Meditations of a Buddhist skeptic : a manifesto for the mind sciences and contemplative practice

304 Pages·2012·2.82 MB·English

by  Wallace

MEDITATIONS

OF A
BUDDHIST
SKEPTIC

wwaallll1155883344..iinnddbb ii 88//3311//1111 77::4477 AAMM
wwaallll1155883344..iinnddbb iiii 88//3311//1111 77::4477 AAMM
B. ALAN WALLACE
M E D I TA T I O N S
O F A
B U D D H I S T
S K E P T I C

A Manifesto for the Mind Sciences
and Contemplative Practice

C OLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS
N EW YORK
wwaallll1155883344..iinnddbb iiiiii 88//3311//1111 77::4477 AAMM
C olumbia University Press
Publishers Since 1893
N ew York Chichester, West Sussex
c up.columbia.edu
C opyright © 2012 Columbia University Press
A ll rights reserved
L ibrary of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
W allace, 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.
B Q4570.N48W36 2012
2 94.3’365—dc22
2 011009041
C olumbia University Press books are printed on permanent
and durable acid-free paper.
T his book was printed on paper with recycled content.
P rinted in the United States of America
c 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
R eferences 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.
wwaallll1155883344..iinnddbb iivv 88//3311//1111 77::4477 AAMM
C ONTENTS
P rologue: Skepticism in Buddhism and Science  vii
P ART I: RESTORING OUR HUMAN NATURE
o ne
Toward a Revolution in the Mind Sciences 3
two
Buddhism and Science: Confrontation and Collaboration 15
t hree
Buddhism and the Mind Sciences 34
four
A Three-Dimensional Science of Mind 60
f ive
Restoring Meaning to the Universe 72
wwaallll1155883344..iinnddbb vv 88//3311//1111 77::4477 AAMM
vi Contents
s ix
What Makes Us Human? Scientifi c and Buddhist Views 86
s even
Achieving Free Will 108
P ART II: TRANSCENDING OUR HUMAN NATURE
e ight
Buddhist Radical Empiricism 125
n ine
From Agnosticism to Gnosticism 144
t en
A Buddhist Model of Optimal Mental Health 158
e leven
Mindfulness in the Mind Sciences and in Buddhism 173
t welve
Shamatha and Vipashyana in the Indian Buddhist Tradition 194
t hirteen
Shamatha and Vipashyana in the Dzogchen Tradition 213
E pilogue: The Many Worlds of Buddhism and Science 231
N otes  241
S elected Bibliography  271
I ndex  275

wwaallll1155883344..iinnddbb vvii 88//3311//1111 77::4477 AAMM
P ROLOGUE
S kepticism in Buddhism and Science
I am a buddhist skeptic. The Greek term skeptikoi means seekers
or inquirers; the early Greek skeptics challenged the dogmatic posi-
tions of their contemporaries, advocating critical investigation in-
stead. The Buddha (563–483 b.c.e.) himself embraced the value of skepti-
cism, 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 expe-
rience which theories and practices are wholesome and which are un-
wholesome. Determining whether they lead to our own and others’ genu-
ine happiness or to harm and suff ering 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 scientifi c career at an early age, but I became just
as skeptical of the materialistic assumptions saturating scientifi c 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
wwaallll1155883344..iinnddbb vviiii 88//3311//1111 77::4477 AAMM
viii Prologue: Skepticism in Buddhism and Science
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?
I n my pursuit of truth and meaning, I explored the worldview, values,
and meditative practices of Buddhism while retaining my sense of skep-
ticism. In both traditional Buddhist monasteries and modern academia,
it is common to spend years studying a discipline without actually prac-
ticing 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 under-
stand experimental physics, you must develop precise experimental tech-
niques 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 prac-
tices to be followed, this is a system of experiential and rational inquiry
that demands skeptical inspection of one’s own deepest assumptions.
A s I continued my study and practice of Buddhism, I became increas-
ingly 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 un-
informed practice, some Buddhists have taken the liberty of redefi ning
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 Bud-
dha and fail to benefi t from 2,500 years of contemplative experience and
scholarship by those who followed the path he blazed. There is little justi-
fi cation in calling such practices “Buddhist.”
M any 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 medi-
tative concentration (Skt. samadhi) and proceed immediately to the pin-
nacle of Buddhist meditation as they perceive it: insight meditation. In
wwaallll1155883344..iinnddbb vviiiiii 88//3311//1111 77::4477 AAMM
Prologue: Skepticism in Buddhism and Science ix
Mahayana Buddhism, it is common to bypass rigorous study and men-
tal 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 fi nd. Such shortcuts are evidence of the commoditiza-
tion and marketing of Buddhism in the modern world. Witnessing the dis-
mal outcomes of these radically decontextualized, fast-track approaches,
I became even more skeptical.
A t the same time, I saw Buddhist teachers who promoted their tradi-
tions in the modern world without accounting for the many important
diff erences between traditional Buddhist cultures and modernity. Over
the past twenty-fi ve 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 fi rst time in history, Buddhism has become
a global phenomenon, and the outlook depends on a delicate balance be-
tween adaptation to new contexts and preservation of core theories and
practices. When it falls to the extreme of adaptation, Buddhism is some-
times reduced to yet another system of psychotherapy. When it falls to
the extreme of conservatism, it is relegated to historical artifacts in schol-
arly studies and museums. Either way, its vitality and purpose are lost.
O ne indication of the poor outcomes from some contemporary fl avors
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 mis-
leading 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 diff erence whether one makes false claims about one’s own or oth-
ers’ accomplishments. Protecting the credibility of the scientifi c tradition
demands the utmost integrity and respect for honest evidence and ratio-
nal argument. This is just as true in the Buddhist contemplative tradition.
There is certainly a role for faith and confi dence in both Buddhism and
science, but they must not lead to making truth claims concerning mere
conjectures, intuitions, or beliefs.
wwaallll1155883344..iinnddbb iixx 88//3311//1111 77::4477 AAMM
x Prologue: Skepticism in Buddhism and Science
C ertain claims made by cognitive neuroscientists and evolutionary
psychologists about the mind, consciousness, free will, the origins of re-
ligion, and various mental processes leave me equally skeptical. Some
statements are little more than expressions of faith in the ersatz religion
of scientifi c materialism. Metaphysical speculations are frequently pre-
sented as scientifi c truths, when in reality they are not even testable hy-
potheses. Such presumptions of knowledge are the bane of both scientifi c
and contemplative investigations.
A lthough 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 Cliff ord (1845–79) expressed the ideal of many scientists when
he wrote, “It is wrong always, everywhere, and for everyone, to believe
anything upon insuffi cient evidence.” 3 In his recent polemic against re-
ligion, Sam Harris echoes this and calls for the end of religious faith in
the modern world. He argues that a rational and scientifi c view—one
that relies on the power of empirical evidence to support knowledge and
u nderstanding—should replace religious faith. 4 But if it’s wrong for us to
believe in religious doctrines without suffi cient evidence, scientifi c doc-
trines should be held to the same standard. For example, since scientists
have not explained what catalyzed the Big Bang, how life began, the ori-
gins of consciousness in the universe, or the source of awareness in a fe-
tus, 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 confl ate metaphysical speculation with scientifi c knowledge.
I n reality, if scientists and contemplatives could not rely upon their
predecessors and contemporaries—with faith in others’ discoveries—all
scientifi c and contemplative inquiry would grind to a halt. It would be
impossible for each new generation of researchers to replicate for them-
selves all the empirical fi ndings made by others. American psychologist
and philosopher William James (1842–1910) off ered a nuanced view of the
relation between faith and open-minded inquiry of all kinds. Where pref-
erences are powerless to modify or produce things, faith is totally inap-
propriate, he wrote, but for the class of truths that depend on personal
preference, trust, or loyalty for actualization, “faith is not only licit and
wwaallll1155883344..iinnddbb xx 88//3311//1111 77::4477 AAMM