SuttaCentral
For me it’s because the idea in AN 3.22 is the same idea you will find in a modern book on research design 
If you found out they had wood fueled steam cars in India 2500 years ago, wouldn’t that be a bit mind-blowing?
AN 3.22 is, in my humble opinion, on that level. Except it’s a ‘conceptual technology’ and not a physical one.
That reminds me of this: The “Antikythera Mechanism” (link is to a rather cool, albeit long, lecture) Just the precision metalwork involved, much less the astronomical maths being applied, is pretty amazing. Clearly, ancient people understood the basic principles of science and engineering and applied them. The main difference between then and now is they hadn’t invented microscopes or telescopes.
As I read Erik’s reply I too instantly thought of the Antikythera Mechanism! There may be many mind-blowing secrets buried in the earth and under the waves, things that would rewrite many books. But thanks to the Buddha and the Sangha, we have the Dhamma…until humanity forgets.
I don’t think it qualifies as science, but a more basic level, called rational and critical thinking. Or logical thinking.
Science is more of hypothesis, logic, experiments. Kalama sutta fits in much better.
Perhaps it is better not to simply think of ancient people as incapable of logical thinking to a super high sophisticated level, then it’s less surprising to see timeless logical thinking in ancient works.
Yes. In the lecture, the presenter explains that metal objects and machines like this were likely melted down and recycled periodically, which is why it was only in a shipwreck that it was stumbled upon. There’s written records describing similar mechanical calculators, so it wasn’t unique. He spends alot of time on what they’ve discovered about the mechanism, but later in the lecture when he discusses the sleuthing about the text inscriptions as evidence of its origin reminded me of EBT studies. It’s quite a nerdy rabbit hole to fall into.
Bhante, I don’t think science is reconcilable with the Kalama sutta:
Please, Kālāmas, don’t go by oral transmission, don’t go by lineage, don’t go by testament, don’t go by canonical authority, don’t rely on logic, don’t rely on inference, don’t go by reasoned contemplation, don’t go by the acceptance of a view after consideration, don’t go by the appearance of competence, and don’t think ‘The ascetic is our respected teacher.’ But when you know for yourselves: ‘These things are unskillful, blameworthy, criticized by sensible people, and when you undertake them, they lead to harm and suffering’, then you should give them up.
Science is very much based on transmission, i.e. building on previous work. There are often specific people who are considered authorities in the field. Don’t rely on logic or inference? There goes all the statistical tools of modern science. This ascetic is my thesis supervisor, I have to listen to her!
IMO, science doesn’t particularly connect to knowing for yourselves: ‘These things are unskillful, blameworthy, criticized by sensible people, and when you undertake them, they lead to harm and suffering’
To my mind, developing testable causal theories is the heart of science
My view of it is that Kalama sutta says not to rely on those 10 things alone.
As very much Buddhism itself relies on scriptures, especially EBT, relies on the teacher who can train new monks, relies on the authority of the Buddha, relies on logic, contemplating the Dhamma after hearing it, relies on traditions, with the lines of lineage going all the way back to the Buddha.
Same thing for science.
Let’s make it simple to group the 10 into 2. Revelation (oral transmission, lineage, testament, canonical authority, the appearance of competence, and think ‘The ascetic is our respected teacher’) and logic ( logic, inference, reasoned contemplation, acceptance of a view after consideration). Both of them are needed in basically any field. We read up what’s there already, think if it makes sense, then the crucial point is empirical evidences.
In science the empirical evidence is experiment. In Buddhism it is meditation, to know for oneself. That’s the common point which makes Kalama sutta and thus Buddhism scientific.
This is very interesting and gives support to individual path after ‘Buddha and Arahants’ have disappeared at certain times in the world. Yes, my view is that ‘Buddhism’ is a ‘Science of Mind and Consciousness (citta-vijnana)’. The word used for ‘Science’ in India still today is ‘Vijnana’ (as in https://www.iisc.ac.in/). Indian Spiritual search and education for seeking Self-realization, Awakening and Enlightenment was no less than the Sceintific endeavor to find the unified quantum field (higgs-boson field) and unity of forces at the quantum level.
In ancient India the Human body-mind was known as a divine instrument capable of bridging space-time-dimension of human and divine realms (31 planes in Buddhist Cosmology). to complete evolution of consciousness in space-time-dimensions of the form and formless to attain enlightenment, ultimate freedom, peace and happiness from all conditioned existence.
Investigation of dhamma is second factor of Enlightenment. Buddha invited all to ‘come and see’ Ehi passiko and realize the Truth of Dhamma for Oneself. The very first step or stream-entry is overcoming ego-centric personality ‘view’ to reach universal 5D consciousness by opening the sixth-sense of mind (inner-eye of Dhamma-chakkhu of ESP-intuitive insight of Prajna) through mindful-meditation. The ultimate Truth is non-conceptual and can only be grasped by intellect or language, yet can be ‘realized’ in ones own mind-body experience and awareness.
Under colonization and earlier decline of Buddhism in India, unfortunately mainstream academic Indian Science became westernized and materialistic. Buddhist science was going against the stream of materialistic 3 and 4D Science and AI. The Buddha Dhamma was meant to uplift Human Consciousness and Conscious Evolution to 5D and above. The idea of ‘Sunnya’ (Zero) or ‘Sunnyata’ have originated (in India) most likely from ‘Buddha’. This may offend many scientists both in India and the west. Btw, the word ‘precepts’ means education and training the mind=body-speech to stay wholesome and untainted and it needs to be understood and translated like that.
ps. I would say Science was always there even in Egyptian times, but they believed in some kind of soul and afterlife and tried to preserve mummies for future reincarnation or genetic codes. The Emerald tablet was the foundational text for both Arabic and European Alchemists.
To understand this issue, it is important to separate what we refer to as ‘conventional truth’ and ‘ultimate truth.’ Science is only about conventional truth (relative truth) – such as naming things in ways that everyone has agreement about and understanding things (e.g. vaccines and how they work – the examples provided here) in agreed upon ways. Buddhism deals with subjective experience that is changing moment by moment (note: scientists have subjective experience too!). The causal laws in Buddhism describe the factors that are in operation with regards to the moment-by-moment manifestation of the mind (five senses and thinking) – the teachings are about understanding ultimate truths – i.e., how our minds work. So, Buddhism is definitely a science – a science of the mind. Check out the following article that separates these two types of understandings:
https://doi.org/10.1177%2F2158244015583860