On July 6-8, 2012, the Institute of Mongolian Studies, Buddhology and Tibetology of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Ulan-Ude) hosted the international scientific conference "Science and Buddhism". The conference was attended by scientists from China, India, Mongolia, the USA, Italy, as well as from Russian research centers: Moscow, St. Petersburg, Novosibirsk, Yekaterinburg, Samara, Kyzyl, Chita, Ulan-Ude. The conference was devoted to discussing topical issues of modern Buddhology, opportunities for cross-cultural dialogue and interaction, exploring the institutions, values and practices of modern Buddhism, its interaction with modern society and science.

In the opening speech of the Director of IMBT SB RAS, corresponding member B. V. Bazarov noted that one of the important scientific directions of the Institute and the entire Buryat Scientific Center is the study of the intellectual potential of Buddhism and the possibilities of using Buddhist knowledge for the benefit of modern humanity. The conference continued to discuss this topic, in particular understanding the world experience of interaction between modern science and Buddhism.

In the greeting of the Minister of Education and Science of the Republic of Buryatia A.V. Damdinov, the close cooperation of scientific institutions and universities of the republic with domestic and foreign Buddhist centers for the study of cultural and educational experience, the dissemination of medical knowledge, and joint scientific research was noted.

The speech of Khambo Lama D. Ayushev called on scientists to study more actively the knowledge accumulated by many generations of Buddhist scientists and help them become the property of the people.

The conference was organized in three sections: "Philosophical and theoretical-methodological aspects of studying Buddhism, its educational system and practices"; "Buddhism and modern society","Tibetan medicine in modern society".

In the report of the Venerable Lobsan Norbu Shastri (Sarnath, India)" Buddhism and modern science: the possibility of a fruitful dialogue", it was noted that Buddhism and Western science have many common points of contact, similar methodological approaches, and similar conclusions, which gives solid grounds for conducting a dialogue between Buddhists and (Western) scientists. At the same time, in a number of areas (epistemology, logic, psychology), Buddhism may have gone even further than modern Western science, and it could have learned a lot from Buddhism.

The report of P. P. Dashinimayeva (Ulan-Ude) considered some aspects of consciousness and cognition in the context of Buddhist philosophy. Comparing the achievements of modern neurolinguistics and the concepts of consciousness and language developed by Buddhist philosophers, the speaker comes to the conclusion that the progressive evolution of the external side of life does not indicate the progress of the thinking and cognitive ability of Homo sapiens, since the discoveries or concepts of modern linguistics and philosophy of language confirm the corresponding theses of Buddhist philosophy developed 1500-2000 years ago therefore, only the subject himself, who has the unidirectional concentration algorithm in his hands, can prevent mental decline, improve mental function, and improve his cognitive abilities.

The report of S. Y. Lepekhov (Ulan-Ude) compared the values of Buddhist civilization and the ideals of rationality in modern science. Noting that science and the ideals of rationality are considered in the concept of "open society" by K. Popper as the foundations of modern Western civilization and guarantors of democratic development, the speaker points out that they were also not alien to Buddhists. The report, in particular, provides a comparative analysis of the achievements of Buddhist and Western logic.

The report of V. G. Lysenko (Moscow) discussed the possibility of analyzing Buddhist atomism in the light of modern concepts of "emerging properties" and "qualia" and concluded that these concepts can legitimately become elements of our metalanguage in relation to Buddhism. Of course, they will be filled with slightly different meanings, but this will only serve to enrich them, the speaker believes. Thanks to their application, we will be able to see in this article

aspects of the foreign cultural tradition that are also of interest in the perspective of our modern research.

In the report "Physics and Eastern philosophy" by O. Lhagwa, C. Sainsanaa, L. Erdenchimeg (all - Ulaanbaatar), the question was raised that the concepts and progress of quantum physics and synergetics allow us to find out the scientific basis of the mystical philosophy of the East and Buddhism. Under the influence of the revolutionary ideas of quantum physics, the classical paradigm of science has undergone a significant change in accordance with the recognition of the nature of the inseparability of any, not only microscopic, but also macroscopic, systems, including the universe. The development of special and general relativity established the interconvertibility of space and time, as well as mass and energy, which laid the foundation for understanding the idea that the state of enlightenment is reduced to an absolute point without extension, or an absolute present occurs. In the light of synergetics, the integrity of the system due to randomness is also in general agreement with the Buddhist idea that "the distinctions between body and consciousness, subject and object disappear... each item is connected to the rest of the items... not only in terms of space, but also in terms of time."

N. V. Pupysheva's report (Ulan-Ude) "Search for a new paradigm: Buddhism and quantum physics" focuses not so much on the similarity as on the difference of approaches. The main difference between the principles of Buddhist and Western epistemology lies in the sphere of relations between the subject and the object of knowledge. Buddhism is characterized by the subject orientation of knowledge, and Western thought is characterized by the object orientation, in accordance with which such different models of the world characteristic of these cultures were formed. Thus, the Buddhist and Western models of the world differ from each other in their point of reference. This point of reference is a kind of conceptual "gene" that manifests itself in all the sciences that have developed on its basis.

The watershed between Buddhist teaching and the search for truth of Western scientists, the speaker believes, remains the attitude to morality. For Western physics, this concept is beyond its competence. For Buddhist teaching, morality is the basis, ignoring which throws a person into the abyss of a bad fate and deprives knowledge of meaning. Knowledge is power, but science, without a moral basis, can turn into an "evil force". Whether a common language will be found between Western science and Buddhism largely depends on whether Western scientists will be able to change the starting point, i.e., the picture of the world in their own heads, and on the moral vector of knowledge. According to the speaker, Buddhism is open for dialogue with everyone.

I. S. Urbanaeva (Ulan-Ude) in her report "Science and Buddhism: history of the meeting, comparative studies and prospects of interaction" suggested that the failures of Buddhologists in their attempts to understand Buddhism are explained, among other things, by the fact that they approach it mainly as a religion. At the same time, those stereotypical religious studies ideas that have been formed in relation to other religions are projected onto Buddhism, from which Buddhism radically differs both in the method of theoretical justification of its soteriology and in the nature of its saving mission. According to the speaker, for understanding the specifics of Buddhism, including as a religion, as well as its role in the modern world, it is more fruitful to look at it from the side of science and philosophy. The report discusses in detail the results of interaction between Buddhist and Western scientists in various fields of scientific and philosophical knowledge in joint projects and scientific conferences.

In the report of L. B. Chetyrova (Samara), an attempt is made to consider the philosophy of Merab Mamardashvili as a synthesis of Western and Eastern philosophy. Mamardashvili not only freely introduces many terms of Eastern philosophy, but, according to the speaker, also uses Buddhist methodology and Buddhist approaches when addressing the central problem of consciousness for him, and also "reads" the works of famous European philosophers through them, discarding the usual worldview schemes. Thus, he rejects the stable stereotype that has developed in European philosophy and denies any influence of Eastern philosophy.

Section "Philosophical and theoretical-methodological aspects of studying Buddhism, its educational system and practices".

The report of A. A. Bazarov (Ulan-Ude) considered the main works used in scholastic monastic education in Buryatia in the XIX-XX centuries. Based on a study of the publishing activities of Buryat monasteries, the author comes to the conclusion that during the period under review in Buryatia, one can find interest in such a section from the class system-

It is based on a specific Buddhist monastic education, such as Vinaya (monastic discipline). This interest is mainly theoretical in nature. The practical side of the problem of monastic discipline and monastic rules in Buryat datsans is fixed in the specific charters of monasteries. An example is the monastic charter of the Tsugol datsan "Treasury of three Teachings", written by Arya Pandita Agvan-lobsan-zhaltsan-balsanbo. These charters basically copied the charters of Tibetan and Mongolian monasteries and were not changed in the future. Nevertheless, during the decline of monastic life, the "renewal movement" of the first quarter of the XX century, associated with the names of S. Tsydenov, A. Dorzhiev, the statutes could be edited.

In his report, Jampa Samten (Sarnath, India) tried to investigate the historical development of Buddhism based on a comparative textual study of the Mahaparinirvanasutra. The author came to the conclusion that Mahayana and Theravada can be considered as parallel doctrinal lines already in early Buddhism.

D. S. Zhamsueva (Ulan-Ude) described the main directions of scientific research of the famous Russian ethnographer K. M. Gerasimova. The polemical charge of many of the scientist's articles was aimed at overcoming the "Soviet" dogmatism in the scientific methodology of ethnographic disciplines (including in his own research) and was caused by the need to understand unresolved problems, understand and evaluate new approaches to the theoretical understanding of factual material. At the same time, K. M. Gerasimova's rejection of anti-historicism, a priori speculative constructions in ethnographic science, which in the current Russian reality "flourish" against the background of the devaluation of the Marxist theory of the historical process, is also obvious.

S. V. Kapranov's report (Kiev, Ukraine) discussed the interpretation of Buddhism in the works of M. Eliade. The Buddhist fragments of various works of Eliade form a complete (though incomplete) and fairly systematic picture that fits into his general theory of religion. This indicates a serious interest in the teachings of the Buddha.

Ch. Ts. Tsyrenov's report (Ulan-Ude) was devoted to the peculiarities of translation and interpretation of ancient Chinese texts (based on the material of early Sinobudd texts). In the process of understanding and translating early Sinobuddhi texts, certain costs are unavoidable, with objective reasons of a linguistic and cross-cultural nature. These include multiple translation variations, various scribal errors, and the interpretation of contradictory allusions and allegories, hidden quotations, and references. You can partially compensate for these costs by using the translator's explanatory comments and additional translation options. Reconstruction of the terminological apparatus is not always possible in full. Apparently, the difficulty of reconstructing the terminological apparatus of Chinese Buddhism at an early stage of its development is explained by the fact that this teaching was at the stage of formation and formation of Chinese philosophical equivalents for the concepts of Indo-Buddhist culture, as well as the development of its own Sinobuddian concepts and terms.

L. E. Yangutov (Ulan-Ude) addressed the problem of teaching Buddhism in higher educational institutions in Russia and considered the advantages and disadvantages of existing curricula and manuals on this topic. The authors noted the works that, in the author's opinion, give an adequate presentation of the basics of Buddhist teaching.

Section "Buddhism and Modern Society".

In the report of D. D. Amogolonova (Ulan-Ude) " Buddhist revival in the context of socio-cultural modernization (based on the material of modern Buryatia)" It was noted that the importance of religious identification in the period of ethnic demobilization increases significantly. Even if the majority of Buryats are poorly acquainted with Buddhist dogma and with their mostly ascriptive attitude to religion and conditional faith, Buddhist institutions perform the functions of social self-identification. Due to the belief that Buddhism is a national value, people who sincerely believe and are indifferent to religion equally feel that they belong to the ethno - cultural (and political) community - "Buryats". In this sense, Buddhism is assigned an instrumental role in the construction of the Buryat ethnosphere, which includes all the variety of ethnically colored practices that manifest belonging to a group (ethnic identity). At the same time, many features of traditional religious culture in everyday life acquire the character of regional values and humanitarian and geographical images of their own space, and therefore the syncretism of religious feelings that has developed over the period of long-term intercultural interaction of Rus-

It does not weaken, but on the contrary, becomes more pronounced. This strengthens interethnic trust and builds tolerance.

P. K. Varnavsky (Ulan-Ude) in the report " Dialogue of science and religion in the context of globalization: in search of mutual support? (on the example of traditional confessions in the Republic of Buryatia) " analyzed the causes and conditions that contribute to the convergence of science and religion. Science (humanities), losing solid ground under its feet due to the spread of a postmodern worldview that denies the possibility of any objective knowledge and postulates its fundamental relativity, tries to answer this challenge by appealing to the religious and philosophical tradition. Under these conditions, a religion (traditional), losing its flock and losing competition to its"heretic" opponents, uses science (and / or education), trying to preserve its legitimacy by appropriating part of the symbolic capital of the latter. However, while the long-term strategic goals of Orthodoxy and Buddhism are similar, there is a significant difference in their tactics. Without claiming the laurels of scientific knowledge, but putting religion above science, the Orthodox Church seeks to strengthen its position in society through the education system. Buddhists, on the other hand, do not seek the clericalization of school education, advocating the preservation of its secular character and advocating that students themselves can decide whether to study the basics of a particular religion or not. But unlike the Orthodox, they quite actively insist that Buddhism has a lot in common with modern science, and if we cannot talk about their full-fledged synthesis, then, in any case, we can expect close and profitable interaction. Despite such a marked difference in the actions of the Orthodox and Buddhist Churches, the results that they can achieve in the future will be approximately the same. Both of them will strengthen their cultural, social, and political positions in society by mastering and partially appropriating institutions that were previously at the monopoly disposal of those who represented exclusively the forces of secularization.

Thus, P. K. Varnavsky concludes, political practice determines the similarity of positions of traditional confessions, which, in turn, leads to the similarity of their reactions and behavior in society. This similarity is manifested primarily in the fact that religious institutions in search of ways of development are guided by "external" factors-the state and/or the resource of ethnicity, and not by the potential of religion as such.

The report of A. S. Kolesnikov (St. Petersburg) is devoted to some aspects of the influence of Buddhism on the culture of Russia at the turn of the XIX-XX centuries. In particular, the speaker elaborated on the views and activities of Prince E. E. Ukhtomsky, whom he considers an ideologist of "proto-Eurasianism". E. E. Ukhtomsky, unlike his teacher B. S. Solovyov, focused on the issue of the dialogue of cultures not so much on Christian values as on the principle of mutual respect and interpenetration of cultures. This contributed to the formation of more favorable conditions in Russia for the development of intercultural and interethnic dialogue, awareness of its cultural and civilizational mission, as well as influenced the country's foreign policy and contributed to the successful development of Russian Oriental studies and Buddhology during this period.

V. N. Rudenko (Yekaterinburg) discusses the institute of drawing lots from the Golden Urn and its place in political processes in Tibet. The Golden Urn Draw is one of the oldest public law institutions in China, designed to determine the reincarnation of spiritual leaders of Tibetan Buddhism. It has more than two hundred years of history and currently gives a certain paradox to the public law system of the PRC: it simultaneously operates legal norms based on rationalism and irrationalism, on atheism and theism. The institution of drawing lots from the Golden Urn is controversial in Buddhism. While official Chinese authorities claim to strictly follow two centuries of historical tradition and religious ritual, supporters of the Dalai Lama XIV do not accept the draw from the Golden Urn. For them, the draw from the Golden Urn is only an episode in the history of Sino-Tibetan relations. They made their own identification of the reincarnation of Panchen Lama X according to the custom of predictions with the drawing of flour balls. Panchen Lama XI in May 1995. Gedun Choki Nyima was announced and was immediately arrested by the Chinese authorities and is still in custody. Dalai Lama XIV and his entourage are trying to remove the procedure for identifying Tulkus from the sphere of public law in China and return to the religious tradition. Therefore, the question of the significance of the institution of the Golden Urn is the subject of uncompromising polemics between the disputing parties. In this dispute, the institution of drawing lots from the Golden Urn has religious and geostrategic significance and is extremely politicized. It is obvious that its revival for the Chinese side is a long way off-

the final stage in solving the problem of the successor of the Dalai Lama XIV. Against the background of statements by the head of Tibetan Buddhism about the possibility of his reincarnation in one of the free countries of the world or about stopping the reincarnation of the Dalai Lamas in general, China has created a legal mechanism for identifying the Dalai Lama and continuing the existing line of his reincarnations. However, further use of the Golden Urn institute may deepen the schism among the Buddhist clergy.

In the report of S. L. Kuzmin (Moscow), the problem of the status of Tibet was considered within the framework of the concept of "mentor-patron" (Tib. choi-yon), which was formed in Tibet in the middle of the IX-beginning of the XIII century. and legitimized the scheme of relations that developed between the Qing emperors and the highest Tibetan lamas. The speaker polemics with some of the conclusions of V. N. Rudenko: "It is difficult to call the use of the Golden Urn as a legal mechanism for state intervention in the" appointment " of the tulku in modern China a legal norm based on rationalism and irrationalism, atheism and religious mysticism." But he agrees with the opinion of the previous speaker that the drawing of lots from the Golden Urn symbolizes Chinese sovereignty over the spiritual practice of Tibetan Buddhism. In general, according to S. L. Kuzmin, the relations of the Qing emperors with the highest hierarchs of Tibetan Buddhism cannot be interpreted in terms of modern law. Tibet was not invaded by the Qing Empire or peacefully incorporated into it. The status of one country as part of another implies mutual consent. In this case, this was not the case. Tibet was not declared a part of the Empire and remained a separate state dependent on it. This dependence has allowed and still allows contradictory interpretations. Contradictions are removed only when this relationship is explained by the "mentor-protector" relationship between the Dalai Lamas and the Qing Buddhist emperors. Instead of these relations, Great Britain recognized Qing suzerainty, and then on August 31, 1907, the "Convention between Russia and Great Britain on the Affairs of Persia, Afghanistan and Tibet". This was done "over the head" of the Tibetans, who did not recognize such suzerainty. By the time of the collapse of the Qing Empire in 1912, when it was ruled by regents rather than emperors, the latter began to turn their former relations into vassalage and implement plans to turn Tibet into a Qing province. The mentor-patron relationship was destroyed. As a result, Tibet declared its independence, which it enjoyed until the invasion of the PRC in the 1950s.

Section "Tibetan Medicine in modern society".

In the report, see A review of the achievements of the staff of the Institute of General and Experimental Biology of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences over the past few decades in the field of studying literature sources on Tibetan medicine, deciphering and identifying the names of diseases, methods and means of treatment, deciphering and identifying medicinal raw materials, their chemical composition and pharmacotherapeutic effectiveness was made.

In the joint report, Ch. Nida (Rome, Italy) and SEE Naidanova (Ulan-Ude) examined the traditions of Tibetan medicine in the modern world. The currently accumulated rich scientific material opens up prospects for comprehensive experimental research. The current trend towards integration in modern medicine and the official recognition of the expediency of using traditional medicine methods open up the prospect of wider use of Tibetan medicine, its safe and effective methods and tools in everyday medical practice, and in preserving public health.

N. D. Bolsokhoeva's report (Ulan-Ude) was devoted to the history of the organization of Tibetan manba datsans (medical datsans) and the development of classical medical education in Tibet. The first medical college based in the Tibetan cultural space was located in Sman lung in the Kongpo district south of Lhasa. Its construction was carried out in the VIII century on the initiative of the Tibetan king Tisrondev Tsang (khri srong Ide btsan, years of reign 755-797). Traditionally, medicine in Tibet enjoyed strong support from the ruling circles and developed in the historical context of the Tibetan state. The fact that the head of state actively participated in the creation of the first medical college indicates a certain interest and favor of official circles in the dissemination of medical knowledge in the country. Medicine was considered an integral part of the multi-faceted Tibetan culture and successfully developed within the centralized Tibetan state. The report examined the most pressing issues of Tibetan medical education on the example of manba datsans in Menlung, Chagpori and the Institute of Tibetan Medicine and Astrology in Lhasa. These educational centers were largely the prototype for the establishment of medical schools in Tibet and the introduction of educational programs. Principles of academic medical education developed by an outstanding Tibetan thinker-

The Tibetan manba datsans were recognized as the same for all Tibetan manba datsans by the scholar-encyclopedist Desi Sangye Gyatso. They continue to exist today with minor changes and additions due to the richness of original provisions and ideas in the educational medical literature.

Topic of the report: V. V. Boronoev (Ulan-Ude) automation of pulse diagnostics of human functional state according to the canons of Tibetan medicine. Currently, quite active work is being carried out aimed at objectifying and automating pulse diagnostics of the body's condition in such countries as China, Japan, South Korea, France, the USA, Russia, etc. The research focuses on the search for technical solutions, primarily the development of heart rate sensors. Comprehensive research on objectification and automation of pulse diagnostics of a person's functional state according to the canons of Tibetan medicine was started at the Pulse Diagnostics Laboratory (LPD) Department of Physical Problems of the Buryat Scientific Center of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences in 1983 under the supervision of Professor Ch. Ts. Tsydypov. A distinctive feature of the approach to the problem under study in LPD is its pronounced interdisciplinary nature, which, along with the physical interpretation of the main provisions of pulse diagnostics and the creation of an intelligent information and computational diagnostic complex, implies a wider range of research in the field of source studies and the theory of Tibetan medicine. This approach to the problem has determined three main areas of research in the laboratory: 1) information and expert diagnostic systems of Tibetan medicine; 2) objectification and automation of pulse diagnostics; 3) objectification of biologically active points (BAT) of Tibetan-Mongolian medicine and development of an electropuncture diagnostic method based on them. The ultimate goal of the research is to create an intelligent information and computational diagnostic complex of Tibetan medicine, which is a synthesis of an automated pulse diagnostic complex (APDC) with an expert diagnostic system. The main purpose of the complex is to simulate the thinking and actions of a Tibetan doctor during the entire cycle of the treatment process: diagnosis nosology-treatment. The results of the research made it possible to substantiate the possibility of an instrumental method for diagnosing diseases by pulse. According to the terms of reference compiled on the basis of translations and analysis of primary sources, an automated pulse diagnostic complex was developed and manufactured that meets the requirements of pulse diagnostics in Tibetan medicine. The prospect of using the APDC is outlined.

The participants of the conference noted the fruitfulness of joint discussion of current scientific, religious, social and cultural problems by scientists and ministers of worship. Since the first such conference, both the number of participants and the subject matter of the issues studied have significantly expanded. The participants of the meeting called for preserving cultural heritage, increasing tolerance in interfaith and interethnic relations, and strengthening effective interaction between the religious, cultural and scientific community.

Permanent link to this publication: