Abstract
Convergences and conflicts in the dialogue between Buddhism and modern science occasionally find precedent in historical sources and encounters, some of which have set the stage for scenarios that are commonplace in the current dialogue. This paper brings recent scholarship and Tibetan sources on astronomy and geography in Tibet into conversation with the ongoing Buddhism and science dialogue. In response to a lack of context in the dialogue, the paper gives attention to how two contexts in particular, namely, the contemplative and historical, inform currents in the Buddhism and science dialogue about cosmology. The paper challenges claims made that Tibetans did not encounter European science until the twentieth century and that Tibetans were unaware of scientific cosmological ideas, and therefore have not updated the Buddhist Mount Meru cosmology. To address tensions inherent in the binary discourse on science vs religion, this paper asks, does the Mount Meru cosmology represent a domain wherein Buddhism or science hold more appropriate tools for meaningful discourse and resolution about its existence?
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
For their invitation to contribute to this special issue on “Buddhism and the History of Science,” I’d like to thank Devin Zuckerman and Thomas Calobrisi. I’d also like to thank David McMahan for constructive feedback on this paper as well as the anonymous reviewers.
For discussion on polycentric science, Buddhist forms of knowledge, and dialogue, see Ganeri (2013). By “science” throughout, except in discussion below about “Buddhist science,” the term refers to a normative modern idea of science. For discussion on the emergence of modern science out of Christian cosmology, see Harrison (2015), 21–24.
For a review, see Sheehy (2020), 115–119.
For a review, see Sheehy (2018), 111.
The dialogue was also titled Universe in a Single Atom. In 2012, the book was published in the Tibetan language. See Bstan ‘dzin Rgya mtsho, Ta lai Bla ma. 2012.
For an example of how one Tibetan Buddhist cosmology, that of the Kālacakra Tantra, is bound up with doxography and philosophy, see Sheehy (2019).
sa gzhi spos chus byugs zhing me tog bkram/ ri rab gling bzhi nyi zlas brgyan pa ‘di/ sangs rgyas zhing du dmigs te phul ba yis/ ‘gro kun rnam dag zhing du spyod par shog. The authorship of these lines is not known. Though the formulation of the liturgy predates his writing, an early version of these lines is found in a commentary on a liturgy for a consecration ritual by the Sakya hierarch, Grags pa Rgyal mtshan (1147–1216) who writes, “sa gzhi spos kyis byugs shing me tog gtor/ ri rab gling bzhis legs par brgyan pa ‘di/ sang rgyas zhing du dmigs shing phul ba yis/ ‘gro rnams rnam dag zhing la spyod pa shog.” See Grags pa 2006, 217. In the Tibetan tradition, the most common form of this offering practice is the thirty-seven-part maṇḍala that is adapted in myriad variations to simplify the offering, accredited to ‘Phags pa Blo gros rgyal mtshan. The thirty-seven-parts sync with a ritual symmetry to the thirty-seven factors of enlightenment that are ubiquitous in Buddhist literature. For a classic description, see Patrul (1998), 283–295.
In practice, there are two maṇḍala discs, an accomplishment maṇḍala (sgrub pa’i maṇḍal) and an offering maṇḍala (mchod pa’i maṇḍal) that are employed in conjunction. From the lowest hell realms up to the heavenly god realms, a zoology of living beings and the realms in which they dwell are detailed.
The practice can also be visualized without the physical representation on the maṇḍala disc. Merit is understood to be generated by the practice.
See discussion below on empirical observation of the Mount Meru cosmology.
This is probably “black plum.” See Kapstein (2011), 352, n. 6.
Composition of the Mahābhārata is dated to be between the fourth c. B.C.E. and the fourth c. C.E. The prefix su- means “wonderful,” the wonderful Meru.
The Kālacakra model of the cosmos is also employed in maṇḍala offering practice as an alternative cosmology to that of the Abhidharma. A major distinction is the inclusion of symbols of eclipses and meteors along with the sun, moon, and planets. See Jampaiyang (2018), 433–447 and Huntington (2018), 139.
‘Jig rten gzhag pa by Maudgalyāyana in the Abhidharma section of the Bstan ‘gyur.
In the full thirty-seven-point maṇḍala offering, there are symbols that correspond directly to the cakravartin treasures and vases, including the parasol and banner that symbolize royalty and victory.
In the Bka’ ‘gyur, Khang bu brtsegs pa’i mdo.
The three predominant cosmologies in Tibet were the Abhidharma, Kālacakra, and Dzokchen (rdzogs chen).
On outer (phyi), inner (nang), and secret (gsang) offering in Tibetan Buddhism, see Huntington (2018), 154–155.
The Kālacakra presents a syncretism of the Vaibhāṣika atomic theory, Sāṃkya theory of puruṣa and prakṛti, and Jaina and Purāṇic cosmographies. See Wallace (2001), 56–108. On Kālacakra theory of space particles, see Dalai Lama Tenzin (2017), 319–321. The main contribution of the tantra is however the astronomical calculations that inform the calendar and understandings of space and time. Henning notes that there is no “Kālacakra astrology” per se but that the tantra accepts the general principles of Indian astrology and corrects a few points.
The configuration of the four continents in the Abhidharmakośa and other early Buddhist sources are represented as the four islands of Jambhudvīpa in the Kālacakra cosmology. For a detailed discussion of these differences by a Tibetan scholar, see Khedrup Norsang Gyatso’s (1423–1513) commentary chapter titled, “Resolving Contradictions Between Kālacakra and Abhidharma Cosmology” in Gyatso 2004, 145–157.
One of the eighteen domains of knowledge (rig gnas chung ba bcho brgyad). van der Kuijp 2016, 56 cites the Vinayavibhaṅga as an early source. The distinction between astronomy and astrology was not historically made in Tibet as it was in Europe during the late Renaissance. The Tibetan term, skar rtsis, means literally “calculation of the stars,” and the term for an astronomer or astrologer, rtsis pa, literally is “one who calculates” or computes the celestial bodies. van der Kuijp 2016, 55–56 suggests the term rtsis pa was first attested in the fifteenth century for a court astronomer, using the term “bla rtsis pa.” For a history of astronomy and astrology in Tibet, see Snying mo (2018).
As Janet Gyatso detailed in her study on Tibetan medical science, doctors and medical scholars in the sixteenth and seventeenth century Tibet confronted empirical claims. In particular, Tibetan scholars wrestled with how the ontological status of the subtle body that is described in Buddhist tantra and medical models was represented and explained empirically. Rhetorical moves in these historical debates are strikingly parallel to those made by the Dalai Lama in Mind and Life Dialogues when confronted with scientific materialism. See Gyatso (2015).
Johann Schreck (1576–1630), Giacomo Rho (1583–1638), and later Johann Adam von Bell and Ferdinand Verbiest (1623–1688) were among these Jesuit astronomer-priests in China.
“rgya dkar gyi mu stegs pa’i rtsis pa thang shi dbang gis ji ltar ‘ong bar lung bstan pa ltar byung.” See also Karmay (2014), 294. Yongdan (2017), 94, 3 suggests that “rgya dkar,” the Tibetan word for “India,” here is a printing mistake and that this should be “rgya ser,” which would refer to him European. Tuttle (2006), 84, 76 suggests that the reference to being of “India” might refer to the fact that most missionaries during this period came from their port in the Portuguese colony of Goa in India.
See Mingxin and Chen (1987) for a study of the Chinese translations of European scientific works on astronomy in early eighteenth century.
The full title is, ‘Jam dbyangs bde ldan rgyal pos mdzad pa’i rgya rtsis bod skad du bsgyur ba (n.d.), The Tibetan Translation of Chinese Astrology Compiled by Mañjuśrī, King of the Heavens (i.e. the Kangxi Emperor). For historical discussion on the translation of the Rgya rtsis chen mo into Tibetan, see ‘Byams pa ‘phrin las (1998), 556–567. For a translation and study of the printer’s colophon of the Rgya rtsis chen mo, see Jo (2016), 352–360 and for a discussion of the historical translation and contents, see Yongdan 2015, 182–188.
“sgra gcan rgyu ba de yis zla ba nyi ma dag ni ‘dzin par ‘gyur zhes so.” See also Henning (2007), 95.
Desideri writes, “From the cosmology as described in the Tibetans’ books, one is led to the obvious conclusion that the ancient people and pagans of Hindustan, from who the Tibetans took most of their books, had adopted in its entirety, or nearly so, the system propounded and explained by the fifth-century Alexandrian author Cosmas the Egyptian.” This is a reference to Cosmas otherwise known as Indicopleustes, a Greek merchant, theologian, and geographer from Alexandria in Egypt who sailed the Indian Ocean on voyages from Ethiopia to India and Ceylon. His treatise, Christian Topography, describes one of the earliest world maps and a scripturally based cosmology with the Earth as a plateau at the bottom of the universe. Cosmas famously denied the sphericity of the Earth and proposed a theological cosmology of a flat Earth. See Kominko (2013), 52.
The exact location is not specified, but the event likely occurred while Śākyaśrī was traveling with his entourage to Khro pu Monastery from Chu mig during the year that he arrived in Tibet, which was 1204. While no date is given, the previous page states, “kha che paṇ chen bod du byon pa’i rjes la ‘brangs” discussing Sakya Paṇḍita’s visit to meet the master upon his arrival in Tibet.
“yang skabs shig tu sa skyar paN chen pas dus ‘di la nyi ma gzas ‘dzin zhes yi ge btab/ rje pas de skad mi gsung ba zhu da lan cis kyang mi ‘dzin pa ‘dug zhus pas/ paN chung rnams kyang thugs khrel gyi rnam pa mdzad/ de nas paN chen chos rje pa dang bcas pa shang sreg shing du phebs/ nyi ma gza’ ‘dzin dus btab bzhin ma byung bas/ paN chen pa na re/ de tsam dag khong rang shes te stod ya gi na dge bsnyen rgan po cig nga rgyal yod gsungs so.” A special thanks to Leonard van der Kuijp for pointing out this reference. Four years later in 1208, Śākyaśrī presided over the ordination ceremony of Sakya Paṇḍita. See van der Kuijp (1994), 612.
On Tibetan observation of eclipses, see Henning (2007), 137–139.
A kyā Blo bzang bstan pa’i rgyal mtshan.
“‘jig rten chags pa’i sa ‘di zlum po la nyi zla gza’ skar phal che ba zhig steng ‘og tu ‘khor zhing ‘gro bas bgrod tshul gyi dbang gis nyi ma zla bas sgrib pa dang zla ba sa gzhi nyi ma rnams thad drang por bab pa na sa gzhi’i grib ma zla lba phog pa’i dbang gis zla ‘dzin byung ba yin zer.” See Yongdan (2018), 6.
Astronomic theories by Tycho Brahe and Johannes Kepler (1571–1630) were predominant in China during this period.
To decipher exact dates for the historical Buddha, Tibetan astronomers worked to synchronize Buddhist chronology (brtan rtsis) with calendrical astronomy calculations using a method of “backward calculation” (yar log gi rtsis). For a detailed study of the mathematics, see Jo (2016), 37–76. For a discussion related to the Buddha’s dates using the Rgya rtsis chen mo, see van der Kuijp (2016), 57–64.
Aris notes that the text discusses the intriguing view that England, because it is an island with extreme wealth, could be the original Mountain of Jewels or Mt. Meru at the center of the cosmos. Jikmé Lingpa however discounts this theory because, as Aris puts it, “in England precious substances are extracted not from the flanks of any mountain but rather from the space in between mountains.” See Aris (1994), 8 and 10.
By this, I mean to include Tibetan geography writing that draws from geographies outside Tibet which would be found in autobiographical and travel journals. For instance, early exemplars of this kind of writing include those by Chag Lo tsā ba Chos rje dpal (1197–1263), Man lung Gu ru Bsod nams dpal (b. 1239), and O rgyan pa Rin chen dpal (1229–1309).
Smad sog Ba dzra blo bzang sbyin pa. Yongdan (2017), 102–103 refers to him as a nineteenth-century astronomer, Thub bstan Rgya mtsho. His other alias is Tshangs sras bzhad pa’i blo gros. The phrase he writes is “‘jig rten sa gzhi zlum po ‘di’i.” His work is dedicated to the calendar based on the astronomy in the Rgya rtsis chen mo.
The phrase that he uses is “rigs pa gsar pa’i lugs,” the tradition of new reasoning. See also Lopez (2008), 113.
For a Tibetan discussion of modern astral science from the Egyptians to astronomer Claudius Ptolemy to Galileo Galilei to the Apollo 11 moon landing to NASA’s launch of the Hubble Telescope, see Tshul ‘khrims Blo gros (2011), 56–68. And on Tibetan approaches to the Buddhism and science dialogue, see Sheehy forthcoming.
See 2015 Mind & Life XXX – Perception, Concepts and Self: Contemporary Scientific and Buddhist Perspectives. Historically, the idea of a “Buddhist science” is problematic namely because Buddhism is an amalgamation of influences specific to the culture in which it was transplanted, so knowledge systems that Buddhism subsumed were never exclusively Buddhist.
Translation of volume 01 is Dalai Lama 2017.
For translation, see Dalai Lama Tenzin (2017), 7–9.
Science is defined in the introduction to refer to “a body of knowledge about the world that is obtained through a particular method and that is verifiable by anyone repeating the same experiment.” And more broadly to “refer also to a systematic method of investigation.” Historically, however, even in the context of modern science, observation and experimentation have not triumphed over the authority of existent paradigms of the scientific tradition.
The first photograph of the Earth from space was taken on October 24, 1946, from a rocket that was launched from New Mexico.
For further discussion, see Lopez (2008), 63–64 and Lopez (2006), 18. Elsewhere the Dalai Lama does not concede that the Buddha was wrong about cosmology but rather shifts to question whether Vasubhandu, the author of the Abhidharmakośa, actually believed in the Buddhist cosmology that he presented. See Dalai Lama Tenzin (2005), 80.
Gould’s chapter “Columbus and the Flat Earth: An Example of the Fallacy of Warfare Between Science and Religion” strikes particular chords with the present discussion.
What Dunne calls, a “Buddhist ‘crank’.” See Dunne (2015), 339.
See Kuhn (2012) (reprint 1962) on the concept of paradigm presented by Kuhn’s structure of scientific revolutions which has helped shape discourse in the modern history of science.
References
Tibetan Sources
Blo bzang Bstan pa’i rgyal mtshan. (2000). Ma hā tsi na’i byang mtha’ rgyal khab chen po pe’ kying gtso bor gyur pa’i byang phyogs kyi yul ‘khor la ‘os pa’i dus sbyor gyi rnam bzhag padmo’i tshal rab ‘byed pa’i nyi ma gzhon nu, 1–-56. In A kyā pa’i sku rin po che blo bzang bstan pa’i rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po’i zhal snga nas kyi bka’ ‘bum. Sku ‘bum byams pa gling par khang.
Blo bzang Dpal ldan bstan pa’i nyi ma, Paṇ chen VII. (2002). Btsan po no min han sprul pa’i sku’i dogs lan. In‘Jig rten khams kyi rnam bzhag mdor bsdus su bkod pa dus mun sel ba’i nyin byed, 345–-351. Edited by Chak ris Skal bzang thogs med. Lan kru’u: Kan su’i mi rigs dpe skrun khang.
Blo bzang ‘phrin las, Dung dkar. (2004). Rig gnas dang tshan rig gi slob gso gong ‘phel ‘gro bzhin pa’i bod ljongs gsar pa. In Mkhas dbang dung dkar blo bzang ‘phrin las kyi gsung ‘bum, 7 (pp. 244–254). Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang.
Blo bzang sbyin pa, Smad sog Ba dzra. (2003). Ma hā’a tsi na’i rang lugs ‘ba’ zhig las ongs ba’i lda nyi sgrib rtsis ‘jam dbyangs ‘dzum zer. In Blab rang dus ‘khor ba smad sog ba dzra gyi gsung ‘bum (pp. 95–116). Lanzhou: Kan su’i mi rigs dpe skrun khang.
Bstan ‘dzin Rgya mtsho, Ta lai Bla ma. (2012). Rdul snyed ‘jig rten: Tshan rig dang sems don gyi sgo nas nga tsho’i ‘dzam gling la zhabs zhu ji ltar sgrub thub. Dharamsala: Bod kyi dpe mdzod khang.
Bstan ‘dzin Rgya mtsho, Ta lai Bla ma. (2014). Nang pa’i tshan rig dang lta grub kun btus, 1–-2. Compiled by the Kuntue Committee. New Delhi: Norbu Graphics.
‘Byams pa ‘phrin las. (1998). Bod kyi rtsis rig kun ‘dus chen mo. Chengdu: Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang.
Dge ‘dun chos ‘phel. (1938). ‘Jig rten ril mo’am zlum po. In Yul phyogs so soʾi gsar ‘gyur me long, 10, 11. Kālimpong: G. Tharchin. Electronic reproduction 2009. New York: Columbia University Libraries.
Dge ‘dun chos ‘phel. (2009). Rgyal khams rig pas bskor ba’i gtam rgyud gser gyi thang ma. In In Mkhas dbang dge ‘dun chos ‘phel gyi gsung ‘bum. Sichuan: Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang.
Dpa’ bo Gtsug lag ‘phreng ba. (2004). Dpal dus kyi ‘khor lo’i man ngag rtsis kyi bstan bcos kun las btus pa chen po’i rgyas ‘grel rin po che’i gter mdzod. In Rtsis rig (pp. 57–533). Xining: Mtsho sngon mi rigs dpe skrun khang.
Grags pa Rgyal mtshan. (2006). Arga’i cho ga dang rab tu gnas pa don gsal. In In Sa skya bka’ ‘bum, 9. Kathmandu: Sachen International.
‘Jam dbyangs bde ldan rgyal po mdzad pa’i rgya rtsis bod skad du bsgyur ba. (n.d.) Tibetan woodblock print. BDRC #: W8LS15753.
‘Jam dpal Chos kyi bstan ‘dzin ‘phrin las. (2012). ‘Dzam gling chen po’i rgyas bshad snod bcud kun gsal me long. In‘Dzam gling spyi bshad dang rgyas bshad. Lhasa: Bod ljongs bod yig dpe skrun khang.
Ngag dbang Blo bzang rgya mtsho. (2009). Za hor gyi bande ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho’i ‘di snang ‘khrul pa’i rol rtsed rtogs brjod kyi tshul du bkod pa du ka’u la’i gos bzang. In Rgyal dbang lnga pa ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho’i gsung ‘bum . Beijing: Krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang.
Ngag dbang Kun dga’ bsod nams. (1986). Sa skya gdung rabs ngo mtshar bang mdzod. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang.
Phrin las Nor bu. (2009). Gdung sras phrin las nor bu’i gsung ‘bum. Hong Kong: Hong kong gyi ling dpe skrun tshad yod kung si par du bskrun te bkram.
Sum pa Mkhan po Ye shes dpal ‘byor. (2012). ‘Dzam gling spyi bshad ngo mtshar gtam snyan. In‘Dzam gling spyi bshad dang rgyas bshad. Lhasa: Bod ljongs bod yig dpe skrun khang.
Snying mo Rgyal. (2018). Bod kyi skar rtsis rig pa byung ‘phel gyi lo rgyus. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang.
Tshul ‘khrims Blo gros. (2011). ‘Dzam gling shar nub kyi gna’ deng rig pa’i rnam gzhag dang ‘dzam gling skad yig gi ske ‘chi’i lo rgyus. Lanzhou: Kan su’i mi rigs dpe skrun khang.
Yul phyogs so soʾi gsar ‘’gyur me long. (1938). Kālimpong: G. Tharchin. Digital image made available via Columbia University Libraries Electronic Books. New York: Columbia University.
Secondary Sources
Aris, M. (1994). India and the British according to a Tibetan text of the later eighteenth century. In P. Kvaerne (Ed.), Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the 6th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies (pp. 7–15). Oslo: Institute for Comparative Research in Human Culture.
Cabezon, J. (2003). Buddhism and science: On the nature of the dialogue. In B. Alan Wallace (Ed.), Buddhism and Science: Breaking New Ground. New York: Columbia University Press.
Dalai Lama, T. G. (1994). The way to freedom. San Francisco: Harper San Francisco.
Dalai Lama, T. G. (1999). Consciousness at the crossroads: Conversations with the Dalai Lama on brain science and Buddhism. Edited by Houshmand, Zara and Robert B. Livingston and B. Alan Wallace. Ithaca: Snowlion Publications.
Dalai Lama, T. G. (2005). The universe in a single atom: The convergence of science and spirituality. New York: Morgan Road.
Dalai Lama, T. G. (2017). Science and philosophy in the Indian Buddhist classics: Volume 1, The Physical World. Edited by Thupten Jinpa. Boston: Wisdom Publications.
Dietz, S. (1992). Cosmogony as presented in Tibetan historical literature and its sources. In Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the 5th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies (pp. 435–438). Narita: Naritasan Shinshoji.
Dunne, J. (2015). What is inner science? In In Vimalakīrti’s House: A Festchrift in Honor of Robert A. F. Thurman on the Occasion of his 70th Birthday (pp. 317–341). New York: American Institute of Buddhist Studies.
Elman, B. A. (2005). On their own terms: science in China, 1500–-1900. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Everett, D. (2016). Dark matter of the mind: The culturally articulated unconscious. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ganeri, J. (2013). Well-ordered science and Indian epistemic cultures: Toward a polycentered history of science. In Isis, 104, 348–359.
Gillies, D. (2015). Why Did the Copernican revolution take place in Europe rather than China? English version of the Italian published in Scienze e filosofia da Copernico a Darwin, Caracci, 29-65. Edited by Paolo Pecere. Il libro della nature.
Goble, A. E. (2011). Confluences of medicine in medieval Japan: Buddhist healing, Chinese knowledge, Islamic formulas, and wounds of war. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
Goleman, D. (2003). Destructive emotions: How can we overcome them? A Scientific dialogue with the Dalai Lama. New York: Bantam Books.
Gould, S. J. (1999). Rocks of ages: science and religion in the fullness of life. New York: The Random House.
Gumilev L. N. and B. I. Kuznetsov. (1970). “Two traditions of ancient tibetan cartography”. In Soviet Geography: Review and Translation, 11(7), 565–579.
Gyatso, K. N. (2004). Ornament of stainless light: An exposition of the Kālacakra Tantra. Translated by Gavin Kilty. Boston: Wisdom Publications.
Gyatso, J. (2015). Being human in a Buddhist World: Intellectual history of medicine in early modern Tibet. New York: Columbia University Press.
Harrison, P. (2015). The territories of science and religion. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Henning, E. (2007). Kālacakra and the Tibetan Calendar. New York: The American Institute of Buddhist Studies at Columbia University in New York.
Huntington, E. (2018). Creating the universe: depictions of the cosmos in Himalayan Buddhism. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Jampaiyang, C. (2018). Ornament of Abhidharma: A commentary on Vasubhandu’s Abhidharmakośa. Translated by Ian James Coghlan. Boston: Wisdom Publications.
Jinpa, T. (2003). Science as an ally or a rival philosophy? Tibetan Buddhist thinkers’ engagement with modern science. In B. Alan Wallace (Ed.), Buddhism and Science: Breaking New Ground. New York: Columbia University Press.
Jinpa, T. (2010). Buddhism and science: How far can the dialogue proceed? In Zygon, 45(4), 781–882.
Jinpa, T., & Lopez, D. S. (Eds.). (trans)(2014). Grains of gold: Tales of a cosmopolitan traveler. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Jo, S. (2016). Topics on the history of Tibetan astronomy with a focus on background knowledge of eclipse calculations in the 18th century. Dissertation. The Committee on Inner Asian and Altaic Studies, Harvard University.
Kapstein, M. T. (2011). Just where in jambudvīpa are we? New geographical knowledge and old cosmological schemes in eighteenth-century Tibet. In Forms of knowledge in early modern Asia: Explorations in the intellectual history of India and Tibet, 1500–-1800 (pp. 336–364). Durham: Duke University Press.
Karmay, S. G. (2014). The illusive play: The autobiography of the fifth Dalai Lama. Chicago: Serinda Publications.
Knorr Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: How science makes knowledge. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Kominko, M. (2013). The world of Kosmas: Illustrated Byzantine Codices of the Christian topography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kongtrul, L. T. J. (1994). The torch of certainty. Boston: Shambhala Publications.
Kongtrul, L. T. J. (1995). Myriad worlds: Buddhist cosmology in Abhidharma, Kālacakra, and Dzog-chen. Translated by the International Translation Committee. Ithaca: Snow Lion Publications.
Kuhn, T. S. (2012 (reprint, 1962)). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
van der Kuijp, L. W. J. (1994). Review: On the Lives of Śākyaśrībhadra (?-?1225). Journal of the American Oriental Society, 114(4), 599–616.
van der Kuijp, L. W. J. (2016). From Chongzhen lishu 崇禎曆書 to Tengri-yin udq-a and Rgya rtsis chen mo. In H. Diemberger, K. Ehrhard, & P. F. Kornicki (Eds.), Tibetan printing: comparison, continuities, and change (pp. 51–71). Leiden: Brill Publications.
Lopez, D. S. (2006). The Madman’s middle way: reflections on reality of the Tibetan Monk Gendun Chopel. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lopez, D. S. (2008). Buddhism and science — A guide for the perplexed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lopez, D. S. (2010). The future of the Buddhist past: A response to readers. Zygon, 45(4), 883–896.
Lopez, D. S. and Thupten Jinpa (trans.). 2017. Dispelling the darkness: A Jesuit’s quest for the soul of Tibet. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Martin, D. (1994). Tibet at the center: A historical study of some Tibetan geographical conceptions based on two types of country lists found in bon histories. In P. Kvaerne (Ed.), Tibetan Studies (p. 1). Oslo: Institute for Comparative Research in Human Culture.
Martin, D. (1999). ’Ol-mo-lung-ring, the Original Holy Place. In T. Huber (Ed.), Sacred spaces and powerful places. Dharamsala: Library of Tibetan Works and Archives.
McMahan, D. L. (2008). The making of Buddhist modernism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
McMahan, D. L. (2017). How meditation works: Theorizing the role of cultural context in Buddhist contemplative practices. In D. L. McMahan & E. Braun (Eds.), Meditation, Buddhism, and Science (pp. 21–46). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mingxin, H. and Chen, J. (1987). Zangli de yuanli yu Shijian: ju Shangzhuote Sangre yu Mayang Suobajiacan zangwen yuan zhu fanyi he yanjiu. Bod kyi rtsi rig gi go don dang lag len. Beijing: Minorities Publishing House.
Natarajan, P. (2016). Mapping the heavens: The radical scientific ideas that reveal the cosmos. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Norbu, T. (2006). A cascading waterfall of nectar. Boston: Shambhala Publications.
Park, K. (2011). Observation in the Margins, 500-1500. In L. Daston & E. Lunbeck (Eds.), Histories of scientific observation. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Patrul, R. (1998). Words of my perfect teacher. Translated by the Padmakara Translation Group. Boston: Shambhala Publications.
Pollock, S. (2011). The languages of science in early modern India. In Forms of knowledge in early modern Asia: explorations in the intellectual history of India and Tibet, 1500–-1800 (pp. 19–48). Durham: Duke University Press.
Presti, D. E. (Ed.). (2015). Mind beyond brain: Buddhism, science, and the paranormal. New York: Columbia University Press.
Sadakata, A. (2009). Buddhist cosmology: Philosophy and origins. Tokyo: Kōsei Publishing.
Schaeffer, Kurtis R. 2005. “The Fifth Dalai Lama Ngawang Lopsang Gyatso,” 64-91. In the Dalai Lamas: A visual history. Edited by Martin Brauen. Ethnographic Museum of the University of Zürich and Serinda Publications.
Sheehy, M. R. (2018). The science of meditation, beyond the brain: A review of Meditation, Buddhism, and Science. By D. L. McMahan & E. Braun (Eds.). In Buddhadharma: The Practitioner’s Quarterly, fall (pp. 111–115).
Sheehy, M. R. (2019). The dharma of the perfect eon: Dolpopa Sherab Gyaltsen's hermeneutics of time and the Jonang doxography of zhentong madhyamaka.. In M. R. Sheehy & K.-D. Mathes (Eds.), The other emptiness: Rethinking the Zhentong Buddhist discourse in Tibet (pp. 65–93). Albany: State University of New York Press.
Sheehy, M. R. 2020. The problem with calling Buddhism a science: A review of Why I am not a Buddhist. By Evan Thompson. In Buddhadharma: The Practitioner’s Quarterly, spring (pp. 115–119).
Sheehy, M. R. (forthcoming 2021). Tibetan Buddhism and the new science of rebirth. In H. Gayley (Ed.), Voices from Larung Gar: Shaping Tibetan Buddhism for the twenty-first century. Boulder: Shambhala Publications.
Sweet, M. (trans.). 2010. Mission to Tibet: The extraordinary eighteenth-century account of father Ippolito Desideri, S.J. Boston: Wisdom Publications.
Thompson, E. (2016). Empiricism and the very idea of Buddhist Science. Remarks at the Toshide Numata Book Award Symposium. University of California: Berkeley. Unpublished transcript.
Thompson, E. (2017). Looping effects and the cognitive science of mindfulness meditation. In D. L. McMahan & E. Braun (Eds.), Meditation, Buddhism, and Science (pp. 47–61). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Thompson, E. (2020). Why I am not a Buddhist. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Tuttle, G. (2006). A Tibetan Buddhist mission to the east: The fifth Dalai Lama’s journey to Beijing 1652-1653. In B. J. Cuevas & K. R. Schaeffer (Eds.), Power, politics, and the reinvention of tradition: Tibet in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Proceedings of the Tenth Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies (pp. 65–87). Leiden: Brill Publications.
Wallace, V. (2001). The Inner Kālacakra: A Buddhist tantric view of the individual. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Whitehead, A. N. (1967 (reprint, 1925). Science and the modern world. New York: Free Press.
Wylie, T. V. (1958). Dating the Tibetan geography ‘Dzam gling rgyas bshad through its description of the Western Hemisphere. Central Asiatic Journal, 4, 200–311.
Wylie, T. V. (1962). The geography of Tibet according to the ‘Dzam-gling rgyas-bshad. SOR 25. Rome: Instituto Italiano per il Medio ed. Estremo Oriente.
Yongdan, L. (2011). Tibet charts the world: The Bstan po no mon han’s detailed description of the world, an early major scientific work in Tibet. In G. Tuttle (Ed.), Mapping the Modern in Tibet (pp. 73–134). International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies.
Yongdan, L. (2015). The translation of European astronomical works into Tibetan in the early eighteenth century. In Inner Asia (17, pp. 175–198). Brill.
Yongdan, L. (2017). A scholarly imprint: How tibetan astronomers brought Jesuit astronomy to Tibet. East Asian Science, Technology, and Medicine, 45, 91–117.
Yongdan, L. (2018). An exploration of a Tibetan Lama’s study of the Pythagorean theorem in the mid-18th century. In Études Mongoles et Sibériennes, Centrasiatiques et Tibétaines, 49, 1–16.
Zajonc, A. (Ed.). (2004). The new physics and cosmology: Dialogues with the Dalai Lama. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sheehy, M.R. The Offering of Mount Meru: Contexts of Buddhist Cosmology in the History of Science in Tibet. DHARM 3, 319–348 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42240-020-00089-5
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42240-020-00089-5