In my opinion, we need to see the Aggana Sutta in the overall spirit of the message, not the letter. In this way, both the Aggana Sutta and biological evolution are describing the same things:
Small unicellular life forms evolving into larger, more complex ones over vast amounts of time, continuing and replicating due to greed for food and pro-creation.
Also, the Buddhist cosmology of course includes the animals, with humans potentially being reborn as animals and vice versa. Evolution confirmed that we are animals too, the main difference just being the degree of intelligence. Biological evolution is completely compatible with Buddhism, in my opinion.
I found this series useful in answering that question.
The Buddhist tradition has created and passed down the world’s oldest and largest body of mythological literature, yet its value is rarely appreciated. Mythologycreates meaning by situating a people in the story of the world. Buddhist mythology teaches us how Buddhist people over the years have struggled to reconcile the pure and exalted teachings of the Buddha with their messy and imperfect lives. These are the stories that don’t make it into the “proper” doctrines: stories of women, of loss, of the dispossessed, of redemption in the most unlikely places. This course draws on multiple modern interpretations of myth to illuminate Buddhist stories, arguing that mythology deserves a central place in our understanding of how we, as people inspired by the Buddha’s teachings, can learn from those who have come before. Bhante Sujato, the respected teacher and scholar of early Buddhism, will lead the course, which runs for four two-hour evening sessions over four weeks.
For practitioners who already have faith, no issue.
For practitioners who are investigating Buddhism, to obtain faith, it’s kinda important that Buddhism makes logical sense, internally consistent, and if possible, consistent with the best model of cosmology available that fits observational data of the universe.
Rebirth being central to Buddhism either has a first life or not. If there’s a first life, we have contradiction with the dependent origination of emergence from nothing, the ignorance doesn’t have a previous life chain of ignorance. So rebirth is without discernable beginning. Unless at some point, we all were formless beings to infinite past, beginningless rebirth requires physical universe, ideally to beginningless cosmology too.
Thus the best fit model from physics indeed depends on the social/religious/political, etc forces which shapes the view. Today it’s objectivity, observational data, general relativity, science. And if we were talking about this a few decades ago for steady state vs Big bang theory, indeed, there can be embarrassment if Buddhists choose to favour steady state due to wanting no beginning. Turns out steady state is wrong.
So cyclic multiverse is still the best possible fit, and if physics cosmology should one day evolves to a form which is incompatible with Buddhism, maybe then we might want to reevaluate that there’s some data yet which would change their theories to be a better fit. Regardless, science although has models which keeps on changing, there’s still a notion that it gets closer and closer to the truth, and likely the changes would stop at some point. Eg. Earth is round (oval shaped) is basically not going to be undergoing any more changes, until earth melts in the Red Giant of the sun.
So you’re hoping that modern cosmology theory eventually resembles the creation myths of people in iron-age India?
IMO what is important for new Buddhist practitioners is that the practices they’re taught are effective in removing suffering. I think it’s about liberating insight, and not about adjusting one’s beliefs, or taking on a new set of views, or whatever.
As for “faith”, isn’t it more important to have confidence in our practice methods, rather than hoping that “science” might eventually validate some aspects of our belief system?
DN27 does not literally say it but it introduces some kind of beginning of craving. Maybe not a first moment but at least a beginning.
“But the single mass of water at that time was utterly dark. The moon and sun were not found, nor were stars and constellations, day and night, months and fortnights, years and seasons, or male and female. Beings were simply known as ‘beings’. After a very long period had passed, solid nectar curdled in the water. It appeared just like the curd on top of hot milk-rice as it cools. It was beautiful, fragrant, and delicious, like ghee or butter. And it was as sweet as pure manuka honey. Now, one of those beings was reckless. Thinking, ‘Oh my, what might this be?’ they tasted the solid nectar with their finger. They enjoyed it, and craving was born in them. And other beings, following that being’s example, tasted solid nectar with their fingers. They too enjoyed it, and craving was born in them”.
Due to this craving beings became coarses over time, and underwent all kind of changes, They lost their ‘orginal (long lasting) state’: “… mind-made, feeding on rapture, self-luminous, moving through the sky, steadily glorious”.
One can also reason there must have been ananusaya of avijja and kama raga for this beings to start to enjoy and crave for that solid nectar. The sutta does not say there is a first point to craving.
What do you think…does this sutta want to explain the origin of organism on Earth? So, were those mind made luminous beings firstly transformed in primitive cells because of their craving?
Or did they become in some way humans without those very primitive stages of evolution?
What does this sutta exactly explain? Maybe that live on Earth did not arise from anorganic matter?
I don’t see DN 27 as that. I see it as the words of a fully awakened Buddha who has divine eye and recollection of past lives, as well as divine ear to be able to hear the account of the beginning of this universe cycle from the Brahmas who lived through it.
It’s an aspect of faith to have faith in such powers of the Buddha. Cosmology might not be directly important or relevant for liberation, but for some, it’s an important thing that Buddha is so powerful and worthy of being believed in.
Basically, yes very similar to taking Buddha as a God figure. Yes, very similar to fundamental Christianity.
Some other people can say evolution is wrong, and that humans comes from outer space, devas being aliens directly. There’s this fringe theory in r/pastlife that there was a precursor species for the humaniods in Venus, mars, and earth. and that Venus and Mars got destroyed some thousands of years ago. Clearly, that’s a bit too far out for most scientifically minded people. Unless there’s more people who can recall past lives as a martian, it’s hard to take it as anything other than fiction. But it also fits in well with DN 27.
In terms of myth lens, DN 27 I think has been explained by other monastics already. Likely positing the origin of sex, privacy, property, social contract for government, how craving leads to lower life etc.
Thanks venerable. I think our body (and habits) shows evidences or at least strong clues of evolution from animals on Earth. For example, we have still a rudimentary tail-bone. It seems there were/are children born with a tail (max. 30 cm i read somewhere). We have evolutionary signs of a hide, also chicken skin, to cool down the skin. Some people have very much bodily hair almost like an ape.
There seem to be a phase in the embryo in which it has gill-like structures. Our brain shows evolution too. Old and relatively new parts. The old are very animal-like, reptile brain, fight, flight or freece. Our dna corresponds very much with certain apes. Taking this all together i think there are strong clues for evolution.
Do you feel the distinction between animal realm and human realm is real, or is just a convention, made up by humans. Are we not animals too?
Thanks for the reminder of the evolutionary evidences from embyro development. I totally forgot it. Yes, I wouldn’t take that conspiracy as seriously now.
Buddhism wise, the main difference is that humans can understand, practise and realize the Dhamma. Although to what degree some animals might be able to do it in the future is up for experiments. I wonder if anyone had tried to teach Dhamma to octopus or pigs or apes yet. It’s amazing that science fiction wants to imagine that we can translate language with aliens, but we still cannot communicate with dolphins. Maybe some powerful AI maybe able to allow animals to have language communication with us, then we can try the experiment of teaching animals Dhamma.
