user7115: I've been doing a lot of scripture reading on consciousness (vijnana, mana, citta, etc) in the pali canon and Mahayana doctrines. Buddha never seemed to accept materialism, or that mind was material, in much of the scripture. 
But as someone who also observes the empirical sciences, I am a bit confused. 
If it is true we are all evolved beings from microscopic organisms over millions of years via cell growth and evolution, would this not verify, then, that consciousness is truly material in origin? That our thinking minds evolved and gradually arose, over the years, from some material and previously mindless thing like a single celled organism? 
Basically, my concern is this: if science is right that consciousness is just chemicals and nerves in the human brain, would a large part of Buddhism be disproved? If consciousness is really just a material reaction, would rebirth be impossible then since the mind would exist as brain functioning and cannot transmigrate? 
Basically, I seemed to have run into a block in my practice. I just have fundamental doubts about everything now. Is there a way we can prove the mind is immaterial or experiences the birth/death cycle...and is not just the evolved brain? 
Thank you to all. 

user295: 
Buddha never seemed to accept materialism, or that mind was material, in much of the scripture.

A being has a material structure and mental structure (Namarupa).

If it is true we are all evolved beings from microscopic organisms over millions of years via cell growth and evolution, would this not verify, then, that consciousness is truly material in origin? That our thinking minds evolved and gradually arose, over the years, from some material and previously mindless thing like a single celled organism?

There are fine material and immaterial planes where thinking is not linked to a material organ like the brain. Thinking is linked heart in the Abhidhamma. In immaterial spheres since there is no materiality thinking cannot be material base.
As for organism in this world, Buddhism does not seems to contradict Darwinism but Buddhism evolution is much more, where the evolution began from celestial beings.


Their body was still coarse and roughly shaped. Thus, after a very long time, the mud-like substance began to be exhausted. Then, mushroom-like plants began to grow so fast that they replaced the mud-like ocean. The creatures began to devour them as well, and they also found it delicious, like sweet honey and milk. Their body hardened more and details began to turn finer.
After another very long time, the mushrooms also began to be exhausted, replaced by cassava or turnip-like plants. They also began to devour them night and day, and thus they began to notice differences amongst them. As the changes of their bodies varied between each other, the concept of difference arose. The concepts of the beautiful and the ugly were born. The beautiful scorns the ugly and they became arrogant because of their appearance.
Then, after the turnips, the earth was grown with rice plants. ...


Source: Aggañña Sutta

Basically, my concern is this: if science is right that consciousness is just chemicals and nerves in the human brain, would a large part of Buddhism be disproved? If consciousness is really just a material reaction, would rebirth be impossible then since the mind would exist as brain functioning and cannot transmigrate?

There is both a physical and non physical part. Science cannot proble not non physical aspects hence. So any scientific proof and disproof is not considering all the facts.

Basically, I seemed to have run into a block in my practice. I just have fundamental doubts about everything now. Is there a way we can prove the mind is immaterial or experiences the birth/death cycle...and is not just the evolved brain?

This you have to mediate. If you develop any higher knowledges then it is possible, but only a few are capable of this.

user8157: Words such as 'material' & 'immaterial' are just translations. It is probably best to not impute our own ideas onto these translations, particularly the idea that 'materiality' & 'immateriality' are independent of eachother.
For example, meditators can enter into the 'immaterial jhanas' where the physical body cannot be felt anymore. However, the mind of the meditator is still dependent upon its physical body.
Regarding the word 'material' or 'rupa', this is pointing to the nature of physical things, such as the physical body. For example, about 'rupa', the Pali scriptures have certain descriptions of 'rupa' that do not pertain to 'consciousness', such as:

And why do you call it 'form' (rupa)? Because it is afflicted (ruppati), thus it is called 'form.' Afflicted with what? With cold & heat & hunger & thirst, with the touch of flies, mosquitoes, wind, sun & reptiles. Because it is afflicted, it is called form. (Khajjaniya Sutta.)
...the body — endowed with form, composed of the four primary elements, born from mother & father, nourished with rice & porridge, subject to inconstancy, rubbing, pressing, dissolution & dispersion — is eaten by crows, vultures, hawks, dogs, hyenas or all sorts of creatures... (Mahanama Sutta.)
The four great elements, bhikkhu, are the cause and condition for the manifestation of the form aggregate. (Puṇṇamā Sutta.)

As for consciousness, it is defined as follows:

And why do you call it 'consciousness'? Because it cognizes, thus it is called consciousness. What does it cognize? It cognizes what is sour, bitter, pungent, sweet, alkaline, non-alkaline, salty & unsalty. Because it cognizes, it is called consciousness. (Khajjaniya Sutta.)

The Pali suttas state in many places that there can be no arising of consciousness independent of a physical body &/or sense organs (e.g. MN 38, SN 22.53, SN 12.67, SN 22.82, etc).
The Pali scriptures do not teach consciousness transmigrates from life to life. Ideas of re-linking or a stream of consciousness were created by later-day Buddhist philosophers & scholars. In MN 38, the bhikkhu Sati was severely reprimanded, admonished & censured by the Lord Buddha for holding such a pernicious viewpoint that consciousness transmigrates.
In conclusion, if science is right that consciousness arises from chemicals and nerves in the human brain, this will not disprove what the Buddha taught but, to the contrary, will affirm what the Buddha taught about consciousness.
However, it will disprove what the majority of Buddhists believe about Buddhism.

Note: Although consciousness may arise from chemicals & nerves, chemicals & nerves are not the operation of consciousness. Chemicals & nerves are 'rupa' where as 'consciousness' is 'knowing' or 'cognition'. Thus, consciousness is not chemicals & nerves, which is why consciousness is immaterial. The immaterial (nama) arises from the material (rupa).

Mind-and-body (nama-rupa) is the cause and condition for the manifestation of the consciousness aggregate. SN 22.82


user10293: What Buddha taught is not the science which layman(non-Ariya) call at present. Science cannot prove everything Buddha taught so far, maybe later. Sansara and the end of the samsara(i.e. Nibbanna) many people tried to find out but in vain. What Buddha said is one have suffering, there is cause of suffering and liberation of suffering. To know this Buddha mentioned something related to mind and matter what most people disputed. Just like making dispute on the footprint of the person whom one want to trace although that same person is just in front of one.
One has already been injured by the spear which should be removed instantly so that one can be saved in time. If one practice insight meditation towards Nibbanna and attaining Bhanga Nana(knowledge of dissolution) no more doubts on these things. If you observe so-called empirical science, particle theory, wave theory , dual theory of light even Einstein find difficulty in understanding, will be clear even by lower Nana of insight meditation. Then why some who attain Nibanna never mention is , it is NOT WORTH MENTIONING. Let alone Nibanna which is the ultimate goal. So what I suggest you is practice meditation if you believe it or not, once you attain these levels mentioned, all doubts will be cancelled.

7115: <p>I've been doing a lot of scripture reading on consciousness (vijnana, mana, citta, etc) in the pali canon and Mahayana doctrines. Buddha never seemed to accept materialism, or that mind was material, in much of the scripture. </p>

<p>But as someone who also observes the empirical sciences, I am a bit confused. </p>

<p>If it is true we are all evolved beings from microscopic organisms over millions of years via cell growth and evolution, would this not verify, then, that consciousness is truly material in origin? That our thinking minds evolved and gradually arose, over the years, from some material and previously mindless thing like a single celled organism? </p>

<p>Basically, my concern is this: if science is right that consciousness is just chemicals and nerves in the human brain, would a large part of Buddhism be disproved? If consciousness is really just a material reaction, would rebirth be impossible then since the mind would exist as brain functioning and cannot transmigrate? </p>

<p>Basically, I seemed to have run into a block in my practice. I just have fundamental doubts about everything now. Is there a way we can prove the mind is immaterial or experiences the birth/death cycle...and is not just the evolved brain? </p>

<p>Thank you to all. </p>
 295: <blockquote>
  <p>Buddha never seemed to accept materialism, or that mind was material, in much of the scripture.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>A being has a material structure and mental structure (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namarupa" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Namarupa</a>).</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>If it is true we are all evolved beings from microscopic organisms over millions of years via cell growth and evolution, would this not verify, then, that consciousness is truly material in origin? That our thinking minds evolved and gradually arose, over the years, from some material and previously mindless thing like a single celled organism?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>There are fine material and immaterial planes where thinking is not linked to a material organ like the brain. Thinking is linked heart in the Abhidhamma. In immaterial spheres since there is no materiality thinking cannot be material base.</p>

<p>As for organism in this world, Buddhism does not seems to contradict Darwinism but Buddhism evolution is much more, where the evolution began from celestial beings.</p>

<blockquote>
  <blockquote>
    <p>Their body was still coarse and roughly shaped. Thus, after a very long time, the mud-like substance began to be exhausted. Then, mushroom-like plants began to grow so fast that they replaced the mud-like ocean. The creatures began to devour them as well, and they also found it delicious, like sweet honey and milk. Their body hardened more and details began to turn finer.</p>
    
    <p>After another very long time, the mushrooms also began to be exhausted, replaced by cassava or turnip-like plants. They also began to devour them night and day, and thus they began to notice differences amongst them. As the changes of their bodies varied between each other, the concept of difference arose. The concepts of the beautiful and the ugly were born. The beautiful scorns the ugly and they became arrogant because of their appearance.</p>
    
    <p>Then, after the turnips, the earth was grown with rice plants. ...</p>
  </blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>Source: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agga%C3%B1%C3%B1a_Sutta" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Aggañña Sutta</a></p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Basically, my concern is this: if science is right that consciousness is just chemicals and nerves in the human brain, would a large part of Buddhism be disproved? If consciousness is really just a material reaction, would rebirth be impossible then since the mind would exist as brain functioning and cannot transmigrate?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>There is both a physical and non physical part. Science cannot proble not non physical aspects hence. So any scientific proof and disproof is not considering all the facts.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Basically, I seemed to have run into a block in my practice. I just have fundamental doubts about everything now. Is there a way we can prove the mind is immaterial or experiences the birth/death cycle...and is not just the evolved brain?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>This you have to mediate. If you develop any higher knowledges then it is possible, but only a few are capable of this.</p>
 8157: <p>Words such as 'material' &amp; 'immaterial' are just translations. It is probably best to not impute our own ideas onto these translations, particularly the idea that 'materiality' &amp; 'immateriality' are independent of eachother.</p>
<p>For example, meditators can enter into the 'immaterial jhanas' where the physical body cannot be felt anymore. However, the mind of the meditator is still dependent upon its physical body.</p>
<p>Regarding the word 'material' or 'rupa', this is pointing to the nature of physical things, such as the physical body. For example, about 'rupa', the Pali scriptures have certain descriptions of 'rupa' that do not pertain to 'consciousness', such as:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><em>And why do you call it 'form' (rupa)? Because it is afflicted (ruppati), thus it is called 'form.' Afflicted with what? With cold &amp; heat &amp; hunger &amp; thirst, with the touch of flies, mosquitoes, wind, sun &amp; reptiles. Because it is afflicted, it is called form. (<a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.079.than.html#fn-1" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Khajjaniya Sutta</a>.)</em></p>
<p><em>...the body — endowed with form, composed of the four primary elements, born from mother &amp; father, nourished with rice &amp; porridge, subject to inconstancy, rubbing, pressing, dissolution &amp; dispersion — is eaten by crows, vultures, hawks, dogs, hyenas or all sorts of creatures... (<a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn55/sn55.021.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Mahanama Sutta</a>.)</em></p>
<p><em>The four great elements, bhikkhu, are the cause and condition for the manifestation of the form aggregate. (<a href="https://suttacentral.net/en/sn22.82" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Puṇṇamā Sutta</a>.)</em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>As for consciousness, it is defined as follows:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><em>And why do you call it 'consciousness'? Because it cognizes, thus it is called consciousness. What does it cognize? It cognizes what is sour, bitter, pungent, sweet, alkaline, non-alkaline, salty &amp; unsalty. Because it cognizes, it is called consciousness. (<a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.079.than.html#fn-1" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Khajjaniya Sutta</a>.)</em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>The Pali suttas state in many places that there can be no arising of consciousness independent of a physical body &amp;/or sense organs (e.g. MN 38, SN 22.53, SN 12.67, SN 22.82, etc).</p>
<p>The Pali scriptures do not teach consciousness transmigrates from life to life. Ideas of re-linking or a stream of consciousness were created by later-day Buddhist philosophers &amp; scholars. In <a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.038.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">MN 38</a>, the bhikkhu Sati was severely reprimanded, admonished &amp; censured by the Lord Buddha for holding such a pernicious viewpoint that consciousness transmigrates.</p>
<p>In conclusion, if science is right that consciousness arises from chemicals and nerves in the human brain, this will not disprove what the Buddha taught but, to the contrary, will affirm what the Buddha taught about consciousness.</p>
<p>However, it will disprove what the majority of Buddhists believe about Buddhism.</p>
<hr />
<p>Note: Although consciousness may arise from chemicals &amp; nerves, chemicals &amp; nerves are not the operation of consciousness. Chemicals &amp; nerves are 'rupa' where as 'consciousness' is 'knowing' or 'cognition'. Thus, consciousness is not chemicals &amp; nerves, which is why consciousness is immaterial. The immaterial (nama) arises from the material (rupa).</p>
<blockquote>
<p><em>Mind-and-body (nama-rupa) is the cause and condition for the manifestation of the consciousness aggregate. SN 22.82</em></p>
</blockquote>
 10293: <p>What Buddha taught is not the science which layman(non-Ariya) call at present. Science cannot prove everything Buddha taught so far, maybe later. Sansara and the end of the samsara(i.e. Nibbanna) many people tried to find out but in vain. What Buddha said is one have suffering, there is cause of suffering and liberation of suffering. To know this Buddha mentioned something related to mind and matter what most people disputed. Just like making dispute on the footprint of the person whom one want to trace although that same person is just in front of one.
One has already been injured by the spear which should be removed instantly so that one can be saved in time. If one practice insight meditation towards Nibbanna and attaining Bhanga Nana(knowledge of dissolution) no more doubts on these things. If you observe so-called empirical science, particle theory, wave theory , dual theory of light even Einstein find difficulty in understanding, will be clear even by lower Nana of insight meditation. Then why some who attain Nibanna never mention is , it is NOT WORTH MENTIONING. Let alone Nibanna which is the ultimate goal. So what I suggest you is practice meditation if you believe it or not, once you attain these levels mentioned, all doubts will be cancelled.</p>
