gad rgyangs wrote:
False. Scientific models for our cosmos has not been changing for decades, so the minor details are still in debates. I don't know where you got the "rapidly changing" part but it do seem that you seldom get in touch with scientific development. As for religious models, they never change, hence often subject themselves to scrutiny and ridicule.
OMG you're joking right? Have you heard of string theory, inflation, black hole evaporation & the holographic principle, m-brane theory, ADS-CFT duality, conformal cyclic cosmology etc etc. physics and cosmology are in the biggest upheaval since quantum theory and relativity, which was just 100 years ago! and you say "models for our cosmos has not been changing for decades"????
The new model are adjusted to fit and built upon the older models. It does not imply that if (lets say) string theory is proven = standard model being rejected. In fact, if string theory can't prove old theories like standard model, then it should be rejected. Thats how science works. Furthermore theories like black hole evaporation, etc, are there to clarify specific details in existing theories, not to overthrow them.
And physics are not in upheaval, quantum theory and relativity are greatly accepted by almost all scientists in the world, they already have theories on how the universe begins, now they are just trying to show it mathematically using strings and quantum loops. To fill in the gap, so to say. Nothing had been revolutionized for decades since Einstein and the quantum founders....
As for "religious" models never changing, within a given religion with entrenched priesthoods (like Buddhism) that is mostly true, but there is a whole model/group of models that has arisen in the 20th century under the name "New Age" which is not in any fashion just a rehashing of old-world religions, so even new religious models appear and change. but scientific models still change way faster.
You see "new age" as religions but most people don't, we see them as cults. Interesting but not really useful......
So this question is left for us to solve on our own: either the neutral awareness of basis is multiple, not entirely satisfying for a number of reasons, but this explains how there are individual mind streams from the start; or it is singular (not entirely satisfying for a number of reasons), but gets warped by the presence of trace afflictions into individuated sentient beings; or is it neither singular or multiple (not entirely satisfying for a number of reasons) and gets warped by the presence of trace afflictions into individuated sentient beings. In the last two scenarios, the inability of awakened people to completely eradicate all traces of afflictions leaves traces of affliction left over, where they act as seeds for new sentient beings.
This one really had me thinking...............