HIS HOLINESS THE DALAI LAMA told the 90 000 odd Buddhist audience during the Kalachakra-2006, “If science proves some belief of Buddhism wrong then Buddhism will have to change”. This simple sentence impressed me, to the point of developing ever more respect for the philosophy that has stood the test of time ever since it was discovered by a simple Bhikkhu in North India and elaborated by a number of rationalist followers whose only laboratories were under their hats. I am talking about the Buddha Shakyamuni and the many learned philosophers who followed him like Acharya Nagarjuna and Arya Deva. Although I have been taught by my teachers that Buddhism, unlike any other religious tradition in the world, is based solely on the foundation of reason and logic, it is this statement by the foremost authority on Buddhism that has reassured me that Buddhism, like science, is probably a right way towards unraveling the mysteries of the cosmos.
Science, as it advanced over centuries, has shown that following what is known as a scientific method in investigating the unknown can eventually lead one step by step towards the answer, however complex the problem might seem initially. It is perhaps partly in this spirit that Einstein said-“If you ask the right question, nature will give you the right answer”. History clearly demonstrates that science has progressed by questioning the existing theories about the working of the universe and constantly subjecting them through objective analyses and logical tests until they are either disproved and scrapped or refined and cast in better forms. For example, the Geocentric theory (which contends that Earth is the center of the solar system and all other planets including the sun are revolving around it) proposed by Ptolemy and widely accepted during his time was eventually refuted by Coppernicus as being false and came up with his own heliocentric (Sun as the center) version which has been tested to be in conformity with reality. If a theory fails to stand up to logical tests and empirical evidences then it has only one destination-trash bin! This is perhaps the very spirit that drives the vehicle of science steadily uphill the road of time.
When I say Buddhism here, I mean the contemplative tradition originally propounded by the Shakyamuni Buddha and his great rationalist followers like Acharya Nagarjuna and Arya Deva and not much else.
The Buddhism that I had known back in school is probably not the one that I have come to discover lately. Perhaps in school the teachers had to teach them to fulfill the requirements of academic curriculum rather than finding the time to convince the students on the logical correctness of the essential philosophy that makes Buddhism what it is. Or may be we were not mature enough to comprehend the logic. Whatever the reason may be, it has lately come to strike me as something that is radically different from what one tends to believe conventionally as just another interesting faith that enriches the religious diversity of the planet. Let me dwell on this simple sentence that led to my writing this article-If science proves some belief of Buddhism wrong, then Buddhism will have to change.
This might tempt some people to think of Buddhism as a philosophy built on a soft foundation which can be easily shaken every time someone comes up with a view that contradicts its, though I have not seen its essential fundamental philosophy originally enunciated by the Buddha himself being disproved so far. To my mind, far from threatening its relevance, it gives even greater credibility to the fact that Buddhism is not based on pure belief or blind faith but on observation, experimentation and verification of truth. It strongly emphasizes the need to view things with suspicion until their truth is validated through reason. Wait a second. Suspicion, Observation, experimentation and verification of truth-does it not ring a bell? Yes. Yes. This is what Science is all about! That implies Buddhism shares basic commonalities with Science in its fundamental philosophical outlook and methodology. This is what I mean to say here. However, a question may be asked here. Why should it’s resemblance to Science give it a credibility at all?
|
|
From its early beginnings, science has developed into one of the greatest and most influential fields of human endeavor. It is broadly classified into basic and applied sciences. While basic sciences have been extremely successful in unearthing a wealth of information about our universe, ranging from the micro world of atoms and molecules to the mind boggling- phenomena at the scale of galaxies and beyond, applied sciences have changed the way humans interact with nature in a revolutionary way through what is known as Technology. No other human endeavor has had such an impact on human society. This shows quite clearly that Science as a philosophy has been extremely successful in sorting its way through all the intricacies of physical phenomena and getting to the bottom of the mysteries of at least the objective world. In other words, Scientific method is “a” correct way to comprehending the reality.
It is based on this argument that the resemblance, if any, of Buddhist Contemplative method to Scientific Method should, by logical reason, give the former the kind of credibility that is accorded to the latter. Moreover, Science is arguably the only field of intellectual endeavor on the planet that cuts across religious and ideological barriers. I am sure nobody on this planet, whatever faith he may belong to, will reject the notion of spherical earth after looking at the NASA images of the earth clicked from space. Nobody will refuse to believe in the existence of DNA when some of their most deadly physical conditions can be treated with techniques that are after all based on the fact that ‘DNA is real’. Such is the influence of Science.
The basic philosophical outlook that every investigation must begin with a deep sense of suspicion about the phenomenon at hand is common to both these intellectual traditions. The truth has to be reached at through rigorous study based purely on reason as opposed to being blindly accepted as an incontrovertible truth established and imposed by a higher authority. If the prevailing theory about something is found to be suspect then it must be rethought. And if it is found to be contradicting solid reliable empirical evidences then it must be rejected. It is only through such kinds of investigative approach that one can hope to uncover the hidden truth. And only when the truth is established beyond any doubt will one be fully confident about what one has always believed in, blindly or otherwise.
My confidence in the belief that Buddhism is probably a right way to the reality is reinforced by yet another development that has seen Buddhists, led by His Holiness the Dalai Lama, sitting together with the bests of scientific minds to discuss some very important matters for over two decades. If you think that the topic of the discussions may have been about striking a deal with the scientists on not being criticized and getting a suitable place for Buddhism in the eyes of the wider public as a great tradition then i am afraid you have to think again. The issues have been cosmology, quantum physics, neurobiology, modern psychology and the likes…and about how they can cooperate to gain a better insight into the mysteries of the physical and mental worlds. Quite an undertaking for a time-honored religious tradition! And the Buddhists were not in the least worried about losing their followers should science manage to prove them wrong on anything, for their ultimate aim is to find out the one thing that is central to the missions of both these intellectual traditions: the Truth. And it doesn’t matter who finds out first so long as it is a truth that is found out.
I hardly claim to possess any profound knowledge of Buddhism to be in a position to say with hundred percent confidence that it is unquestionably the right way to the reality. However, my own meager experience with both these traditions tells me that Buddhism can’t be hundred percent wrong if not hundred percent right. Finally, i could conceive of no better way to wind up this article than to quote the great Shakyamuni Buddha himself, “ Oh. Bhikkhus and Bhikkhunis, accept not my words for what they are; The way a gold is tested for its originality by burning, cutting and rubbing it you must subject my words to unbiased logical tests; If found to be true, accept it, otherwise don’t give a damn about it.” ( pardon my italics)
|
