Buddhism as "secular spirituality" (1)


These days it seems that the "culture war" is becoming a full-scale religious "war." (Fortunately, there are few incidents of actual violence in it so far.) But unlike the wars between Catholics and Protestants in 17th-century Europe, or the pogroms visited by Christians on Jews, the current conflict is not being presented as a war between religions, but between religion and "secularism." As the common terminology which seems to be emerging presents it, it is a battle between "people of faith" and "secular humanism."

I would like to argue in this entry (and probably in a few following ones) that Buddhism can be seen as an entity (call it a religion or a philosophy or whatever you like) which bridges this distinction: a kind of "secular spirituality." It considers questions of life, death, meaning, and purpose which most Americans would consider "spiritual" or "religious," but attempts to answer them in a very different way from the way that is familiar to "religious" folk.

We tend to think, today, that this conflict between "secular" and "religious" ways of seeing the world is relatively new -- dating back, perhaps, to the time of Galileo and others, about 400 years ago. But 2500 or so years ago, in the Buddha"s time, there were also many religious doctrines being spread around by individuals and groups who claimed to have unique access to religious or metaphysical truth -- the ultimate knowledge of life and the universe. But they tended to contradict each other. How to know who was right?

A group of people who called themselves the Kalamas were troubled by this problem; when they heard that the Buddha was nearby, we read in the Kalama Sutta that they seated themselves respectfully next to him and posed it to him:

The Kalamas who were inhabitants of Kesaputta sitting on one side said to the Blessed One: "There are some monks and brahmans, venerable sir, who visit Kesaputta. They expound and explain only their own doctrines; the doctrines of others they despise, revile, and pull to pieces. Some other monks and brahmans too, venerable sir, come to Kesaputta. They also expound and explain only their own doctrines; the doctrines of others they despise, revile, and pull to pieces. Venerable sir, there is doubt, there is uncertainty in us concerning them. Which of these reverend monks and brahmans spoke the truth and which falsehood?"

His answer:

It is proper for you, Kalamas, to doubt, to be uncertain; uncertainty has arisen in you about what is doubtful. Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, "The monk is our teacher." Kalamas, when you yourselves know: "These things are bad; these things are blamable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill," abandon them.

So much for what should be rejected. What should be believed? He went on:

Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, "The monk is our teacher." Kalamas, when you yourselves know: "These things are good; these things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness," enter on and abide in them.

(Unfortunately for us moderns, the traditional Buddhist texts tend to be rather repetitious. There are two reasons for this: one was that they were handed down orally for quite a few generations before they were written, and the repetition helped the students to memorize them. The other was that reciting the repetitious texts in a very meditative frame of mind impresses their meanings, which are manifold and complex, on the mind more securely.)

The Buddha then laid out for his hearers what would lead to benefit and happiness, namely, a mind free of greed, hate, malice, and delusion. Those with such a mind he defined as the "noble ones" (ariya, or "noble," generally meant in his time a member of the upper class, but he had a new meaning to teach).

The disciple of the Noble Ones, Kalamas, who has such a hate-free mind, such a malice-free mind, such an undefiled mind, and such a purified mind, is one by whom four solaces are found here and now.

Suppose there is a hereafter and there is a fruit, result, of deeds done well or ill. Then it is possible that at the dissolution of the body after death, I shall arise in the heavenly world, which is possessed of the state of bliss." This is the first solace found by him.

Suppose there is no hereafter and there is no fruit, no result, of deeds done well or ill. Yet in this world, here and now, free from hatred, free from malice, safe and sound, and happy, I keep myself." This is the second solace found by him.

Suppose evil (results) befall an evil-doer. I, however, think of doing evil to no one. Then, how can ill (results) affect me who do no evil deed?" This is the third solace found by him.

Suppose evil (results) do not befall an evil-doer. Then I see myself purified in any case." This is the fourth solace found by him.

The disciple of the Noble Ones, Kalamas, who has such a hate-free mind, such a malice-free mind, such an undefiled mind, and such a purified mind, is one by whom, here and now, these four solaces are found.

The Kalamas (according to this sutta, at least) were completely convinced:

Marvelous, venerable sir! Marvelous, venerable sir! As if, venerable sir, a person were to turn face upwards what is upside down, or to uncover the concealed, or to point the way to one who is lost or to carry a lamp in the darkness, thinking, "Those who have eyes will see visible objects," so has the Dhamma been set forth in many ways by the Blessed One. We, venerable sir, go to the Blessed One for refuge, to the Dhamma for refuge, and to the Community of Bhikkhus for refuge. Venerable sir, may the Blessed One regard us as lay followers who have gone for refuge for life, from today.

(Another characteristic of these traditional texts is that, as soon as the Buddha delivers a teaching, the listeners generally agree with it immediately. In reality, it was probably not that easy.)

At any rate, I would suggest that this is the proper attitude to take in discussions of religious matters. (See also my entry "God Speaks to Dreamers?")

Posted: Sun - May 1, 2005 at 01:00 PM           | |


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.