What do you think?
Rate this book
Einstein e Buda: Palavras Comuns
Esta colecção de citações de Albert Einstein e do Buda, colocadas em paralelo e organizadas por temas, mostra como duas abordagens aparentemente opostas — a observação científica e a contemplação espiritual — produziram ideias assombrosamente semelhantes sobre a natureza do universo e o lugar que nele ocupamos. Este livro apresenta mais de cem exemplos destas convicções convergentes, incluindo citações de: Albert Einstein, Buda, Niels Bohr, Os Upanixades, Erwin Schrödinger, Chuang Tzu, Werner Heisenberg,, D. T. Suzuki , David Bohm , O Dalai Lama.
208 pages, Paperback
First published November 28, 2001
6 people are currently reading
128 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
January 24, 2014
A must-have book for anyone interested in the convergence between quantum science and Buddhist/more broadly Eastern spiritual thought.
The book is divided into different sections, each of which contains parallel sayings by scientists and the wisdom traditions of the East. In many cases, the two come to almost identical conclusions, such as:
'It is a primitive form of thought that things either exist or do not exist' - Sir Arthur Eddington.
'To say "it is' is to grasp for permanence. To say "it is not" is to adopt the view of nihilism. Therefore a wise person does not say "exists" or "does not exist"' Nagarjuna
A fascinating book I've gone back to countless times over the years, and always with fresh appreciation.
The book is divided into different sections, each of which contains parallel sayings by scientists and the wisdom traditions of the East. In many cases, the two come to almost identical conclusions, such as:
'It is a primitive form of thought that things either exist or do not exist' - Sir Arthur Eddington.
'To say "it is' is to grasp for permanence. To say "it is not" is to adopt the view of nihilism. Therefore a wise person does not say "exists" or "does not exist"' Nagarjuna
A fascinating book I've gone back to countless times over the years, and always with fresh appreciation.
December 17, 2021
Muy interesantes las muchas similitudes que se encuentran entre ciencia y religión.
Muchas de las frases de grandes científicos son comparadas con las de los maestros orientales y es increíble la semejanza que existe entre ambos.
Muchas de las frases de grandes científicos son comparadas con las de los maestros orientales y es increíble la semejanza que existe entre ambos.
January 28, 2021
Super thought provoking. Included parallel sayings from history's leading physicists and metaphysical thinkers.
Read
October 12, 2021McFarlane isn’t the only spiritual thinker who wants to show that science supports religious claims and spiritual experiences.
Those who do often don’t seem to realize that science is constantly changing / in part by experimentation / by field study / by thought experiments / and by the richness of cogitation. They don’t seem / or want / to recognize that science proceeds by proving itself wrong. Perhaps Einstein expressed his most valuable insight when he said that someday someone would prove him wrong. And that / in spite of the fact that general relativity along with quantum mechanics are science’s most tested / and verified / fields of endeavor and realization.
Perhaps that points to why spiritual and religious practitioners want science to confirm their beliefs / ideas that they hold to be true / or even True. After all / we don’t award the same status to beliefs as to scientific truths because beliefs tend to be individual / and because they can never be repeated and tested by others. Therefore many religious and spiritual people want very much to claim science’s (at least apparent) certainty / as proof of their own beliefs.
McFarlane offers a statement by a scientist on the top of each page and a statement by a Buddhist teacher on the bottom. His book title describes them as “parallel sayings”. The two statements have been chosen by him and placed in such combinations so that they say as nearly as possible the same thing. Or at least appear to. Remember / the selections have been made by one person – they constitute one person’s thesis. They are not properly the theses of those from whom he quotes / the short statements having been taken out of contexts and with the proof of McFarlane’s thesis as their aim. He gives the scientists the first word / thereby giving the last word to the Buddhists.
McFarlane has further divided the quotes into fourteen chapters. Most have titles such as “Speakable and Unspeakable” / “Subject and Object” / “Unity and Plurality”. In other words the chapters are constructed around dichotomies / a way of thinking that wise Buddhist thought proscribes / and one that is even refuted by some that he quotes. He has a short introduction at the beginning of each chapter / so we are encouraged / if not forced / to familiarize ourselves with his thoughts before we get to the thoughts of others. In other words / to a considerable extent we’re being told what to think.
He quotes from fifteen scientists / only one of whom is still alive. So there is nothing by scientists working with eg string theory / capturing the sounds of the big bang / loss of information in black holes / or such things as dark energy and dark matter and the many types of stars that have been discovered more recently. That wouldn’t be a problem if / as he seems to think / the truths of science are eternal. There is probably not a scientist among those he quoted who would agree with him on that.
A few of the scientists are known for their work in the philosophy of science rather than for work in physics. Some of the spiritual teachers from whom he quotes are also known more as popularizers of Buddhist ideas rather than the practitioners of what alone can give rise to those realizations / eg D T Suzuki. Half a dozen or so are Hindu / not Buddhist / practitioners / a couple are academics / and there’s a Taoist. This suggests that McFarlane was more interested in proving a point than in sticking to the title of his book / Einstein and Buddha.
There is nothing by Stephen Hawking or the philosopher of science Karl Popper / probably because neither of them believed in anything like the necessity for a divine first cause – they each came to believe that science could adequately explain the origins and nature of the world.
There have been other books by people interested in the compare-and-contrast approach to talking about Buddhism with reference to some other area of thought. There is for example The Monk and the Philosopher: A Father and Son Discuss the Meaning of Life. Science has always been of keen interest to the current Dalai Lama. Among his several talks available on YouTube is The Universe in a Single Atom: The Convergence of Science and Spirituality. Ken Wilbur’s books attempt to show that a host of existing disciplines and theories are really one.
As for the editor of Einstein and Buddha / McFarlane seems to have been a seeker after truth(s) for some time – he holds degrees in mathematics / physics / and philosophy and religion. He is the author of a lengthy and appreciative article about Franklin Merrell-Wolff who believed in transcendental knowledge beyond our quotidian experience / and who tried to reconcile the two. Einstein and Buddha is McFarlane’s first book since 1995’s Sacred Science: Essays on Mathematics, Physics and Spiritual Philosophy. He teaches at Center For Sacred Sciences where he is “…collaborating closely on the Center's mission to develop the foundations for a new sacred worldview.” He is a partner in a Silicon Valley patent firm.
/ Copyright © Alan Davies 2021
Those who do often don’t seem to realize that science is constantly changing / in part by experimentation / by field study / by thought experiments / and by the richness of cogitation. They don’t seem / or want / to recognize that science proceeds by proving itself wrong. Perhaps Einstein expressed his most valuable insight when he said that someday someone would prove him wrong. And that / in spite of the fact that general relativity along with quantum mechanics are science’s most tested / and verified / fields of endeavor and realization.
Perhaps that points to why spiritual and religious practitioners want science to confirm their beliefs / ideas that they hold to be true / or even True. After all / we don’t award the same status to beliefs as to scientific truths because beliefs tend to be individual / and because they can never be repeated and tested by others. Therefore many religious and spiritual people want very much to claim science’s (at least apparent) certainty / as proof of their own beliefs.
McFarlane offers a statement by a scientist on the top of each page and a statement by a Buddhist teacher on the bottom. His book title describes them as “parallel sayings”. The two statements have been chosen by him and placed in such combinations so that they say as nearly as possible the same thing. Or at least appear to. Remember / the selections have been made by one person – they constitute one person’s thesis. They are not properly the theses of those from whom he quotes / the short statements having been taken out of contexts and with the proof of McFarlane’s thesis as their aim. He gives the scientists the first word / thereby giving the last word to the Buddhists.
McFarlane has further divided the quotes into fourteen chapters. Most have titles such as “Speakable and Unspeakable” / “Subject and Object” / “Unity and Plurality”. In other words the chapters are constructed around dichotomies / a way of thinking that wise Buddhist thought proscribes / and one that is even refuted by some that he quotes. He has a short introduction at the beginning of each chapter / so we are encouraged / if not forced / to familiarize ourselves with his thoughts before we get to the thoughts of others. In other words / to a considerable extent we’re being told what to think.
He quotes from fifteen scientists / only one of whom is still alive. So there is nothing by scientists working with eg string theory / capturing the sounds of the big bang / loss of information in black holes / or such things as dark energy and dark matter and the many types of stars that have been discovered more recently. That wouldn’t be a problem if / as he seems to think / the truths of science are eternal. There is probably not a scientist among those he quoted who would agree with him on that.
A few of the scientists are known for their work in the philosophy of science rather than for work in physics. Some of the spiritual teachers from whom he quotes are also known more as popularizers of Buddhist ideas rather than the practitioners of what alone can give rise to those realizations / eg D T Suzuki. Half a dozen or so are Hindu / not Buddhist / practitioners / a couple are academics / and there’s a Taoist. This suggests that McFarlane was more interested in proving a point than in sticking to the title of his book / Einstein and Buddha.
There is nothing by Stephen Hawking or the philosopher of science Karl Popper / probably because neither of them believed in anything like the necessity for a divine first cause – they each came to believe that science could adequately explain the origins and nature of the world.
There have been other books by people interested in the compare-and-contrast approach to talking about Buddhism with reference to some other area of thought. There is for example The Monk and the Philosopher: A Father and Son Discuss the Meaning of Life. Science has always been of keen interest to the current Dalai Lama. Among his several talks available on YouTube is The Universe in a Single Atom: The Convergence of Science and Spirituality. Ken Wilbur’s books attempt to show that a host of existing disciplines and theories are really one.
As for the editor of Einstein and Buddha / McFarlane seems to have been a seeker after truth(s) for some time – he holds degrees in mathematics / physics / and philosophy and religion. He is the author of a lengthy and appreciative article about Franklin Merrell-Wolff who believed in transcendental knowledge beyond our quotidian experience / and who tried to reconcile the two. Einstein and Buddha is McFarlane’s first book since 1995’s Sacred Science: Essays on Mathematics, Physics and Spiritual Philosophy. He teaches at Center For Sacred Sciences where he is “…collaborating closely on the Center's mission to develop the foundations for a new sacred worldview.” He is a partner in a Silicon Valley patent firm.
/ Copyright © Alan Davies 2021
August 2, 2011
A very promising title drew me to this book. Albert Einstein and the Buddha are two of my favorite people, and certainly two of the "smartest" (whatever that means) ever to grace our fair planet.
The book compares and contrasts, on each page, sayings by a scientist and an Eastern Mystic within a variety of topics such as "The Human Experience" and "Time and Space," intended to demonstrate the similarity between the hard science and the soft philosophy of the two pursuits. And it does, and it works, by and large.
The problem with the book (at least for someone uneducated like me) is that there is absolutely no context to the short quotations and often it at least appears as though quotes were chosen because of the existence of a word or two in them, to make them appear as though they are addressing the topic at hand when in fact they may have been intended for something else altogether. An example:
sir Arthur Eddington: "The concept of substance has disappeared from fundamental physics."
Yeshe Tsogyel: "I have seen nothing in the world that is ultimately real."
I'm not convinced that the second quote, in particular, refers to anything remotely like what Eddington was talking about (he is referring to the duality of the particle/wave state of everything...not that it wasn't "real" like the typical person would use that word).
Again, I ain't that smart, or well-read, so I could be wrong, but even if I am, it seems obvious that one would be far better off reading some more focused works by these amazing folks to better understand what they're really getting at. Then, maybe, this book serves as a proper capstone for that.
Not bad, just a bit pointless...
The book compares and contrasts, on each page, sayings by a scientist and an Eastern Mystic within a variety of topics such as "The Human Experience" and "Time and Space," intended to demonstrate the similarity between the hard science and the soft philosophy of the two pursuits. And it does, and it works, by and large.
The problem with the book (at least for someone uneducated like me) is that there is absolutely no context to the short quotations and often it at least appears as though quotes were chosen because of the existence of a word or two in them, to make them appear as though they are addressing the topic at hand when in fact they may have been intended for something else altogether. An example:
sir Arthur Eddington: "The concept of substance has disappeared from fundamental physics."
Yeshe Tsogyel: "I have seen nothing in the world that is ultimately real."
I'm not convinced that the second quote, in particular, refers to anything remotely like what Eddington was talking about (he is referring to the duality of the particle/wave state of everything...not that it wasn't "real" like the typical person would use that word).
Again, I ain't that smart, or well-read, so I could be wrong, but even if I am, it seems obvious that one would be far better off reading some more focused works by these amazing folks to better understand what they're really getting at. Then, maybe, this book serves as a proper capstone for that.
Not bad, just a bit pointless...
July 7, 2010
پس از آنکه اندیشمندان تحقیقات گسترده ای رادر زمینه تفکرات مشابه میان فیزیک نوین وعرفان شرق آغاز کرده انددیگر این تشابه تنها به عنوان اطلاعات نگرشی انحصاری و محرمانه تلقی نمیشود وصحت آن را میتوان در این کتاب به وضوح مشاهده کرد. نویسنده با گرداوری مطالب ونظایر ونیز موارد قیاسپذیر موجود در این میان سعی در اثبات یگانگی اهداف فیزیک وعرفان میکند ومایه پیدایش تاثیری حیرت انگیز در شناخت این دو میشود و نیز تصدیق فیزیکدانان در تطابق میان فیزیک جدید بودیسم و تائو ئسم را به همراه دارد
نویسنده که از شخصیتهای مشهور و پیشرو در مذهب و فلسفه و دارای درجاتی در فیزیک است دیدگاههای مشابه بودیسم وفیزیک را همچون وحدت اشیا توصیف و واقعیت در گذار از پارادکس ورابطه میان مشاهده گر ومشاهده شونده را بررسی میکند
.
یاسمینا
نویسنده که از شخصیتهای مشهور و پیشرو در مذهب و فلسفه و دارای درجاتی در فیزیک است دیدگاههای مشابه بودیسم وفیزیک را همچون وحدت اشیا توصیف و واقعیت در گذار از پارادکس ورابطه میان مشاهده گر ومشاهده شونده را بررسی میکند
.
یاسمینا
May 24, 2009
Thought-provoking, yes, but in reading this book, I felt as if the editor's agenda to "prove" that modern physics is just catching up to the revelations of Buddhism is a bit heavy-handed, and quoted out of context to the point of being misquoted. Identification of quote sources within the text would have been appreciated.
I think this book has put me off of my resolution to read "The Quantum and the Lotus" and "The Tao of Physics." It all feels just a bit too contrived for me.
But maybe that's why I'm not a Buddhist.
I think this book has put me off of my resolution to read "The Quantum and the Lotus" and "The Tao of Physics." It all feels just a bit too contrived for me.
But maybe that's why I'm not a Buddhist.
October 19, 2012
review menyusul . yang jelas keren banget, segala hal tentang fisika pada dasarnya juga mempelajari kosmos itu sendiri.
February 23, 2013
Cool idea. Some of the parallels seem forced.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews