OF A
BUDDHIST
SKEPTIC
MEDITATIONS
OF A
BUDDHIST
SKEPTIC
A Manifesto for the Mind Sciences and Contemplative Practice
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS
NEW YORK
Publishers Since 1893
New York Chichester, West Sussex
Copyright © 2012 Columbia University Press
All rights reserved
E-ISBN: 978-0-231-53032-3
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Wallace, B. Alan.
Meditations of a Buddhist skeptic : a manifesto for the mind sciences and contemplative practice / B. Alan Wallace.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-0-231-15834-3 (cloth : alk. paper) — ISBN 978-0-231-53032-3 (electronic)
1. Neurosciences—Religious aspects—Buddhism. 2. Buddhism—Psychology. 3. Buddhism and science. I. Title.
BQ4570.N48W36 2012
294.3’365—dc22
2011009041
A Columbia University Press E-book.
CUP would be pleased to hear about your reading experience with this e-book at cup-ebook@columbia.edu.
References to Internet Web sites (URLs) were accurate at the time of writing. Neither the author nor Columbia University Press is responsible for URLs that may have expired or changed since the manuscript was prepared.
Prologue: Skepticism in Buddhism and Science
PART I: RESTORING OUR HUMAN NATURE
ONE
Toward a Revolution in the Mind Sciences
TWO
Buddhism and Science: Confrontation and Collaboration
THREE
Buddhism and the Mind Sciences
FOUR
A Three-Dimensional Science of Mind
FIVE
Restoring Meaning to the Universe
SIX
What Makes Us Human? Scientific and Buddhist Views
PART II: TRANSCENDING OUR HUMAN NATURE
EIGHT
Buddhist Radical Empiricism
NINE
From Agnosticism to Gnosticism
TEN
A Buddhist Model of Optimal Mental Health
ELEVEN
Mindfulness in the Mind Sciences and in Buddhism
TWELVE
Shamatha and Vipashyana in the Indian Buddhist Tradition
THIRTEEN
Shamatha and Vipashyana in the Dzogchen Tradition
Epilogue: The Many Worlds of Buddhism and Science
Skepticism in Buddhism and Science
I AM A BUDDHIST SKEPTIC. The Greek term skeptikoi means seekers or inquirers; the early Greek skeptics challenged the dogmatic positions of their contemporaries, advocating critical investigation instead. The Buddha (563–483 B.C.E.) himself embraced the value of skepticism, for he counseled others not to adopt beliefs on the basis of hearsay, legend, tradition, scriptural sources, logical conjecture, probability, or a teacher’s authority. He encouraged us to learn through our own experience which theories and practices are wholesome and which are unwholesome. Determining whether they lead to our own and others’ genuine happiness or to harm and suffering requires empirical investigation.1 Even regarding his own teachings, the Buddha advised, “Monks, just as the wise accept gold after testing it by heating, cutting, and rubbing [on a touchstone], so are my words to be accepted after examining them, but not out of respect [for me].”2
A skeptical orientation came naturally to me as a youth. I was brought up in a Christian household, and even though I found great meaning in the teachings of Jesus, some of the church’s doctrines made no sense to me. I set my sights on a scientific career at an early age, but I became just as skeptical of the materialistic assumptions saturating scientific inquiry as I was of religious doctrine. Even though I found much truth in science, it didn’t answer the need for meaning in my life. Furthermore, the notion of segregating religion from science, as if their spheres of authority were nonoverlapping, was anathema to me. How could a meaningful life not be based on truth? How could something be true yet hold no meaning?
In my pursuit of truth and meaning, I explored the worldview, values, and meditative practices of Buddhism while retaining my sense of skepticism. In both traditional Buddhist monasteries and modern academia, it is common to spend years studying a discipline without actually practicing it. My education in science and mathematics showed me early on that you can never fully understand any discipline without practicing it. If you want to understand theoretical physics, you must learn to formulate physical theories that can be tested experimentally. If you want to understand experimental physics, you must develop precise experimental techniques to yield accurate observations. The study of Buddhism is the same. Not simply a set of beliefs to be accepted on faith or traditional ritual practices to be followed, this is a system of experiential and rational inquiry that demands skeptical inspection of one’s own deepest assumptions.
As I continued my study and practice of Buddhism, I became increasingly skeptical of some modern traditions that emphasize study over practical experience and of others that emphasize practice without study. I became equally skeptical of those who emphasize ritual practices while ignoring rigorous study as being “too intellectual.” As one result of uninformed practice, some Buddhists have taken the liberty of redefining key terms such as “mindfulness” (Pali sati), “meditative stabilization” (Skt. dhyana; Pali jhana), “insight” (Skt. vipashyana) meditation, “nonself” (Pali anatta), “emptiness” (Skt. shunyata), “liberation” (Skt. nirvana), and “pristine awareness” (Tib. rigpa) on the basis of their own ideas—often diverging widely from authoritative Buddhist sources. Decontextualized doctrines and practices lose their grounding in the teachings of the Buddha and fail to benefit from 2,500 years of contemplative experience and scholarship by those who followed the path he blazed. There is little justification in calling such practices “Buddhist.”
Many people in our fast-paced world, in both the East and the West, are in a hurry to achieve their goals, and this attitude undermines their practice of Buddhism. In the Modern Vipassana Movement (MVM), some people marginalize or skip the foundational practices of ethics and meditative concentration (Skt. samadhi) and proceed immediately to the pinnacle of Buddhist meditation as they perceive it: insight meditation. In Mahayana Buddhism, it is common to bypass rigorous study and mental training in the Buddha’s foundational teachings recorded in the Pali Canon and to focus instead on “more advanced” levels of meditation and philosophy. Followers of Vajrayana Buddhism often skip the foundational teachings in the sutras and immerse themselves in the most esoteric practices they can find. Such shortcuts are evidence of the commoditization and marketing of Buddhism in the modern world. Witnessing the dismal outcomes of these radically decontextualized, fast-track approaches, I became even more skeptical.
At the same time, I saw Buddhist teachers who promoted their traditions in the modern world without accounting for the many important differences between traditional Buddhist cultures and modernity. Over the past twenty-five centuries, Buddhism has adapted to diverse societies by evolving continuously as times have changed. This gradual process of assimilation and adaptation has led to Buddhism’s rich diversity in India, Southeast Asia, Central Asia, and East Asia—many lineages with distinct characteristics. Now, for the first time in history, Buddhism has become a global phenomenon, and the outlook depends on a delicate balance between adaptation to new contexts and preservation of core theories and practices. When it falls to the extreme of adaptation, Buddhism is sometimes reduced to yet another system of psychotherapy. When it falls to the extreme of conservatism, it is relegated to historical artifacts in scholarly studies and museums. Either way, its vitality and purpose are lost.
One indication of the poor outcomes from some contemporary flavors of Buddhism is the frequency of unsubstantiated claims people make about their own and others’ attainments of samadhi and higher spiritual realizations. A Buddhist monk violates an essential vow by exaggerating the degree of his spiritual maturation and realization. It is equally misleading to exaggerate or claim knowledge about the spiritual attainments of others. The parallel in science is to lie about one’s discoveries. It makes little difference whether one makes false claims about one’s own or others’ accomplishments. Protecting the credibility of the scientific tradition demands the utmost integrity and respect for honest evidence and rational argument. This is just as true in the Buddhist contemplative tradition. There is certainly a role for faith and confidence in both Buddhism and science, but they must not lead to making truth claims concerning mere conjectures, intuitions, or beliefs.
Certain claims made by cognitive neuroscientists and evolutionary psychologists about the mind, consciousness, free will, the origins of religion, and various mental processes leave me equally skeptical. Some statements are little more than expressions of faith in the ersatz religion of scientific materialism. Metaphysical speculations are frequently presented as scientific truths, when in reality they are not even testable hypotheses. Such presumptions of knowledge are the bane of both scientific and contemplative investigations.
Although open-minded, intelligent skepticism is regarded as a virtue in Buddhism, it must be tempered with faith, which may seem to set it at odds with science. English mathematician and philosopher William Kingdon Clifford (1845–79) expressed the ideal of many scientists when he wrote, “It is wrong always, everywhere, and for everyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.”3 In his recent polemic against religion, Sam Harris echoes this and calls for the end of religious faith in the modern world. He argues that a rational and scientific view—one that relies on the power of empirical evidence to support knowledge and understanding—should replace religious faith.4 But if it’s wrong for us to believe in religious doctrines without sufficient evidence, scientific doctrines should be held to the same standard. For example, since scientists have not explained what catalyzed the Big Bang, how life began, the origins of consciousness in the universe, or the source of awareness in a fetus, it is wrong for them to assume that purely physical causes underlie these phenomena. Nevertheless, many scientists routinely assume that there must be physical explanations for everything in nature; in doing so, they conflate metaphysical speculation with scientific knowledge.
In reality, if scientists and contemplatives could not rely upon their predecessors and contemporaries—with faith in others’ discoveries—all scientific and contemplative inquiry would grind to a halt. It would be impossible for each new generation of researchers to replicate for themselves all the empirical findings made by others. American psychologist and philosopher William James (1842–1910) offered a nuanced view of the relation between faith and open-minded inquiry of all kinds. Where preferences are powerless to modify or produce things, faith is totally inappropriate, he wrote, but for the class of truths that depend on personal preference, trust, or loyalty for actualization, “faith is not only licit and pertinent, but essential and indispensable. [Such] truths cannot become true till our faith has made them so.”5
Witnessing the passion with which atheists such as Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Daniel Dennett denounce religion and declare the supremacy of science (along with its metaphysical assumptions), one might agree with James’s observation that “philosophy is more a matter of passionate vision than of logic, . . . logic only finding reasons for the vision afterwards.”6 Once people lock onto a vision of reality that appeals to them, they tend to hold their views as being uniquely true. According to the Buddha, this is a fundamental delusion. Such dogmatism lies at the root of humanity’s history of ideological warfare, zealously waged by self-righteous theists and atheists alike.
Avoiding the extremes of skepticism and dogmatism calls for a “middle way” approach that characterized the Buddha’s teachings from the very beginning. The meditations included in this book are expressions of that middle way. I have attempted to present the Buddha’s teachings in full accordance with ancient tradition, while articulating them for a contemporary audience. Many of the ideas and perspectives presented here occurred to me in the course of my own meditative practice. All the meditations described are designed to bring greater meaning to our lives, along with a deeper understanding of truth. I have offered my best and most meaningful guidance to inspire modern seekers on the path to awakening. Although I have tried to be true to Buddhist tradition, there are limits to my own understanding. Whatever value there may be in these efforts is due to the fathomless kindness and wisdom of many spiritual friends and my precious teachers.