[Buddha-l] Earthquake

Curt Steinmetz curt at cola.iges.org
Thu Sep 16 10:51:55 MDT 2010


  No later than Cicero it was known that not only is the earth 
spherical, but it is suspended, somehow, in space, with comparable 
climatic bands in the north and south hemispheres. This is all explained 
in the famous dream sequence at the end of Cicero's "De res publica", 
which is told from a vantage point far out in space where the earth is 
seen only a small dot of light. Centuries earlier, Plato (on whose 
dialogue Cicero's "Republic" was modeled), described the earth as "in 
the form of a globe" in his dialogue "Timaeus," although not with the 
kind of detail found later in Cicero.

In India, the famed astronomer Aryabhata was accurately explaining the 
causes of eclipses at the age of 23 in the year was 500 AD.

The state of the sciences of geography and astronomy appears to have not 
been well developed at the time of the Buddha. But they were both 
developing (one has to start somewhere), and through careful 
observations, analysis, experiments, and calculations, a great deal of 
scientific progress was being made in places like India, Rome and Greece.

Curt

On 9/16/10 3:48 AM, andy wrote:
> On Wednesday 15 September 2010 09:25:47 pm Ngawang Dorje wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>   "This great earth, Ananda, is established upon liquid, the liquid upon the
>> atmosphere, and the atmosphere upon space. And when, Ananda, mighty
>>   atmospheric disturbances take place, the liquid is agitated. And with the
>>   agitation of the liquid, tremors of the earth arise. This is the first
>>   reason, the first cause for the arising of mighty earthquakes." (Digha
>>   Nikaya 16)
>>
>> How do you understand this passage in light of science?
>>
>> Thanks a lot,
>> Rahula
> Sounds as good as the theory of the Ancient Greek philosopher Thales, who
> thought the earth must be floating on water, the primal element, which
> explains earthquakes.  I am more partial to the Chinese "giant catfish under
> the earth" theory.  But the liquid theory is not far off from plate tectonics,
> only the fluid is magma.
>
> So what is the point of the question?



More information about the buddha-l mailing list