai Lama's disarming honesty, humility and respectful tone that truly drew me to this book.
Rare is it for a major religious figure to say the following:
"...scientific investigation proceeds by experiment, using instruments that analyze external phenomena........if science shows something to exist or to be non-existent (which is not the same as not finding it), then we must acknowledge that as a fact. If a hypothesis is tested and found to be true, we must accept it. Likewise, Buddhism must accept the facts-whether found by science or found by contemplative insights. If, when we investigate something, we find there is reason and proof for it, we must acknowledge that as reality-even if it is in contradiction with a literal scriptural explanation that has held sway for many centuries or with a deeply held opinion or view."
That last line would be considered anathema, if not outright heresy, by many of the world's leading religious leaders. They fear science and thus have a confrontational view of it. I found no such undercurrent in this book. The Dalai lama makes clear that science is reality, though there are elements such as quantum physics that have some elements of spirituality about them. This book then shows how certain aspects of Buddhist thought, and the various schools of the philosophy underlying the lore, have been able to find some similarities in broad concepts, especially in the field of quantum physics.
In the end this book gets a 3 star rating because while it is an interesting story about how this Tibetan monk was introduced to the world of science and his attempts to balance the modalities of both types of thought. But, in the end I find the usefulness of trying to justify any particular religion and that religion's dogma/beliefs to actual science as about as useful as discussing how the Force from Star Wars "works" in or with science. Well it doesn't. At all.
September 11, 2022
The Dalai Lama Discusses Science
For many years, I have belonged to a Sutta study group in which we have read many of the key texts of the Pali canon, the earliest of the surviving Buddhist scriptures. We recently read the famous text (Sutta no. 63) in the Mahjima Nikaya, the mid-length discourses, in which the Buddha tried to discourage certain kinds of speculation by offering a simile based upon a poisoned arrow. If someone is struck by such an arrow, the important thing is to have it removed rather than to worry about the type of the arrow's wood or feathers, the clothing worn by the person who shot it, etc. The Buddha suggests that those who worry about certain metaphysical questions, such as whether the world is finite or infinite, whether the world is eternal or transient, or whether the soul is separate from the body or part of it, are like those people who ask irrelevant questions about the poisoned arrow rather than try to remove it as expeditiously as possible. This simile to me seems to capture something important about the relationship between Buddhist spirituality and certain scientific questions, and it encouraged me to read the Dalai Lama's recent book, "The Universe in a Single Atom."
His Holiness the Dalai Lama's eloquent book in fact discusses this enigmatic Sutta together with the divergent interpretations it has received in Buddhist thought. Difficult as the Sutta is, I think it captures a great deal of the Dalai Lama's message in his book, both in his teachings themselves and especially in the tone and manner with which the Dalai Lama conveys his teachings.
The Dalai explores the Sutta I have mentioned in an appropriate place -- in the context of a discussion between the relationship between Buddhist thought and the big bang theory of the origin of the universe. The Sutta and the discussion suggest to me that spiritual questions have an urgency and immediacy of their own, notwithstanding scientific findings. But for me, the most revealing parts of this book were not the sections in which the Dalai Lama discusses the relationship between Buddhist thought and specific scientific teachings. Rather, I thought the most moving discussions were in the opening chapters and in the conclusion. In the opening chapters the Dalai Lama offers some personal biographical information about growing up in Tibet, his monastic training and teachers, and his budding interest in mechanical and scientific subjects. He describes with obvious affection the many Western scientists he has met over the years and how he has responded to what they have taught him. He also tries to draw a distinction between scientific study, which is based upon repeatable, empirical observation and theory -- what he describes as the standpoint of the "third party" and introspection and the search for meaning, which is subject of spirituality and of creative and altruistic endeavor. Science and spirituality frequently interpenetrate, for the Dalai Lama, and have much to give each other. He expands upon this discussion throughout his book and in its conclusion.
In successive chapters of his book, the Dalai Lama discusses, quantum physics, the big bang theory, and evolution. He frequently draws parallels between the results of contemporary science and the results of Buddhist thought. In some cases, he points out that scientific discoveries invalidate certain crude assumptions about the nature of the physical universe found in early Buddhist texts. He candidly recognizes that where specific scientific findings conflict with a Buddhist teaching, the Buddhist teaching must give way. But in other cases, the Dalai Lama is somewhat critical of scientific theory. Thus, the Dalai Lama seems to suggest that the theory of evolution takes too little account of karma -- the nature of consciousness and intentionality -- that he believes necessary to a full understanding of the world. In my opinion, these criticisms of evolutionary theory are unnecessary to the weight of the Dalai Lama's message to look within, to study consciousness and to develop wisdom and compassion. In the process of discussing evolutionary theory, however, the Dalai Lama gives a lucid discussion of kamma, distinguishing it from simple mechanical causation of from the fatalism with which it is sometimes confused.
The strongest scientific discussions in the book are those of the last several chapters where the Dalai Lama discusses consciousness, as developed in Buddhist texts and in the practice of meditation. He suggests ways in which scientists working with the brain and with meditation practitioners can interact in valuable ways that complement their respective practices without denying either of them. Because these discussions of consciousness and introspection involve subjects the Dalai Lama knows intimately and at first-hand, I found them more persuasive than some of the other writing in the book about the interaction between science and Buddhism.
What I took from this book, and from the Pali Sutta discussed at the outset of this review, is that, in some instances, such as those captured by the poisoned arrow simile, spiritual questions are separate from those of science but that in other instances these questions interpenetrate. (That is, a person trying to understand him or herself needs to understand where science belongs in that particular endeavor) The results of scientific investigation, including specifically evolutionary theory, must be respected. But whatever science teaches, one must try to understand oneself and one's feelings, to understand suffering and grief, and to work towards a development of wisdom, compassion, and understanding. This is the message I took from the Dalai Lama's wonderful book.
Robin Friedman
For many years, I have belonged to a Sutta study group in which we have read many of the key texts of the Pali canon, the earliest of the surviving Buddhist scriptures. We recently read the famous text (Sutta no. 63) in the Mahjima Nikaya, the mid-length discourses, in which the Buddha tried to discourage certain kinds of speculation by offering a simile based upon a poisoned arrow. If someone is struck by such an arrow, the important thing is to have it removed rather than to worry about the type of the arrow's wood or feathers, the clothing worn by the person who shot it, etc. The Buddha suggests that those who worry about certain metaphysical questions, such as whether the world is finite or infinite, whether the world is eternal or transient, or whether the soul is separate from the body or part of it, are like those people who ask irrelevant questions about the poisoned arrow rather than try to remove it as expeditiously as possible. This simile to me seems to capture something important about the relationship between Buddhist spirituality and certain scientific questions, and it encouraged me to read the Dalai Lama's recent book, "The Universe in a Single Atom."
His Holiness the Dalai Lama's eloquent book in fact discusses this enigmatic Sutta together with the divergent interpretations it has received in Buddhist thought. Difficult as the Sutta is, I think it captures a great deal of the Dalai Lama's message in his book, both in his teachings themselves and especially in the tone and manner with which the Dalai Lama conveys his teachings.
The Dalai explores the Sutta I have mentioned in an appropriate place -- in the context of a discussion between the relationship between Buddhist thought and the big bang theory of the origin of the universe. The Sutta and the discussion suggest to me that spiritual questions have an urgency and immediacy of their own, notwithstanding scientific findings. But for me, the most revealing parts of this book were not the sections in which the Dalai Lama discusses the relationship between Buddhist thought and specific scientific teachings. Rather, I thought the most moving discussions were in the opening chapters and in the conclusion. In the opening chapters the Dalai Lama offers some personal biographical information about growing up in Tibet, his monastic training and teachers, and his budding interest in mechanical and scientific subjects. He describes with obvious affection the many Western scientists he has met over the years and how he has responded to what they have taught him. He also tries to draw a distinction between scientific study, which is based upon repeatable, empirical observation and theory -- what he describes as the standpoint of the "third party" and introspection and the search for meaning, which is subject of spirituality and of creative and altruistic endeavor. Science and spirituality frequently interpenetrate, for the Dalai Lama, and have much to give each other. He expands upon this discussion throughout his book and in its conclusion.
In successive chapters of his book, the Dalai Lama discusses, quantum physics, the big bang theory, and evolution. He frequently draws parallels between the results of contemporary science and the results of Buddhist thought. In some cases, he points out that scientific discoveries invalidate certain crude assumptions about the nature of the physical universe found in early Buddhist texts. He candidly recognizes that where specific scientific findings conflict with a Buddhist teaching, the Buddhist teaching must give way. But in other cases, the Dalai Lama is somewhat critical of scientific theory. Thus, the Dalai Lama seems to suggest that the theory of evolution takes too little account of karma -- the nature of consciousness and intentionality -- that he believes necessary to a full understanding of the world. In my opinion, these criticisms of evolutionary theory are unnecessary to the weight of the Dalai Lama's message to look within, to study consciousness and to develop wisdom and compassion. In the process of discussing evolutionary theory, however, the Dalai Lama gives a lucid discussion of kamma, distinguishing it from simple mechanical causation of from the fatalism with which it is sometimes confused.
The strongest scientific discussions in the book are those of the last several chapters where the Dalai Lama discusses consciousness, as developed in Buddhist texts and in the practice of meditation. He suggests ways in which scientists working with the brain and with meditation practitioners can interact in valuable ways that complement their respective practices without denying either of them. Because these discussions of consciousness and introspection involve subjects the Dalai Lama knows intimately and at first-hand, I found them more persuasive than some of the other writing in the book about the interaction between science and Buddhism.
What I took from this book, and from the Pali Sutta discussed at the outset of this review, is that, in some instances, such as those captured by the poisoned arrow simile, spiritual questions are separate from those of science but that in other instances these questions interpenetrate. (That is, a person trying to understand him or herself needs to understand where science belongs in that particular endeavor) The results of scientific investigation, including specifically evolutionary theory, must be respected. But whatever science teaches, one must try to understand oneself and one's feelings, to understand suffering and grief, and to work towards a development of wisdom, compassion, and understanding. This is the message I took from the Dalai Lama's wonderful book.
Robin Friedman
July 11, 2010
I had really, really high hopes for this book, and I feel awful for giving the freaking Dalai Lama a bad book review (of all things), but it was a major disappointment. I couldn’t help but continuously wonder where the narrative was going, the anecdotes and stories weren’t particularly intriguing or compelling, and it was frankly hard to finish. There are other, more interesting books on this and related topics. I hope this assault on the Lama’s writing doesn’t mean that I’m slated to reincarnate as a rat or something.
April 19, 2008
For all my introspection and soul-searching on the subject of how to integrate Western science into my philosophical views of the world, I wish that I had read this book years ago – it would have saved me a lot of hard thinking on my own. Ouch. As it turns out, the Dalai Lama has been on a decades-long campaign to import much of the Western science canon into the training of new Tibetan Buddhist monks. A large part of the book is spent discussing where science fails (reductionism/materialism) and how Buddhism can be used to bolster the scientific understanding of the natural world. The Dalai Lama’s arguments for incorporating science into formal Buddhist training are two-fold: In his view, Buddhism is empirically based. If the mind is put through a certain set of exercises, certain results can be expected. This empiricism meshes well with the construct of Western science. As a result, if something can be empirically proven, then that finding trumps any historical religious teachings, dogmas, or texts.
The second reason is that the Dalai Lama has great hope in meshing the spirituality of Buddhism with science. In particular, he is interested in applying the powers of science to the study of consciousness. Whereas science has historically taken on the role of a third person observer, the D.L. would like to produce a science of the first person where consciousness can be pulled out into the open and more fully described and appreciated. Fascinating stuff.
The second reason is that the Dalai Lama has great hope in meshing the spirituality of Buddhism with science. In particular, he is interested in applying the powers of science to the study of consciousness. Whereas science has historically taken on the role of a third person observer, the D.L. would like to produce a science of the first person where consciousness can be pulled out into the open and more fully described and appreciated. Fascinating stuff.
August 25, 2010
I can't remember the last book I read that so far exceeded my expectations. As soon as I finished the book I flipped right back to the first page and started all over again. I'm about half-way through the second read now, and I still find myself jotting down notes, re-reading passages, and taking long moments to pause and contemplate the profound ideas put forth in this text. I've never read a book by the Dalai Lama before, and to be honest I wasn't expecting him to be all that skilled of a writer--especially given the fact that English is not his first language and that he's writing on the topic of science. He far surpassed my expectations, however, and I throroughly enjoyed learning about the overlap between modern Buddhist and Scientific perspectives. Given the scope of scientific topics covered in this book-- including cosmology, quantum physics, biological evolution, consciousness, psychology, and even stem cell research-- his holiness was able to speak to the complexity of his subjects in simple, yet comprehensive language. He covered points of intersection and departure between science and buddhism, doing so without reducing ideas upon which the two paradigms seem to disagree to black/white issues. He even addressed the ontological and empistemological underpinnings of both paradigms, noting how scientific reductionism can lead to both positive and negative outcomes. Fantastic read for the scientifically- and spiritually- minded reader alike. Highly recommended!
December 4, 2007
This was a pretty nice exploration of the intersection of Science and Buddhist religion. The Dalai Lama came at this material from a very humble standpoint and makes that his religion could be greatly improved by approaching it from the standpoint of science (e.g. he admits that Buddhist cosmology is hopelessly archaic and should be replaced with current models).
Interestingly, he also points to some current research where Buddhist monastic disciplines have made contributions to the science of the brain: see PNAS vol. 101 no. 46 p 16369–16373 (2004). This was very nice work.
On the whole it was nice to see a religious leader that was not contemptuous of science and excited to work with scientists to expand our knowledge through sharing wisdom (old and new).
Interestingly, he also points to some current research where Buddhist monastic disciplines have made contributions to the science of the brain: see PNAS vol. 101 no. 46 p 16369–16373 (2004). This was very nice work.
On the whole it was nice to see a religious leader that was not contemptuous of science and excited to work with scientists to expand our knowledge through sharing wisdom (old and new).
February 6, 2023
เล่มนี้เป็นมุมมองของท่านทะไลลามะ ถึงวิทยาศาสตร์กับพุทธศาสนา
ท่านทะไลลามะสนทนาทั้งกับนักวิทยาศาสตร์สมัยใหม่และคุรุทางพุทธศาสนาหลายท่านจนตกผลึกมาถ่ายทอดผ่านหนังสือเล่มนี้
ท่านทะไลลามะยอมรับว่าวิทยาศาสตร์ก้าวหน้าไปมาก มีความรู้บางอย่างในคำสอนของพระพุทธเจ้าที่ต้องเปลี่ยนแปลงโดยเฉพาะด้านจักรวาลวิทยาและอะตอม
แต่ก็มีเรื่องหนึ่งที่ท่านยังมองว่าเป็นปริศนาคือเรื่อง ‘จิตวิญญาณ
สิ่งมีชีวิตกำเนิดอารมณ์ ความรู้สึกมาได้อย่างไร เราจะอธิบายอารมณ์ต่างๆ ความเมตตาของเพื่อนมนุษย์ได้จากมุมมองวิทยาศาสตร์เพียงอย่างเดียวหรือ
ท่านเสนอว่าการเจริญสมาธิ ภาวนา อาจจะช่วยให้เราพัฒนา ส่งเสริมความเข้าใจเรื่องอารมณ์ให้กระจ่างยิ่งขึ้น
ท่านมีความกังวลที่วิทยาศาสตร์เริ่มมาเกี่ยวข้องกับการกำหนดพันธุกรรมของสิ่งมีชีวิต มีการตัดแต่งพันธุกรรม โคลนนิ่ง ตรวจเลือกกรรมพันธุ์เด็กก่อนเกิด
ซึ่งเป็นเรื่องละเอียดอ่อน เพราะไปยุ่งเกี่ยวกับการเนิดชีวิต ต้องเฝ้าระวังผลที่ตามมาอย่างใกล้ชิด
สุดท้ายที่ท่านเตือนให้ตระหนักคือ แม้วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยีจะก้าวหน้าไปมาก แต่ขอให้เราใช้จิตวิญญาณ ความดีงามของมนุษย์นำทางสิ่งเหล่านี้ด้วย
เล่มนี้เล่าเรื่อย ๆ อ่านแล้วง่วง ๆ หน่อย แต่อ่านไม่ยาก
July 7, 2008
With this book, the Dalai Lama shows that he is at once the most spiritual of persons, and the most practical. In
The Universe In A Single Atom, he shows one possible method for people living in the modern age of nuclear power, quantum physics and genetic engineering to combine the knowlege of science with the wisdom of spirituality. Just as Einstein thought that religion without science is blind and science without religion is lame, the Dalai Lama believes that "spirituality and science are different but complementary investigative approaches with the same greater goal, of seeking the truth."
The Universe In A Single Atom briefly tells the story of the Dalai Lama's education, spiritual and scientific, and explains his thoughts on how we can use both science and religion to make the world a better place. In doing so, the Dalai Lama examines the strengths and limitations of both. For instance, although he believes that science cannot answer such questions as the meaning of life or good and evil, and that there is "more to human existence and reality than science can ever give use access to," he although feels that "spirituality must be tempered by the insights and discoveries of science," and that a mind-set that ignores these "can lead to fundamentalism."
This book is full of common sense and wisdom. It can help anyone who has wrestled with the hard questions of the meaning of life to learn to live with the compassion and peace that comes from spirituality and the practical knowledge and wonder that springs from scientific understanding.
April 12, 2011
I find it encouraging that the Dalai Lama is so open to new scientific ideas. Our world is changing at such a rapid rate. The ideas exploding into the field of physics are absolutely revolutionizing the way we view reality. It is interesting to hear some Buddhist commentary on the advancements of our age. I really enjoyed the last bit where he talked about some of the ethical consequences of bio genetic engineering, and was proud that he addressed this issue with such a strong stance for both plants and animals. The eastern way of thinking lends so well to enveloping and including all species of life in the great circle. I always find it concerning when spiritually minded individuals neglect or ignore their more real world thinking selves. Furthermore I think it is a good reminder of the importance of spirituality in the life of the academic. Learning to look at the world from all views brings wholeness and peace.
January 17, 2008
Basically his ramblings about being interested in science. A good introduction to science/buddhist intertwinnigs.
July 2, 2016
There is More To Science than Dreamt Of by the Dalai Lama
The Dalai Lama clearly has a long-standing and genuine interest in science. He has access to the best minds in science, and hosts an annual conference on science. To his credit, he is humble about his limited understanding, and does not claim to have divine knowledge about what is true science. While he faithfully records what the scientists tell him in the book, it seems that he does not always understand them.
On page 12 he presents a concise summary of his philosophy of science, tied together with dubious logic. Unfortunately it ignores what the scientists told him. As it nicely sums up what is wrong in this otherwise worthwhile book, this review will examine it in detail, rather than evaluate the entire book.
“I have noticed that many people hold an assumption that the scientific view of the world should be the basis for all knowledge and all that is knowable. This is scientific materialism.”
The scientific view of the world is that it is comprehensible. We can explain what we observe by conjecturing rules, and testing to ensure they work. As our knowledge and investigative tools improve, we can observe new things that were unimaginable before. So science is the basis for all that is observable, remembering that there is always much more to be discovered. Ideas are an integral part of the reality that science investigates. Science itself is driven by our creativity, inventing new ideas to explain how the world works. “Scientific Materialism” is misleading if it means that scientific method is excluded from studying our mental processes or philosophy.
“This view upholds a belief in an objective world, independent of the contingency of its observers. It assumes that the data being analyzed within an experiment are independent of the preconceptions, perceptions, and experience of the scientist analyzing them.”
Science is indeed based on the concept of a single objective reality. The confusion here comes from the distinction between the reality of an object and our observation of it. Observation is certainly affected by the expectations and techniques of the scientist. Science is about overcoming these biases to arrive at an ever-improving approximation of the truth. The fact that we do not know exactly what is the truth does not mean there is no truth at all. This is a false dichotomy.
“Underlying this view is the assumption that, in the final analysis, matter, as it can be described by physics and as it is governed by the laws of physics, is all there is. Accordingly, this view would uphold that psychology can be reduced to biology, biology to chemistry, and chemistry to physics.”
Objective reality does not require or lead to reductionism. This misconception comes from the fact that an important part of science is about decomposing systems to investigate their parts. But science is also about unifying observations to create universal explanations. The alternative to reductionism is the view that when a certain level of complexity is reached, new laws emerge that cannot be described by the laws of the lower level. For example, your body is made up of cells. But even if we had perfect knowledge of how cells work, it would never describe you. Your life depends on your cells, you act through your cells, but it is impossible to understand you knowing only about your cells. Physics is therefore not sufficient to understand the world, even though everything that happens is ultimately based on physics. While there are no hard boundaries between physics, chemistry, biology and psychology, these sciences are separate disciplines because that is the only way to study the higher level rules that define them.
“My concern here is not to argue against this reductionist position, but to draw attention to a vitally important point: that these ideas do not constitute scientific knowledge; rather they represent a philosophical, in fact a metaphysical, position.”
This is indeed a vital point. For example, Newton’s laws of motion have been thoroughly tested and verified. But this established fact does not provide support for common metaphysical belief at the time in a clockwork universe, or for the physical assumption that time is the same everywhere. These notions were never experimentally verified, and have turned out to be false. We must always be careful to distinguish between verified scientific knowledge and the unverified theories and opinions of individual scientists.
When the Dalai Lama said on page 3 that Buddhism must align with “scientific analysis” he means verified knowledge, as opposed to unproven assumptions and metaphysics. As verified knowledge is rather limited in his domain of psychology, few of his fundamental beliefs are actually challenged. To his credit, he is willing to discard some of the myths that Buddhism inherited from Hinduism.
“The view that all aspects of reality can be reduced to matter and its various particles is, to my mind, as much a metaphysical position as the view that an organizing intelligence created and controls reality. The danger is that human beings may be reduced to nothing more than biological machines, the products of pure chance in the random combination of genes, with no purpose than the biological imperative of reproduction.”
A science that recognizes emergent properties knows that we are more than our cells, more than our genes, and more than our evolutionary heritage. Reductionism may be used as an excuse for nihilism, but it is curious how moral relativism, which is based on the rejection of the existence of objective reality, also leads to nihilism. Scientific method and Buddhism may both be seen as a middle way to the truth.
“According to the theory of emptiness, any belief in an objective reality grounded in the assumption of intrinsic, independent existence is untenable. All thing and events, whether material, mental, or even abstract concepts like time, are devoid of objective, independent existence. To possess such independent, intrinsic existence would imply that things and events are somehow complete unto themselves and are therefore entirely self-contained. This would mean that nothing has the capacity to interact with and exert influence on other phenomena.”
For a middle-way guy this is a hardline view. It is based on a false dichotomy playing on the word “independent”. Objects can exist independent of our observation of them without making them completely independent and isolated from everything.
Next we are told that belief in objective reality leads to “attachment, clinging, and the development of our numerous prejudices.”
The attachment issue is another false dichotomy. Some attachment is necessary to have any goals and get anything done (including meditation), while excessive attachment interferes with rational thinking. For example, the Dalai Lama seems to have an attachment to the theory of emptiness, not to mention to the independence of Tibet. The solution for attachment problems is not to wish the real world out of existence. This is like curing acne with suicide. As for prejudice, its very definition is to believe what you want to believe, rather than accept objective reality.
The denial of objective reality is not a problem for Buddhism because it also hands its students a pre-packaged purpose in life. For others, the logical conclusion is that if nothing objectively exists, you cannot really know anything. So believe anything you want, why care about anything?
The Dalai Lama does not support this kind moral relativism, if I understand this book at all. He seems to think first person introspection is ruled out by science. But if meditation actually leads to a tangible change, such as the state of mind or physiology of the meditator, or increased compassionate behavior, then this is also the realm of science. Why would the Dalia Lama invite scientists to study meditators if there was no reality to it? Again, an unnecessary restriction is being placed on science.
There is much to like about this book other than the philosophy of science it presents. Listen carefully to what the scientists tell him, as opposed to his conclusions, and remember that science can be broader than he gives it credit for.
The Dalai Lama clearly has a long-standing and genuine interest in science. He has access to the best minds in science, and hosts an annual conference on science. To his credit, he is humble about his limited understanding, and does not claim to have divine knowledge about what is true science. While he faithfully records what the scientists tell him in the book, it seems that he does not always understand them.
On page 12 he presents a concise summary of his philosophy of science, tied together with dubious logic. Unfortunately it ignores what the scientists told him. As it nicely sums up what is wrong in this otherwise worthwhile book, this review will examine it in detail, rather than evaluate the entire book.
“I have noticed that many people hold an assumption that the scientific view of the world should be the basis for all knowledge and all that is knowable. This is scientific materialism.”
The scientific view of the world is that it is comprehensible. We can explain what we observe by conjecturing rules, and testing to ensure they work. As our knowledge and investigative tools improve, we can observe new things that were unimaginable before. So science is the basis for all that is observable, remembering that there is always much more to be discovered. Ideas are an integral part of the reality that science investigates. Science itself is driven by our creativity, inventing new ideas to explain how the world works. “Scientific Materialism” is misleading if it means that scientific method is excluded from studying our mental processes or philosophy.
“This view upholds a belief in an objective world, independent of the contingency of its observers. It assumes that the data being analyzed within an experiment are independent of the preconceptions, perceptions, and experience of the scientist analyzing them.”
Science is indeed based on the concept of a single objective reality. The confusion here comes from the distinction between the reality of an object and our observation of it. Observation is certainly affected by the expectations and techniques of the scientist. Science is about overcoming these biases to arrive at an ever-improving approximation of the truth. The fact that we do not know exactly what is the truth does not mean there is no truth at all. This is a false dichotomy.
“Underlying this view is the assumption that, in the final analysis, matter, as it can be described by physics and as it is governed by the laws of physics, is all there is. Accordingly, this view would uphold that psychology can be reduced to biology, biology to chemistry, and chemistry to physics.”
Objective reality does not require or lead to reductionism. This misconception comes from the fact that an important part of science is about decomposing systems to investigate their parts. But science is also about unifying observations to create universal explanations. The alternative to reductionism is the view that when a certain level of complexity is reached, new laws emerge that cannot be described by the laws of the lower level. For example, your body is made up of cells. But even if we had perfect knowledge of how cells work, it would never describe you. Your life depends on your cells, you act through your cells, but it is impossible to understand you knowing only about your cells. Physics is therefore not sufficient to understand the world, even though everything that happens is ultimately based on physics. While there are no hard boundaries between physics, chemistry, biology and psychology, these sciences are separate disciplines because that is the only way to study the higher level rules that define them.
“My concern here is not to argue against this reductionist position, but to draw attention to a vitally important point: that these ideas do not constitute scientific knowledge; rather they represent a philosophical, in fact a metaphysical, position.”
This is indeed a vital point. For example, Newton’s laws of motion have been thoroughly tested and verified. But this established fact does not provide support for common metaphysical belief at the time in a clockwork universe, or for the physical assumption that time is the same everywhere. These notions were never experimentally verified, and have turned out to be false. We must always be careful to distinguish between verified scientific knowledge and the unverified theories and opinions of individual scientists.
When the Dalai Lama said on page 3 that Buddhism must align with “scientific analysis” he means verified knowledge, as opposed to unproven assumptions and metaphysics. As verified knowledge is rather limited in his domain of psychology, few of his fundamental beliefs are actually challenged. To his credit, he is willing to discard some of the myths that Buddhism inherited from Hinduism.
“The view that all aspects of reality can be reduced to matter and its various particles is, to my mind, as much a metaphysical position as the view that an organizing intelligence created and controls reality. The danger is that human beings may be reduced to nothing more than biological machines, the products of pure chance in the random combination of genes, with no purpose than the biological imperative of reproduction.”
A science that recognizes emergent properties knows that we are more than our cells, more than our genes, and more than our evolutionary heritage. Reductionism may be used as an excuse for nihilism, but it is curious how moral relativism, which is based on the rejection of the existence of objective reality, also leads to nihilism. Scientific method and Buddhism may both be seen as a middle way to the truth.
“According to the theory of emptiness, any belief in an objective reality grounded in the assumption of intrinsic, independent existence is untenable. All thing and events, whether material, mental, or even abstract concepts like time, are devoid of objective, independent existence. To possess such independent, intrinsic existence would imply that things and events are somehow complete unto themselves and are therefore entirely self-contained. This would mean that nothing has the capacity to interact with and exert influence on other phenomena.”
For a middle-way guy this is a hardline view. It is based on a false dichotomy playing on the word “independent”. Objects can exist independent of our observation of them without making them completely independent and isolated from everything.
Next we are told that belief in objective reality leads to “attachment, clinging, and the development of our numerous prejudices.”
The attachment issue is another false dichotomy. Some attachment is necessary to have any goals and get anything done (including meditation), while excessive attachment interferes with rational thinking. For example, the Dalai Lama seems to have an attachment to the theory of emptiness, not to mention to the independence of Tibet. The solution for attachment problems is not to wish the real world out of existence. This is like curing acne with suicide. As for prejudice, its very definition is to believe what you want to believe, rather than accept objective reality.
The denial of objective reality is not a problem for Buddhism because it also hands its students a pre-packaged purpose in life. For others, the logical conclusion is that if nothing objectively exists, you cannot really know anything. So believe anything you want, why care about anything?
The Dalai Lama does not support this kind moral relativism, if I understand this book at all. He seems to think first person introspection is ruled out by science. But if meditation actually leads to a tangible change, such as the state of mind or physiology of the meditator, or increased compassionate behavior, then this is also the realm of science. Why would the Dalia Lama invite scientists to study meditators if there was no reality to it? Again, an unnecessary restriction is being placed on science.
There is much to like about this book other than the philosophy of science it presents. Listen carefully to what the scientists tell him, as opposed to his conclusions, and remember that science can be broader than he gives it credit for.
June 25, 2019
I definitely wanted this to be more in depth about the relationship between science and spirituality than just his interest in science, but I would still rate this 3.5 stars. He obviously is very wise and interested in learning, as well as devout in his faith, and believes that you can invest in both science and spirituality. The line that really resonated with me was fairly early on in the book, when he said "Just as we must avoid dogmatism in science, we must ensure that spirituality is free from the same limitations." The world is not science vs faith/spirituality, there is room for it all to intertwine.
June 18, 2020
Interessante para eu lembrar da minha ignorância, apesar de sistematicamente eu esquecer o quanto não sei nada em virtude de muita gente saber menos ainda.
August 23, 2025
A very enlightening treatise on how science and spirituality are capable of going hand in hand for the benefit of humanity. I really enjoyed reading about the Dalai Lamas early days and personal interest in science and his own views of scientific materialism, an extreme reduction of life to the material. I like the idea that science must work with compassion and embrace the subjectivity that is inherent to human nature to further advance our knowledge on the whole - for example in questions of consciousness and where it comes from.
September 24, 2020
As always, the Dalai Lama's synthesis of what appears to be the objective and the subjective, of science and spirituality is thought-provoking, uplifting and leads us to places where only someone with his extraordinary perspective is able to go. Brilliant and highly recommended!
April 24, 2008
I really wanted to like this book, but I decided to quit about 50 pages in. I skimmed the rest and decided that I had made the right decision. I found that the majority of this book was a bland and unfocused account of the Dalai Lama's friends who happened to be scientists over the years. It reads more like a biography than an intellectual exploration of the compatability (or lack thereof) between science and religion. I was hoping for a Jared Diamond-like narrative of facts and insights, but I got a bunch of fluff instead. Very disappointing--perhaps even more so than Art of Happiness (which I at least finished). I'm done with books by or about the Dalai Lama (although maybe something else on Buddhism might be worthwhile).
March 27, 2017
I liked the premise of the book - it's refreshing to see a major spiritual leader challenge religious folks to look at science. He proposes that in order to get the "whole picture" you've got to look at both sides - science and spirituality. But I slogged through the first few chapters, then just skipped right to the conclusion. Some of the sciency parts were over my head (and apparently over his head too). Perhaps I'm just not enough of a "thinker" (or wasn't in a thinking mood when I tried to read this). Just wasn't my cup o' tea!
December 17, 2007
I was just too confused with the concepts and details in this book. I really gave it an honest effort and read as much as I could. This is probably the first book in 8 years that I have started and not finished. I just didn't have it in me.
March 29, 2017
El cosmos budista es visto de otro punto de vista, según ellos primero fuimos seres etéreos, luego comimos materia, tuvimos que defecar y nos salieron órganos, finalmente la comida y el contexto nos hicieron diferentes y de ahí nacen las emociones: la envidia, el amor!! Està padrísimo!!!
June 1, 2014
Maybe my favorite read so far about how science and faith can work together. The Dalai Lama is rapidly becoming one of my favorite religious figures.
August 2, 2020
Too complicated to understand :((((
April 9, 2016
The 14th Dalai Lama is a very intelligent man. This is even more clear with this book. He is, however, inhibited by significant biases. That's not a slight - we all have biases - but his objective suffers considerable obstacles because of his particular biases (well, the ones I perceive through his writing...he likely has many more, as do I.) In his prologue, he says, "This book is not an attempt to unite science and spirituality...Rather, I believe that spirituality and science are different but complementary investigative approaches with the same greater goal, of seeking the truth." Yes, he said that. Given his position, what else could he say? I made a lot of notes while reading this short book, but in the interest of pseudo-brevity, I'll shotgun only a few points here.
He asks, "Do ethics have a place in science? I believe they do." I respond, that's a rather nonsensical rhetorical question - of course they do. But he diverges into presumption quite quickly: "There is, however, a general assumption that ethics are relevant to only the application of science, not the actual pursuit of science." What? 1) how is that a "general assumption", and 2) more importantly, I maintain we have a moral obligation to pursue science, as it is the only way to truly understand anything. He errs further in saying "Science and technology are powerful tools, but we must decide how best to use them." No. I concur with the assessment and judgment with respect to technology, but you use science to learn. He almost lost me when he said "...many aspects of human existence, including values, creativity, and spirituality, as well as deeper metaphysical questions, lie outside the scope of scientific inquiry." No. Nothing lies outside the scope of scientific inquiry.
Here he nearly fails...were it not for the qualifier "current", he might as well have stoppped right there. James Morrow said in his fictional story Only Begotten Daughter,
To which I always append "...yet."
I am not wholly ignorant of Buddhism, but not have studied it in depth, I learned a bit reading this book. He says, "...strictly speaking, in Buddhism scriptural authority cannot outweigh an understanding based on reason and experience." This is refreshing in light of Western religious traditions. The emphasis placed on reason is important, but he undermines scientific reason by placing limits on it that he claims are not so in his religion:
Making his case for the inferiority of science? - oh, not overt, but a pervasive subtext throughout. While metaphysics is usually framed as addressing a priori knowledge and non-empirical, and science clearly "a posteriori" and empirical, metaphysics also clearly cannot be empirical-less as it relies on empircal data to analyze! And anything that can be analyzed, science can study. The domain of inquiry is not limited in science...this is not a contrast. What is acceptable evidence is, though, limited in science.
With respect to a perception of science having disproved many claims of religion...
...he really misses the mark. Science does not set out to disprove. Confirmation of a theory only increases the probability of its correctness. Obviously, disproof negates any position and renders the theory, or portion of the theory, invalid. Of course, the disproof must itself be analyzed and confirmed. Validation is crucial. Not proving does not disconfirm...merely, it does not confirm. And his concluding sentence of Chapter Two: Encounter with Science, "Reality, including our own existence, is so much more complex than objective scientific materialism allows." is a non sequitur.
It's not all nits to be picked...he says "One of the most inspiring things about science is the change our understanding of the world undergoes in the light of new findings." Yes! Concur wholeheartedly! However...then there's this:
Does not follow...how can he rationalize that conclusion? I'm not even going to spend time here addressing his "theory of emptiness", but when he says "I have the conviction that the great discoveries in physics going back as far as Copernicus give rise to the insight that reality is not as it appears to us.", well... That's a common argument, and yet no less irrelevant even if he says it. We can only interact with how it appears to us, therefore reality is how it appears to us. Science may determine how and why what is not our perceived reality presents itself to us as we perceive it, or it may be as I said, irrelevant. Imagining other universes, or dimensions, if we cannot interact with them is a thought experiment only. What we can interact with is our perceived reality.
One subtle snipe throughout the book is the Dalai Lama's use of the term "open-minded scientists". He is quite obviously in the context of use referring to scientists who accept religion in some degree. Am I being sensitive? No...for when he describes scientists who are evidence founded only (at least in the descriptions), he does not use the term "open minded." The reality is, all true scientists are open minded. They are also human, while human failings, and sometimes close their minds to that which disproves their work. Another subtle snipe, perhaps not intended as such, but he's far too intelligent for the subtlety to be accidental, is the use of the word "story" to undermine scientific theories he talks about
Of the various scientific theories he discusses, he is comes off weakest with respect to evolution. (Many references to "story" an not theory...) He claims that "From the Buddhist perspective, the idea of these mutations being purely random events is deeply unsettling for a theory that purports to explain the origin of life." (Emphasis mine.) Not true. Evolutionary biologists would love to be able to explain the origin, but most accurately, the study attempts to explain the speciation of life. Don't put words into their published papers, Mr. Lama...no one not from religious intent have claimed an origin theory. (Note, when he has a negative to say about something, it's a "theory", not a "story".) His understanding of altruism and evolution are flawed, making claims that altruism can't be supported according to the theory as the passing of genes for altruism is in opposition to the selfish nature of genes. But he gives himself an out "As it stands, the current biological model does not allow for the possibility of real altruism." true. the current model doesn't. But then, we don't have all the science ...yet.
Wrong! In the story of Western religion maybe, not science! (Note again..."story" of evolution...)
I admit I was taken aback in the last chapter with his stories of mystical nonsense. I can sidestep his rationalization of his belief in rebirth though a misunderstanding of instinct, but when he talked about
I can't help it...
Complete loss of credibility claiming someone was in a meditative state 13 days after death! And another for 17!!
It's unfair to end on that note, so I'll share one of his parting thoughts
Wise. Overall, a very good book given the author's position in the world of religion. Admirable. And he can be forgiven for his biases. I suspect he'd forgive me mine.
He asks, "Do ethics have a place in science? I believe they do." I respond, that's a rather nonsensical rhetorical question - of course they do. But he diverges into presumption quite quickly: "There is, however, a general assumption that ethics are relevant to only the application of science, not the actual pursuit of science." What? 1) how is that a "general assumption", and 2) more importantly, I maintain we have a moral obligation to pursue science, as it is the only way to truly understand anything. He errs further in saying "Science and technology are powerful tools, but we must decide how best to use them." No. I concur with the assessment and judgment with respect to technology, but you use science to learn. He almost lost me when he said "...many aspects of human existence, including values, creativity, and spirituality, as well as deeper metaphysical questions, lie outside the scope of scientific inquiry." No. Nothing lies outside the scope of scientific inquiry.
There is more to human existence and to reality itself than current science can ever give us access to.
Here he nearly fails...were it not for the qualifier "current", he might as well have stoppped right there. James Morrow said in his fictional story Only Begotten Daughter,
“Science does have all the answers,” ...“The problem is that we don’t have all the science.”
To which I always append "...yet."
I am not wholly ignorant of Buddhism, but not have studied it in depth, I learned a bit reading this book. He says, "...strictly speaking, in Buddhism scriptural authority cannot outweigh an understanding based on reason and experience." This is refreshing in light of Western religious traditions. The emphasis placed on reason is important, but he undermines scientific reason by placing limits on it that he claims are not so in his religion:
If we take this criterion [the Popperian falsifiability thesis] seriously, then many questions that pertain to our human existence, such as ethics, aesthetics, and spirituality, remain outside the domain of science. By contrast, the domain of inquiry in Buddhism is not limited to the objective. It also encompasses the subjective world of experience as well as the question of values. In other words, science deals with empirical facts but not with metaphysics and ethics, whereas for Buddhism, critical inquiry into all three is essential.
Making his case for the inferiority of science? - oh, not overt, but a pervasive subtext throughout. While metaphysics is usually framed as addressing a priori knowledge and non-empirical, and science clearly "a posteriori" and empirical, metaphysics also clearly cannot be empirical-less as it relies on empircal data to analyze! And anything that can be analyzed, science can study. The domain of inquiry is not limited in science...this is not a contrast. What is acceptable evidence is, though, limited in science.
With respect to a perception of science having disproved many claims of religion...
And within this conceptual framework, anything that is not proven or affirmed by science is somehow either false or insignificant. Such views are effectively philosophical assumptions that reflect their holders’ metaphysical prejudices. Just as we must avoid dogmatism in science, we must ensure that spirituality is free from the same limitations.
...he really misses the mark. Science does not set out to disprove. Confirmation of a theory only increases the probability of its correctness. Obviously, disproof negates any position and renders the theory, or portion of the theory, invalid. Of course, the disproof must itself be analyzed and confirmed. Validation is crucial. Not proving does not disconfirm...merely, it does not confirm. And his concluding sentence of Chapter Two: Encounter with Science, "Reality, including our own existence, is so much more complex than objective scientific materialism allows." is a non sequitur.
It's not all nits to be picked...he says "One of the most inspiring things about science is the change our understanding of the world undergoes in the light of new findings." Yes! Concur wholeheartedly! However...then there's this:
For instance, if we examine our own conception of selfhood, we will find that we tend to believe in the presence of an essential core to our being, which characterizes our individuality and identity as a discrete ego, independent of the physical and mental elements that constitute our existence.
Does not follow...how can he rationalize that conclusion? I'm not even going to spend time here addressing his "theory of emptiness", but when he says "I have the conviction that the great discoveries in physics going back as far as Copernicus give rise to the insight that reality is not as it appears to us.", well... That's a common argument, and yet no less irrelevant even if he says it. We can only interact with how it appears to us, therefore reality is how it appears to us. Science may determine how and why what is not our perceived reality presents itself to us as we perceive it, or it may be as I said, irrelevant. Imagining other universes, or dimensions, if we cannot interact with them is a thought experiment only. What we can interact with is our perceived reality.
One subtle snipe throughout the book is the Dalai Lama's use of the term "open-minded scientists". He is quite obviously in the context of use referring to scientists who accept religion in some degree. Am I being sensitive? No...for when he describes scientists who are evidence founded only (at least in the descriptions), he does not use the term "open minded." The reality is, all true scientists are open minded. They are also human, while human failings, and sometimes close their minds to that which disproves their work. Another subtle snipe, perhaps not intended as such, but he's far too intelligent for the subtlety to be accidental, is the use of the word "story" to undermine scientific theories he talks about
Of the various scientific theories he discusses, he is comes off weakest with respect to evolution. (Many references to "story" an not theory...) He claims that "From the Buddhist perspective, the idea of these mutations being purely random events is deeply unsettling for a theory that purports to explain the origin of life." (Emphasis mine.) Not true. Evolutionary biologists would love to be able to explain the origin, but most accurately, the study attempts to explain the speciation of life. Don't put words into their published papers, Mr. Lama...no one not from religious intent have claimed an origin theory. (Note, when he has a negative to say about something, it's a "theory", not a "story".) His understanding of altruism and evolution are flawed, making claims that altruism can't be supported according to the theory as the passing of genes for altruism is in opposition to the selfish nature of genes. But he gives himself an out "As it stands, the current biological model does not allow for the possibility of real altruism." true. the current model doesn't. But then, we don't have all the science ...yet.
One Implicit assumption I have sometimes found in Western thought is that, in the story of evolution, human beings enjoy a unique existential status.
Wrong! In the story of Western religion maybe, not science! (Note again..."story" of evolution...)
I admit I was taken aback in the last chapter with his stories of mystical nonsense. I can sidestep his rationalization of his belief in rebirth though a misunderstanding of instinct, but when he talked about
One area of possible research on meditation could be what the Tibetan tradition describes as the experience of the clear light state. This is a state of consciousness understood to be extremely subtle that manifests briefly in all human beings at the moment of death.
[...]
My own teacher Ling Rinpoche remained in the clear light of death for thirteen days; although he was clinically dead and had stopped breathing, he stayed in the meditation posture and his body showed no sign of decomposition.
I can't help it...
Complete loss of credibility claiming someone was in a meditative state 13 days after death! And another for 17!!
It's unfair to end on that note, so I'll share one of his parting thoughts
I suppose my fascination for science still rests in an innocent amazement at the wonders of what it can achieve. From these beginnings my journey into science has led me into issues of great complexity, such as science’s impact on our understanding of the world, its power to transform human lives and the very earth we live on, and the awesome moral dilemmas which its new findings have posed. Yet one cannot and should not forget the wonder and the beauty of what has been made possible.
Wise. Overall, a very good book given the author's position in the world of religion. Admirable. And he can be forgiven for his biases. I suspect he'd forgive me mine.
August 5, 2019
3/5
DNF
I have read a few books by the Dalai Lama XIV, that are based on the combining of spiritual practice and the science that drives the world. I have always loved his work, his thoughts, and his message. He truly is a blessed man.
I am keeping this review short because there are a few reasons on why I did not finish (DNF) this book.
1. Time - this was a library book that was sent to me from another library quite a ways away. Due to travel, time commitments, and finishing up 3 other books I was unable to get to this book until the last minute. Which is very unfortunate.
2. I did not like the actual science portion of the book. So, I picked up this book thinking how science and spirituality can be intertwined in today's technological empire. While I did get a feeling for this when the Dalai Lama would explain - at the end of each section - why the two are similar and not similar, I felt like the book was more on the basis of science. In some parts I felt like I was reading on science book on quantum phsyics, atom division, and so forth. Now this was explained at the beginning of the book on Lama's journey into science and that he would be delving into science very deeply, I just wish there was an emphasis on the actual Science into Spirituality and vice versa.
Now I am not saying I won't pick up this book in the future, because I would really like to read more into what he has to say on the subject. Currently, however, I must have not been in the mood to delve into the science portion at the level he has written.
DNF
I have read a few books by the Dalai Lama XIV, that are based on the combining of spiritual practice and the science that drives the world. I have always loved his work, his thoughts, and his message. He truly is a blessed man.
I am keeping this review short because there are a few reasons on why I did not finish (DNF) this book.
1. Time - this was a library book that was sent to me from another library quite a ways away. Due to travel, time commitments, and finishing up 3 other books I was unable to get to this book until the last minute. Which is very unfortunate.
2. I did not like the actual science portion of the book. So, I picked up this book thinking how science and spirituality can be intertwined in today's technological empire. While I did get a feeling for this when the Dalai Lama would explain - at the end of each section - why the two are similar and not similar, I felt like the book was more on the basis of science. In some parts I felt like I was reading on science book on quantum phsyics, atom division, and so forth. Now this was explained at the beginning of the book on Lama's journey into science and that he would be delving into science very deeply, I just wish there was an emphasis on the actual Science into Spirituality and vice versa.
Now I am not saying I won't pick up this book in the future, because I would really like to read more into what he has to say on the subject. Currently, however, I must have not been in the mood to delve into the science portion at the level he has written.
January 12, 2021
As an astrophysicist interested in Buddhism also currently reading a book in neuroscience, this book was right up my alley. I’m definitely glad I had that background, because this book really requires an understanding of the topics to appreciate the depth and philosophy of the relative discussions. I’d recommend three books to read beforehand:
1) Buddhist Ethics: A Very Short Introduction, by Damien Keown
2) Astrophysics for People in a Hurry, by Neil deGrasse Tyson [I may sub this for something more quantum focused]
3) Livewired, by David Eagleman
While the chapters on consciousness got a little long and lost for me in relating back to the connection with science, I thought the initial chapters on astrophysics and neuroscience, as well as the last chapter on the ethics of technology were particularly thought provoking. While there are some things I don’t agree with, they were still interesting ideas to think about. I was trying to imagine each person having a karmic Gaussian in time and that summing up to introduce a habitable world. Other things like the ancient Buddhist stories that include time dilation absolutely blew my mind (in a good way) though of how people can imagine this pre-relativistic physics.
A section of this book that I read in college is part of the reason why I became so interested in Buddhism and I really love the “Science and Religion can go together” argument.
1) Buddhist Ethics: A Very Short Introduction, by Damien Keown
2) Astrophysics for People in a Hurry, by Neil deGrasse Tyson [I may sub this for something more quantum focused]
3) Livewired, by David Eagleman
While the chapters on consciousness got a little long and lost for me in relating back to the connection with science, I thought the initial chapters on astrophysics and neuroscience, as well as the last chapter on the ethics of technology were particularly thought provoking. While there are some things I don’t agree with, they were still interesting ideas to think about. I was trying to imagine each person having a karmic Gaussian in time and that summing up to introduce a habitable world. Other things like the ancient Buddhist stories that include time dilation absolutely blew my mind (in a good way) though of how people can imagine this pre-relativistic physics.
A section of this book that I read in college is part of the reason why I became so interested in Buddhism and I really love the “Science and Religion can go together” argument.
May 6, 2025
Getting into The Universe in a Single Atom was a challenge. His Holiness the Dalai Lama, the author, jumps feet first into physics before integrating Buddhism into modern scientific fields ranging from evolutionary biology to quantum physics. This book is about his quest to add ethics to science and technology so that the application of science and technology improves humanity without sacrificing it.
I most enjoyed the author’s insights into where Buddhism and scientific theories resonate: Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, the theory of emptiness, observer-independent realities (and whether they can exist), creation stories from Bön, the Big Bang theory, the law of impermanence, and gom meditation, for a handful of examples.
His Holiness is an engaging and amusing writer. The complex ideas are accessible and his sense of humor is apparent. I’m glad I read it.
I most enjoyed the author’s insights into where Buddhism and scientific theories resonate: Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, the theory of emptiness, observer-independent realities (and whether they can exist), creation stories from Bön, the Big Bang theory, the law of impermanence, and gom meditation, for a handful of examples.
His Holiness is an engaging and amusing writer. The complex ideas are accessible and his sense of humor is apparent. I’m glad I read it.
July 30, 2018
Por acá les coloco lo que me pareció más llamativo de este libro ;)
*El nombre del Dalai Lama es Tezin Gyatzo, nació en 1935 en el Tibet. Es el 14to Dalai Lama y es un guía espiritual del pueblo tibetano.
*Fue descubierto a los 4 años de edad e inició su formación. Se fue a vivir a la India por la invasión de China.
*Es un increíble estudioso de: filosofía, psicología, budismo, ciencias, física subatómica, cosmología, biología, neurociencias y del comportamiento humano.
*La teoría budista propone q la materia está formada por 8 sustancias subatómicas: tierra, aire, fuego, agua y forma, olor, gusto y tangibilidad.
*Los budistas creen en un universo sin comienzo, sino en la noción de q se encuentra en constante formación y destrucción.
*Budismo reconoce en los animales la consciencia con grado distinto a la humana. No reconoce en los animales algo parecido al alma.
*Según el budismo los humanos llegaron por nacimiento espontáneo.
*Karma significa acción!
*Conoció a Paul Ekman en el año 2000 y se apasionó por el estudio de las emociones básicas y cognitivas superiores.
*Conclusión: la ciencia y la epiritualidad comparten el mismo objetivo: mejorar la condición humana.
*El nombre del Dalai Lama es Tezin Gyatzo, nació en 1935 en el Tibet. Es el 14to Dalai Lama y es un guía espiritual del pueblo tibetano.
*Fue descubierto a los 4 años de edad e inició su formación. Se fue a vivir a la India por la invasión de China.
*Es un increíble estudioso de: filosofía, psicología, budismo, ciencias, física subatómica, cosmología, biología, neurociencias y del comportamiento humano.
*La teoría budista propone q la materia está formada por 8 sustancias subatómicas: tierra, aire, fuego, agua y forma, olor, gusto y tangibilidad.
*Los budistas creen en un universo sin comienzo, sino en la noción de q se encuentra en constante formación y destrucción.
*Budismo reconoce en los animales la consciencia con grado distinto a la humana. No reconoce en los animales algo parecido al alma.
*Según el budismo los humanos llegaron por nacimiento espontáneo.
*Karma significa acción!
*Conoció a Paul Ekman en el año 2000 y se apasionó por el estudio de las emociones básicas y cognitivas superiores.
*Conclusión: la ciencia y la epiritualidad comparten el mismo objetivo: mejorar la condición humana.
September 20, 2019
Yikes, this one took a long time, but every minute was worth it. Deep insights, accessible explanations of the development of Buddhist philosophy and thought, and compelling arguments for both the feasibility and value of reconciling western science with Buddhism, all in an extraordinarily well-written, accessible package. An almost unbelievable achievement for a non-native English speaker who states that his "personal encounter with science began in an almost entirely prescientific world where the technological seemed miraculous." Will definitely revisit, since I only absorbed a this time through.
Just one highlight of many: "The fact that, despite our living for more than half a century in the nuclear age, we have not yet annihilated ourselves is what gives me great hope."
Just one highlight of many: "The fact that, despite our living for more than half a century in the nuclear age, we have not yet annihilated ourselves is what gives me great hope."
Displaying 1 - 30 of 654 reviews