From Piya Tan
Every Wednesday at 7.15 pm (TMC sutta study
with guided meditation): see end of email.
Free
Buddhism
American author, philosopher, neuroscientist, and
founder CEO of Project Reason, Sam Harris, in his thoughtful article, “Killing
the Buddha” (2006), writes:
“There is a reason
that we don’t talk about ‘Christian physics’ or ‘Muslim algebra,’ though the Christians invented physics as we know it, and the
Muslims invented algebra. Today, anyone who emphasizes the Christian roots of
physics or the Muslim roots of algebra would stand convicted of not
understanding these disciplines at all. In the same way, once we develop a
scientific account of the contemplative path, it will utterly transcend its
religious associations. Once such a conceptual revolution has taken place,
speaking of ‘Buddhist’ meditation will be synonymous with a failure to
assimilate the changes that have occurred in our understanding of the human
mind.”[1]
Harris champions what is becoming a viable and valuable
reality today -- “contemplative science” -- that is how Buddhism should be
accepted today, shorn of all its religiosity. I fully agree with Harris that
such a contemplative science would bring great and broad benefits to the world
as physics and algebra (just to mention the examples he has given) have done.
However, let us explore deeper the significance of taking Buddhism as such a
“contemplative science.”
In his best-seller, The End of Faith:
Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason (2004), Harris criticizes
organized religion, the clash between religious faith and rational thought, and
the problems of tolerance towards religious fundamentalism. In 2006, he
published the book Letter to a Christian Nation, a response to
criticisms of The End of Faith. This was followed by The Moral
Landscape (2010), on the science of morality, then his long-form essay
Lying (2011), and the short book Free Will (2012).
Harris
is a well-known contemporary critic of religion and proponent of scientific
skepticism and the "New Atheism." If we see history as a human struggle against
the abuses and domination of religion (especially the God-religions and churched
Buddhism), and the rise of scientific knowledge and the free world, then Sam
Harris is one of its key proponents. It is on account of the wisdom and courage
of people like Sam Harris, over the centuries, that we today are freer and
wiser to reject religious evangelism, dogmas and superstitions, for more
meaningful and liberated ways of life that respect human dignity and life as a
whole.
Most of us would generally agree with Harris
that “it is as yet undetermined what it means to be human, because every facet
of our culture -- and even our biology itself -- remains open to innovation and
insight” (2006). However, those of us familiar with the early Buddhist training
in moral virtue would know that to be human is to respect life, live it as
happily and freely as possible, valuing truthfulness, and keeping the mind
truly calm and clear.[2]
Not everyone, however, knows the workings of
the mind, even our own. But we know enough, Harris declares, “to say that the
God of Abraham is not only unworthy of the immensity of creation; he is
unworthy even of man... We need to understand how the mind can transform
itself from a mere reservoir of greed, hatred, and delusion into an instrument
of wisdom and compassion. Students of the Buddha are very well placed to further
our understanding on this front, but the religion of Buddhism currently stands
in their way.” (2006)
Some might argue that the Buddhist
tradition is the richest source of contemplative wisdom that any civilization
has produced. In a world that has long been terrorized by fratricidal Sky-God
religions, the ascendance of Buddhism would surely be a welcome development. But
this will not happen. There is no reason whatsoever to think that Buddhism can
successfully compete with the relentless evangelizing of Christianity and Islam.
Nor should it try to, claims Harris. The reason is simple: it is a
self-destructive process, and we should avoid it at all cost.
It is true
that many exponents of Buddhism, most notably the Dalai Lama, observes Harris,
have been remarkably willing to enrich, even constrain, their world-view through
dialogue with modern science. “But the fact that the Dalai Lama regularly meets
with Western scientists to discuss the nature of the mind does not mean that
Buddhism, or Tibetan Buddhism, or even the Dalai Lama’s own lineage, is
uncontaminated by religious dogmatism.”
Indeed, charges Harris, there
are ideas in Buddhism that are “so incredible as to render the dogma of the
virgin birth [of Christianity] plausible by comparison.” Even among Western
Buddhists, there are college-educated men and women who apparently believe that
Guru Rinpoche [Padmasambhava] was actually born from a lotus! Many
Buddhists even believe that merit or good can be transferred (what about demerit
and bad?). This is not the spiritual breakthrough that civilization has been
waiting for all these many centuries, laments Harris.
The Buddha’s
wisdom is today trapped within the religion of Buddhism. Even in the West, where
scientists and Buddhist contemplatives now collaborate in exploring the effects
of meditation on the brain and on mental health, Buddhism remains “an utterly
parochial concern.” While it may be true enough to say (as many Buddhists
allege) that “Buddhism is not a religion,” most Buddhists worldwide simply
practise it as such, in naive, petitionary, and superstitious ways as in any
other religion. To speak of “Buddhism,” as such, is to give a false impression
of the Buddha’s teachings, and will do little, even nothing at all, to educate
or benefit civilization in our millennium.
The
Buddhism that we often see around us is mostly based on blind faith, like any
other religion. To become a genuine Buddhist, following the Buddha’s teaching,
then, is to accept Buddhism on sufficient evidence of wholesome benefits. [3]
The best way to do this is to be a Buddhist contemplative or meditator. Here, in
many respects, claims Harris, Buddhism is very much like science. We start by
avoiding certain negative behaviours and cultivating positive ones (moral
virtue), then using attention in a prescribed way (meditation), we go on to
enjoy their benefits (wisdom and mental well-being). Buddhism is thus
scientific insofar as we are willing and able to question Buddhism itself, try
it for ourselves and enjoy its healthy and liberating benefits.
Ours
is a shrinking world where a significant event in one location is within minutes
known and seen in other parts. We are so well connected today that our actions
are likely to have consequences well beyond our society and time. What such a
world most needs right now is a means of embracing the whole human race as our
common moral community.
For this, we need an open, non-tribal,
non-sectarian way of talking about the full range of human experiences and
aspirations. “We need a discourse on ethics and spirituality that is every bit
as unconstrained by dogma and cultural prejudice as the discourse of science is.
What we need, in fact, is a contemplative science, a modern approach to
exploring the furthest reaches of psychological well-being.” It goes without
saying, argues Harris, that we will not develop such a science by attempting to
spread “American Buddhism,” or “Western Buddhism,” or “Engaged Buddhism.” Or,
any kind of prefixed Buddhism, we might add, because the prefix somehow
suppresses, even supplants, what it prefixes.
If Buddhist methodology
(moral ethics and meditation) uncovers genuine truths about the mind and the
world -- truths like impermanence, unsatisfactoriness and non-self -- these
universal truths are not in the least “Buddhist” or religious in any way. (The
word “Buddhist” was never used by the Buddha or Buddhist scripture.) Most
informed meditators realize this, but most Buddhists do not. In clinging to
“Buddhism,” we miss what it is all really about.
Yet, only after being truly Buddhist first, can we let go of
Buddhism.[4] It’s like using a raft or boat to cross a
dangerous river: once we’ve crossed over, we do not need
the vessel any more. Meantime we need to board the boat[5]
and keep rowing in the right and safe direction.[6]
R292 Revisioning
Buddhism 74
[an occasional re-look at the Buddha’s Example and
Teachings]
Copyright by Piya Tan ©2013 130512 rev
[1] http://www.samharris.org/site/full_text/killing-the-buddha/ .
[2] See Piya Tan “The Five
Precepts Are Universal” (R49): http://dharmafarer.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/R49-08-0924-Five-precepts-are-universal-5.3.pd f
[3] Essentially, this means that
we should seek to understand and accept the facts (1) that all things (incl our
selves) are impermanent, (2) that we are capable of self-salvation or
self-awakening, and (3) that any effort to find solace of salvation outside of
ourselves (such as through beliefs, rituals, or vows) is superstition. See Piya
Tan, “Superstition” (R251), 2012: http://dharmafarer.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/R251-120801-Superstition-87.pdf , “Breaking free” (R286), 2013: http://dharmafarer.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/R286-130403-Breaking-free-RB71_rev.pdf
[4] See Piya Tan, “You have to be
somebody before you can be nobody,” R128, 2010: http://dharmafarer.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/RB14-Somebody-and-nobody1.pdf
[5] On the significance of “boarding
the boat” (okkanti), see eg the (Anicca) Cakkhu Sutta (S 25.1)
& SD 16.7 (1.6.3.2): http://dharmafarer.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/16.7-Anicca-Cakkhu-S-s25.1-piya.pdf .
[6] See esp “the parable of the
raft” in Alagaddupama Sutta (M 22), SD 3.13: http://dharmafarer.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/3.13-Alagaddupama-S-m22-piya.pdf
Personally I do believe that science will eventually progress to the point that the truths in Buddhism will simply become broadly accepted scientific facts. Not holding my breath though.