<< Click to Display Table of Contents >> Navigation:  Dhamma and Science > Origin of Life > Origin of Life – There is No Traceable Origin

July 10, 2019; revised July 11, 2019; June 21,2022; rewritten November 22, 2024

Why Is This Issue Important?

1. The question, “What is the origin of life?” is very relevant to UNDERSTANDING Buddha Dhamma. It is also a critical issue in science and religion, where they propose two extreme views.

▪Most scientists believe a “Big Bang” (spontaneous expansion of space) created our universe about 14 billion years ago, and stars and planets gradually evolved. Furthermore, current scientific theories say that life first formed in a primitive state (single-cell entities) and evolved into more complex life forms. They also say that humans came into existence less than five hundred thousand years ago.

▪The “creation hypothesis” is the foundation of Abrahamic religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam) and Hinduism. Here, a Creator created the material world and also life, specifically human life. [The term “Abrahamic religions” refers to the monotheistic religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, which are named after the prophet Abraham.]

▪Science rejects the creation hypothesis because it is incompatible with the Principle of Causality, which says nothing can come into existence without a cause(s). If a Creator created life, how did that Creator come into existence? However, the compatibility of a “Big Bang” origin with causality is also unclear. Scientists say they understand the physics of it after a time known as the Planck Time (10−43 seconds.)  They do not understand what happened before that. In other words, they also do not have a complete theory! (see the video in the References.)

2. The Buddha taught that the physical world in a given section of the universe is created by the collective mind power of uncountable living beings who live in that region. An outline is discussed in ”Buddhism and Evolution – Aggañña Sutta (DN 27).”

▪In addition, we create our own future lives, as described by Uppatti Paṭicca Samuppāda. See “Uppatti Paṭicca Samuppāda (How We Create Our Own Rebirths).”

▪Paṭicca Samuppāda cycle starts with “avijjā paccayā saṅkhāra”. As long as there is avijjā (no comprehension of the Four Noble Truths), one is bound to do (abhi)saṅkhāra — and generate kamma —  there will be bhava and jāti (i.e., rebirth).

▪All types of births (jāti) lead to suffering, without exception; some existences have more suffering than others. The rebirth process is filled with unimaginable suffering.

▪This cycle ends ONLY WHEN one’s avijjā is removed by comprehending Buddha’s teachings embedded in Paṭicca Samuppāda.

▪Based on that knowledge, one voluntarily gives up cravings[/attachment] (taṇhā) for existence in this world of 31 realms, which leads to the termination of the Paṭicca Samuppāda process that perpetuates the rebirth process. That is the attainment of Nibbāna or Arahanthood.

▪That summarizes the FOUNDATION of Buddha Dhamma.

Details of Buddha’s Explanation

3. According to the Buddha, sentient life has no traceable beginning. This is compatible with the principle of causality, which is embedded in Paṭicca Samuppāda; the root cause is avijjā.

▪For example, in the “WebLink: suttacentral: Gaddulabaddha Sutta (SN 22.99),” “Anamataggoyaṃ, bhikkhave, saṁsāro” means “bhikkhus, there is no discernible beginning to the rebirth process.” That means we have been born in most of the 31 realms many times over. Think about that. We were all born in the apāyās, Brahma, and Deva realms many times over in our deep past. See “What Reincarnates? – Concept of a Lifestream.”

▪The above verse appears in all suttās in the “WebLink: suttacentral: Anamatagga Saṁyutta (Starting at SN 15)” of the Saṁyutta Nikāya. Each sutta gives a simile to illustrate how long we have been in this rebirth process and how much suffering we have endured. It is a good idea to read them.

▪The “WebLink: suttacentral: Manussacutiniraya Sutta (SN 56. 102)” says, “..those who die as humans (not the physical death, but cuti) and are reborn as humans are few, while those who die as humans and are reborn in hell are many ….” For details, see “Cuti and Maraṇa – Related to Bhava and Jāti.”

▪However, Buddha’s message is NOT depressing. Whether a Buddha exists in the world or not, suffering exists. This suffering is real, but there is a way to overcome it. The way is the Noble Eightfold Path. That is the uplifting message.

4. As many may have observed, learning the deeper aspects of Buddha Dhamma takes effort and considerable time for study and contemplation.

▪Without understanding how long the saṁsāric journey (rebirth process) is and how much suffering is encountered in most births, one is unlikely to generate the MOTIVATION to study Buddha Dhamma. Most people only turn to Buddha Dhamma when they experience harsh suffering (an ailment or depression) and seek relief. But the best time to learn is when one is healthy and has a sharp mind, and I hope I can motivate those people, too, with this series.

▪In the “WebLink: suttacentral: Upanisa Sutta (SN 12.23),” the Buddha discussed the proximate causes/conditions (upanisa) for various factors leading to Nibbāna. The key is understanding how various births (jāti) arise and how ALL those births give rise to dukkha (suffering). When one comprehends the Four Noble Truths, one understands how dukkha arises (and that it can be stopped from arising); that leads to saddhā (faith). Starting there, one can follow the Noble Eightfold Path and attain Nibbāna! That is the essence of the sutta, even though it may not be apparent from the translation in the link.

▪That understanding cannot be reached until one can see that there has not been a beginning to this rebirth process, and we all have suffered so much in every birth. Regarding perpetual suffering, please read the “WebLink: suttacentral: Paṭhama Niraya Sagga Sutta (AN 10.211).” It explains the causes of rebirth in good and bad realms and why most births are in bad/suffering-filled realms.

5. Life has always existed, but planetary systems (like our Solar system) are destroyed periodically and re-formed over long periods of time. See ”Buddhism and Evolution – Aggañña Sutta (DN 27).”

▪This is the only explanation consistent with the Principle of Causality: There is no “first beginning to life.” Life always existed, and it evolves according to the Principle of Causality, which is Paṭicca Samuppāda; see my previous post: “Uppatti Paṭicca Samuppāda (How We Create Our Own Rebirths).”

▪If we go by the Principle of Causality (which is THE basis of modern science), there CAN NOT be an origin of life unless life can start with inert matter.

▪The videos in #9 and #10 below explain that it is NOT POSSIBLE to create EVEN A SINGLE CELL (a fundamental building block of life) in the laboratory, starting with inert matter. If it cannot be made in a laboratory under controlled conditions, it WILL NOT be possible for life to arise in a natural process starting with inert matter.

▪In a newly-formed Earth, the first cells are created by kammic energy. In other words, the “mental energy” in javana cittās is responsible for a “first cell.”

Living Cell – Impossible With Evolution

6. There is an ongoing debate between evolutionists and creationists. Evolutionists believe life evolved into complex entities like humans over billions of years. Furthermore, they think that even the first cell (the building block of all life forms) evolved starting with inert molecules, so evolutionists are also materialists. On the other hand, Creationists believe that a Creator God created life.

▪A few references for both sides can be found at the end of the post.

▪It is to be noted that evolutionists/materialists do not discuss the origin of a cell. They mainly focus on the “evolution of the species,” STARTING WITH a fully functioning cell and progressing into more complex species with more and more cells of complex structure. They speculate that a cell evolved on primitive Earth due to random events, but there is no concrete evidence for that conjecture. For example, Richard Dawkins (a materialist) admits in the reference below, “How long would we have to wait before random chemical events on a planet, random thermal jostling of atoms and molecules, resulted in a self-replicating molecule? Chemists don’t know the answer to this question” (p. 144). That is even before addressing the formation of a DNA molecule inside a living cell.

▪Creationists correctly point out that it is impossible to “create a living cell” via evolution. A living cell is a complex micro-factory, as we discuss below.

▪I agree with the creationists that a cell can’t come into existence “starting with inert molecules” via random events. You can make your decision based on the information below (and the references if you are interested). Of course, we can discuss any issues at the discussion forum.

7. The video in #10 below is by a scientist (Dr. James Tour, a creationist) with a different viewpoint than most other scientists. He proves that life could not have evolved, starting with inert matter. It is too complex to have evolved by natural processes.

▪At the end of the video, Dr. Tour concludes that since life is too complex to evolve, it must have been CREATED by a Creator God. That is the other extreme view.

▪According to Buddha Dhamma, life did not evolve from inert matter, nor was it created by a Creator God. Life has always existed, and it just takes different forms when a given “lifestream” is reborn into a human, animal, Deva, etc. We all have been born in most of the 31 realms in our deep past! As the Earth evolved and the necessary conditions became suitable, cells came into existence via kammic energy.

▪A living cell splits into two to make a new cell; when a baby grows, the number of cells multiplies rapidly. However, a new sentient life can never be created; a given sentient being moves among the 31 realms. See “What Reincarnates? – Concept of a Lifestream” and “31 Realms of Existence.”

Mind Is the Creator of (New Forms of) Life! No Beginning to Life

8. Of course, Dr. Tour is not aware of the extensive and scientific explanation by the Buddha in the Aggañña sutta: Life has ALWAYS existed. A given lifestream (you or I) has existed without a traceable beginning.

▪I have discussed the main points in the Aggañña sutta in ”Buddhism and Evolution – Aggañña Sutta (DN 27)” and “Aggañña Sutta Discussion – Introduction.”

▪We CREATE OUR OWN future lives, as described via Uppatti Paṭicca Samuppāda (which I discussed in “Uppatti Paṭicca Samuppāda (How We Create Our Own Rebirths)”).

How Did the First Living Cell Arise?

9. Here is an introductory video on a living cell. It is a good idea to watch it.

WebLink: Youtube: Introduction to Cells: The Grand Cell Tour

▪As the video notes, all new cells are created by existing cells. An existing cell self-divides into two, and that is how new cells are created.

▪No scientist has ever explained how the first cell arose!

10. A cell is the building block of life. Setting aside a complex life form like a human (made of trillions of different types of cells), science WILL NOT be able to create even a single cell. Individual cells do not come into existence in any living being. Instead, an existing cell divides to make two cells, and those make four new cells. That is how more and more living cells come into existence!

▪Each of our bodies started with just a single cell (zygote), and it became alive only when a gandhabba (or paṭisandhi viññāṇa) “descended to the womb” and merged with that single cell. Cell division led to the current physical body with trillions of cells; see “Buddhist Explanations of Conception, Abortion, and Contraception.”

▪No scientist has been able to create even a primitive single cell. Cloning experiments deal only with existing cells; see “Cloning and Gandhabba.”

▪Dr. Tour explains that a living cell is very complex and like a miniature factory. He does an excellent job of explaining.

WebLink: Youtube: James Tour: The Mystery of the Origin of Life

Summary

1. Science and major religions propose two opposing hypotheses for the origin of life.

▪Materialist scientists propose that the universe came into existence from a “Big Bang” some 14 billion years ago, evolved gradually to produce stars and planets, and eventually led to the emergence of conscious beings.

▪Creationists say such a process is impossible (especially the emergence of living cells and consciousness.) They propose that a Creator God created the physical universe and its living beings.

2. The Buddha taught that the physical environment (a group of planetary systems) was created by the collective “mind power” of countless living beings in the pabhassara Brahma realm for billions of years.

▪He also taught that a sentient being cannot be created. All sentient beings alive today have been sentient beings forever, i.e., a beginning to sentient life cannot be discerned.

▪A sentient being keeps moving among the 31 realms until attaining Nibbāna or Arahanthood.

References

For evolution:

1. Richard Dawkins, “The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe without Design” (2015).

2. Jerry A. Coyne, “Why Evolution is True” (2010).

(Note that both these and other books/research papers do not provide ANY evidence for the evolution of a cell.)

3. The following video provides a summary of the current understanding of the proposed Big Bang origin of the universe:

WebLink: Youtube: Brian Cox - What Was There Before The Big Bang?

 

For creation:

4. Stephen Meyer, “Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design” (2010).

5. Richard Behe, “Darwin’s Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution” (2006).

(Of course, the creationists do not have any evidence for creation. They highlight the impossibility of living entities (e.g., a living cell) coming into existence via evolution, as Dr. Tour did in the video of #10 above. Since evolution cannot explain the origin of complex life, they say a Creator must have created life!)

Both evolution and creation are not correct:

6. Thomas Nagel, “Mind & Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False” (2012).

•Professor Nagel (a philosopher) has had no exposure to Buddha Dhamma, but I am very impressed that he concluded that the mind must play a central role.