QUESTION: Is Buddhism scientific?
ANSWER: Before we answer that question it would he best to define the word ‘science.’ Science is, according to the dictionary, ‘knowledge which can be made into a system, which depends upon seeing and testing facts and stating general natural laws, a branch of such knowledge, anything that can be studied exactly.’ There arc aspects of Buddhism that would not fit into this definition but the central teachings of Buddhism, the Four Noble Truths, most certainly would. Suffering, the First Noble Truth, is an experience that can be defined, experienced and mastered. The Second Noble Truth states that suffering has a natural cause, craving, which likewise can be defined, experienced and measured. No attempt is made to explain suffering in terms of a metaphysical concept or myths. According to the Third Noble Truth, suffering is ended, not by relying on upon a supreme being, by faith or by prayers but simply by removing its cause. This is axiomatic. The Fourth Noble Truth, the way to end suffering, once again, has nothing to do with metaphysics hut depends on behaving in specific ways. And once again behaviour is open to testing. Buddhism dispenses with the concept of a supreme being,as does science, and explains the origins and workings of the universe in terms of natural laws. All of this certainly exhibits a scientific spirit. Once again, the Buddha’s constant advice that we should not blindly believe but rather question, examine, inquire and rely on our own experience, has a definite scientific ring to it. In his famous Kalama Sutta the Buddha says;
So we could say that although Buddhism in not entirely scientific, it certainly has a strong scientific overtone and is certainly more scientific than any other religion. It is significant that Albert Einstein, the greater scientist of the 20th century said of Buddhism:
ANSWER: Before we answer that question it would he best to define the word ‘science.’ Science is, according to the dictionary, ‘knowledge which can be made into a system, which depends upon seeing and testing facts and stating general natural laws, a branch of such knowledge, anything that can be studied exactly.’ There arc aspects of Buddhism that would not fit into this definition but the central teachings of Buddhism, the Four Noble Truths, most certainly would. Suffering, the First Noble Truth, is an experience that can be defined, experienced and mastered. The Second Noble Truth states that suffering has a natural cause, craving, which likewise can be defined, experienced and measured. No attempt is made to explain suffering in terms of a metaphysical concept or myths. According to the Third Noble Truth, suffering is ended, not by relying on upon a supreme being, by faith or by prayers but simply by removing its cause. This is axiomatic. The Fourth Noble Truth, the way to end suffering, once again, has nothing to do with metaphysics hut depends on behaving in specific ways. And once again behaviour is open to testing. Buddhism dispenses with the concept of a supreme being,as does science, and explains the origins and workings of the universe in terms of natural laws. All of this certainly exhibits a scientific spirit. Once again, the Buddha’s constant advice that we should not blindly believe but rather question, examine, inquire and rely on our own experience, has a definite scientific ring to it. In his famous Kalama Sutta the Buddha says;
No comments:
Post a Comment