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.