According to Rupert Sheldrake, noted English biochemist and plant physiologist, DNA doesn't not explain how differentiation is possible or in other words, it hasn't been proven that the genes found in DNA contain the blueprint for morphological development (this is a sad day for the Genome Project!). Extending this further, the shaping or informing force of things, including memory, is not in the material or organic things themselves but in the invisible fields which surround them which Sheldrake termed, Morphogeneic fields, a term which Sheldrake borrowed from older sources. According to Gregorio Morales,
"these morphogenic fields represent modalities of structures, rules, behaviors, ideas and tendencies, each one informing particular aspects of reality...one of these morphogeneic fields consists of the accumulated experiences of humankind. As a result, any changes or novel actions initially collide with strong sources of resistance; however, as these changes become adopted by an increasing number of people, learning them becomes easier. For this reason, morphogeneic fields, at least as they relate to humanity (and other superior animals), are ever-changing and in a process of continuous transformation. Each action exists within the context of a morphogenic field, incorporating itself into the whole while simultaneously changing the composite" (Ed. Caro & Murphy, The World of Quantum Culture, p. 6).
Sheldrake's theory is not far from Buddhism's idea of karma or "storehouse of consciousness" (âlayavijñâna) which is an ocean-like spiritual medium from which our perception of a phenomenal world arises. It also seems that Buddhism's notion of "thought-made body", that is, a manomayakaya is closer to Sheldrake's idea of a morphogeneic field. It is noteworthy that one of the tenets of the Lokottaravada sect was that Buddhas have only manomaya bodies or forms. This body was said not to be deficient in any sense organ. Connected with this is this passage from the Lankavatara Sutra.
Thatness (tathata), Emptiness (shunyata), Reality-limit (bhuta-koti), Nirvana, Dharma Substrata (dharmadhatu) are like the multiple bodies made of spirit (manomaya-kaya)—these are taught as being synonymous (prayaya)." (Bold added for emphasis.)
Sheldrake's theory helps to give credibility to spirituality (at least my brand) and certainly to an aspect of Buddhism pop Buddhists don't wish to hear or learn about, in particular those Western Buddhists who follow pragmatic or agnostic Buddhism.
Also of interest, Sheldrake suggests that the laws of the universe are more like fixed habits—not absolute. This would seem to tie in with Buddhism's notion that all things are Mind-only which is far more malleable than fixed laws-only. Things like crystals, for example, are such by strong habits not by some kind of invisible law or rule. In fact, they can change. The melting point of compounds over time can and do rise. Aspirin is a good example. The melting point from 1914 to 1994 has gone up 14 degrees Centigrade according to Sheldrake.
Rupert Sheldrake’s ideas rub the fur of some of his peers the wrong way who see themselves as the guardians of materialism and Sheldrake as the barbarian at the gate. In September 1981 an editorial appeared in the scientific journal Nature entitled “A book for burning?” which was a review of Sheldrake’s newly published book, A New Science of Life (1981). Unlike with physics in which paradigm shifts happen in somewhat of a civilized manner, evidently the biological sciences have little or no tolerance for paradigm wars or shifts.
Comments