Skip to main content

A skeptic responds with an explanation of how my 2 arahant relics became 4


A skeptic responds with an explanation 

of how my 2 arahant relics became 4.

(the following is a condensed version of his response)

Crystalline minerals naturally occur from cremation. You can in fact pre-order the color of these crystals by manipulating the temperature of the fire or other conditions in which cremation takes place. 

Buddhists are among the few groups of people who actively look for them, therefore they find them and assume that they somehow have a monopoly on the "miracle." 

Scientists have found a few unflattering facts about them: E.g. Virtually all the ones that are ascribed to ancient saints and are tested, are shown to be much more recent than the presumed history, and often from animals (e.g. dogs, parrots, and in one interesting case, donkey), rather than from humans. 

Crystalline minerals are known to naturally split off, "grow," change in color, etc. They in fact do so even in relatively inert environments.

I'm familiar with those Pure Land stories and other accounts from different traditions. Once again, sobering facts can be marshaled if those accounts are scrutinized. I personally know of a few "miracle" tales that are clearly fabricated, or given to contradictory testimonies by different people.

I am militantly against reductionist materialism. But I also know how sloppily people appeal to the supernatural, being deeply aware of the historical and psychological mechanisms with which these accounts are formed, perpetuated, and exaggerated.

 My first instinct is informed by the Buddha's attitude toward relics and assumed deva's involvement (in teleporting new guest relics)--that they are not spiritually significant.

When I studied psychology at school, we've done a fair share of experiments on confirmation bias--how we over-estimate the "hits" we have with our instincts, on how our instincts "checked out." I'm not asserting whether your own encounter is like this one or the other.

Here are videos on how to “grow” relics and other crystalline structure. As relics absorb moisture in air, they “multiply.” Here's one where they accelerated the process by pouring water onto them:


This one shows how the “growth” can be of a different color than the original:


The following is from "Scanning electron microscope observations of heat-treated human bone," by Holden JL, Phakey PP, Clement JG., Department of Physics, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia:
"This report describes the heat-induced alterations in human bone tissue observed using scanning electron microscopy and microradiography. Femoral bone samples were taken from persons varying in age from 1 year to 97 years at the time of their death. The bone was heated at selected temperatures in the range 200-1600 degrees C for periods of 2, 12, 18 and 24 h. Macroscopically, changes in colour occurred, together with some shrinkage, fracturing and distortion. However, dramatic changes occurred at the ultrastructural level. These changes included the progressive combustion of the organic portion of the bone tissue up to 400 degrees C and recrystallisation of the bone mineral beginning at 600 degrees C. Recrystallisation produced a range of crystal morphologies: spherical, hexagonal, platelets, rosettes and irregular. Crystal growth occurred at temperatures > 600 degrees C. Sintering led to fusion of crystals at 1000 degrees C. This process continued up to temperatures > 1400 degrees C. At 1600 degrees C the bone mineral melted. On heating, the morphology of crystals formed, and the ultrastructural changes which occurred, were found to be related to the age of the deceased, the temperature to which the bone had been heated and the duration of heating. These results are of importance to forensic scientists, arson investigators and paleoarcheologists in their investigation of cremated human bones, particularly when only fragments of bone are available, in order to determine something of the life history of the deceased and the circumstances surrounding the death."


...And just half-jokingly, no offense intended: next time, ask the deva to drop something other than a material of the same crystalline structure, so to obviate any doubt that the additional pieces were simply natural growth. I'd say a good chunk of gold nugget would be really good. If they can sneak a molecularly similar material into the container, why don't they sneak in something entirely different, as to best a skeptic's expected queries?


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Advice to younger meditators on jhāna, sex, porn, masturbation

Someone asked: Is porn considered harmful sexual.activity? I don't have a sex life because I don't have a partner and I don't wish to engage in casual sex so I use porn to quench the biological urge to orgasm. I can't see that's it's harmful because nobody is being forced into it. The actors are all paid well and claim to enjoy it etc. The only harm I can see is that it's so accessible these days on smart devices and so children may access it but I believe that this is the parents responsibility to not allow unsupervised use of devices etc. Views? Frankk response: In another thread, you asked about pleasant sensations and jhāna.  I'm guessing you're young, so here's some important advice you won't get from suttas   if you're serious about jhāna.  (since monastics are already celibate by rule)   If you want to attain stable and higher jhānas,   celibacy and noble silence to the best of your ability are the feedstock and prerequiste to tha

SN 48.40 Ven. Thanissaro comments on Ven. Sunyo's analysis

This was Ven. Sunyo's analysis of SN 48.40: https://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/2024/05/exciting-news-honest-ebt-scholars-like.html And here is Ven. Thanissaro's response to that analysis: I think there’s a better way to tackle the issue of SN 48:40 than by appealing to the oldest layers of commentarial literature. That way is to point out that SN 48:40, as we have it, doesn’t pass the test in DN 16 for determining what’s genuine Dhamma and what’s not. There the standard is, not the authority of the person who’s claiming to report the Buddha’s teachings, but whether the teachings he’s reporting are actually in accordance with the principles of the Dhamma that you know. So the simple fact that those who have passed the Buddha’s teachings down to us say that a particular passage is what the Buddha actually taught is not sufficient grounds for accepting it. In the case of the jhānas—the point at issue here— we have to take as our guide the standard formula for the jhānas, a

1min. video: Dalai Lama kissing boy and asking him to suck his tongue

To give more context, this is a public event,  * everyone knows cameras are rolling  *  it's a room full of children * the boy's mom is standing off camera a few feet away watching all of this * the boy initiated contact, he had already had a hug with Dalai Lama earlier and then asked Dalai Lama for another hug which triggered this segment  17 min. video showing what happened before that 1 min. clip and after, with some explanation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bT0qey5Ts78 16min talk from Ajahn Acalo with his thoughts on Dalai Lama kissing boy, relevance to Bhikkhu monastic code, sexual predators in religion in general, and how celibate monastics deal with sexual energy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK2m0TcUib0 The child's comments about the incident in a filmed interview later https://www.marca.com/en/lifestyle/world-news/2023/04/18/643eba5d46163ffc078b457c.html The child: It's a great experience It was amazing to meet His Holiness and I think it's a great ex