Are there really any links between Buddhism and science? Is there any point where the two connect? How can a 2,550-year-old tradition have any relationship with modern science? These are questions that might come to mind when we hear that modern science is making discoveries that could support various teachings given by the Buddha over two millennia ago. When we look at the dharma, we find that the teachings relate not only to psychological phenomena but also to the natural world outside of the mind. We might consider this surprising since the method used by the Buddha to arrive at these conclusions is a method that largely has to do with observing the mind.
Based on the assumption that an objective, external observer can precisely study physical and mental phenomena, modern science has worked to develop research methods and technologies to enforce objectivity. This is why science needs to build powerful devices, like the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN, used to study the constituent particles of matter or the potent magnets that create images through functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), letting us observe the function of the underlying cognitive processes of brain structures. We can say that the scientific endeavor is based on methods and techniques for observing and measuring natural phenomena “external” to the mind.
In ancient times, humankind could not rely on the scientific technology with which “reality” is studied today. Nevertheless, it relied on an equally effective technology to observe phenomena, but from a very different perspective. This technology we know by the name meditation, a multifaceted technique that not only permits us to work with our habits, tendencies, and disturbing emotions, but also lets us precisely observe how phenomena appear, are held together, and disappear back into space. Through this approach of inner observation, the historical Buddha arrived at conclusions that appear quite similar to many discoveries of modern science.
Point of Departure: A critical mind
Lama Ole Nydahl says that a mature mind is one with a healthy critical attitude. Such an attitude is a fundamental quality of a scientist as well as of a Diamond Way Buddhism practitioner. But what do we mean by a healthy critical attitude? We can say that it generally has two key elements. The first is the ability to be critical—to be able to question our deepest principles, beliefs, values, and ideas, and at the same time to put these into perspective to see how they match up to reality. The second element is what makes a critical approach healthy. It is the ability to see the position we are in—the knowledge and experience we have of a certain situation—and to either maintain our ideas or to open ourselves up to experience and find new information to bolster or refute our beliefs.
For example, when we criticize something (or someone) based solely on a rumor we heard at a social gathering, without taking the time to research the topic or corroborate the information, our criticism will keep us closed to discovering reality. It will also evoke disturbing emotions towards whatever we are criticizing—be it a person, situation, or idea. Cultivating a healthy critical attitude, as a Buddhist or as a scientist, is not easy since it requires effort and time to obtain the necessary information to back up our premises. Nonetheless, we can trust that our development will be built upon solid bases of knowledge and experience.
If we examine the path of the historical Buddha, we will see that Buddhism began with a question born of a critical mind. According to the story, when the historical Buddha Siddhartha left his palace, he was confronted with three events that made very strong impressions in his mind with regard to suffering and the impermanence of all phenomena. Siddhartha met old age, sickness, and death. Reflecting on these events, he carried out the first step of a scientific study by precisely formulating a question. To undergo a successful scientific study, we must be able to formulate precise questions that can be transformed into hypotheses. The first question was: does suffering have cause? If the answer is yes, then we might ask, what are the causes of suffering—because if something is produced by a cause, it can be eradicated by removing the cause. And if this is the case, is it possible to become completely free from the causes of suffering? What methods can we use to accomplish this?
In this way, Siddhartha began his search. His curiosity brought him to formulate various questions that led him down the path to developing the methods we use today.
From the scientific point of view, it is important that the questions and hypotheses are correctly formulated, thus allowing for the development of methods for experimental exploration. The methods used to conduct experiments should be described in a clear and understandable way, providing the possibility that they can be replicated. By replicating the method, we are able to verify the results and reach the same conclusions. Only through these steps can we be sure that the findings are trustworthy and can be the basis for later formulations of theoretical postulates.
At this point, it is important to be aware that the way we formulate the question will prompt a specific approach to studying the object of interest. Therefore, only by formulating precise questions will we find an efficient method to obtain the information required to answer them. To ask, “Why do we suffer?” is not the same as asking, “What are the causes of suffering?”
The Method: The Path We Follow to Answer the Question
Here we start to see the fundamental differences between science and Buddhism. While science focuses on studying the principles and laws that govern life on the physical and psychological levels, Buddhism focuses on how and where to find lasting happiness. When Siddhartha observed that the external elements that shaped his life were not able to give him a lasting and real refuge, he directed his search toward that which experiences happiness and suffering—that which is always present regardless of whatever impressions come and go. Siddhartha turned his search toward mind itself—or, as Lama Ole Nydahl describes it, “The mirror that reflects the images, the ocean beneath the waves.”
The method Siddhartha used to find the answers he was looking for was meditation, a methodology that focuses on observation and engagement with subjective mental factors. This is an approach that can be replicated and that will lead us to accomplish the same results as Siddhartha. This can be confirmed by the long tradition of teachers who have used these methods to realize the nature of mind. They teach us that we too—if we apply the methods—can achieve this result.
When speaking about methods, whether in science or meditation, it is important to question their universality. We need to ask ourselves whether the methods that the Buddha taught can be used in cultures and societies so different from those of the Buddha’s time. For a method to yield the same results for everyone who applies them, it has to transcend personal, cultural, and temporal boundaries. To be effective, the method must be universal in the sense that it can be applied regardless of one’s particular ideas and thoughts; it must transcend the values that drive a specific culture and society, and overcome temporal boundaries to be applicable in any era.
To recognize the universality of meditation as a method, we must understand that its objective is to experience the qualities of the mind, which are beyond concepts and have to do with its fundamental nature. When we focus on eliminating that which impedes us from experiencing the nature of mind, we come to realize that these veils are our stiff ideas and personal emotions. However, the object of meditation is not thoughts or values, but rather that which is behind these: the space that allows them to appear, play, and disappear back into it; the radiant quality that lets us perceive and experience the thoughts; the limitless potential that lets everything happen; the true nature of mind. And these qualities—which are intrinsically mind itself—are independent of the phenomena that appear within mind and of any personal or cultural experience. They are the true nature of all beings. This is why meditation can be considered a universal method.
The Result: Formulate a Theory, Formulate a Vision
The final objective of science is to formulate a solid explanation of phenomena based on information obtained through rigorous experimentation. These explanations, known as theories, gain credence among scientists when based on facts that can be replicated and corroborated. In the end, if a theory unequivocally explains the phenomena studied, it turns into a paradigm. And since science in our society is understood as the most exact form of studying and understanding reality, these paradigms end up influencing the way in which we perceive and experience the world.
An example of this is the interest in meditation that has grown in recent years. Different scientific studies have demonstrated that the changes experienced through meditation are not only subjective experiences but also correspond to structural and functional changes in the physiology of the brain. The notion of meditation as a spiritual or metaphysical method has begun to change, and society is becoming more open to experiencing it.
This is a process similar to what we experience when we use Buddhist methods, particularly in Diamond Way Buddhism. Step by step, we observe how our experience of situations changes and how the teachings are transformed from an intellectual understanding to real-life experience. Therefore, by acknowledging the changes we experience, we develop even more trust in the teachings and methods, helping us to change our paradigm of reality.
When we are able to experience the clear and limitless space of our mind, we will understand its expression as fearlessness, spontaneous joy, and active compassion. These are the qualities of the enlightened mind, and we gain confidence in them when meet the great realized teachers of our lineage. In this way, we are introduced to experiences that foster our understanding of the teachings of our lamas, which guide us towards opening up to the true nature of our mind. We gradually exchange a paradigm that controls our lives and limits our mind for one that lets us experience the richness of our limitless mind.
Conclusions
Looking at Buddhism and science, we see that they have different objects of study (the nature of mind vs. the laws of nature), follow different approaches to studying the human mind (subjective vs. objective), and employ different methodologies (meditation vs. the scientific method). However, it is important to notice that both approaches are based on a healthy critical attitude and use methods that can be replicated regardless of cultural, historical, and personal differences. Thus, both approaches are founded on a similar basis, which allows the formulation of descriptions of reality based on empirical information.
We may say that these are a few of the reasons why openness exists in the West toward meditation techniques, especially those of Buddhism. On the levels of both society and science, the principles grounding both paths are the playing field on which we can establish bridges of dialogue. This discussion does not pretend to claim that Buddhism and science are the same, but rather it seeks to illuminate the elements that are somehow shared and that enable the knowledge and wisdom appearing from both approaches to be sustained in a solid way through experience.
Likewise, upon observing these fundamentals, we can understand why the Buddha, on his deathbed, said, “Don’t believe anything you have heard because a Buddha told you; confirm it for yourselves. Be your own guiding light.”1
The 17th Gyalwa Karmapa, Trinley Thaye Dorje, has offered similar guidance:
- Lama Ole Nydahl, The Way Things Are. Page 87, 2008, Mantra Books ↩︎
- H.H. the 17th Karmapa: What is Buddhism? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r35_V5Y0G9Q ↩︎
