Sixteen years ago the Dalai Lama started programs to train his monks and nuns for life in the 21st century. He wanted to augment the monastic training and prevent the Tibetan culture from becoming a museum piece. Every summer, Western educators come to India to teach the monastics math, physics, biology, neuroscience, and cosmology. I’ve taught in the “Science for Monks” workshops since 2008. It’s a high point of my year to brave the chaos of India for this quiet sanctuary near the roof of the world.
The monks and nuns have an idealized view of how science works. They think scientists can measure quantities with arbitrary precision, it just depends on having good equipment and dedication. Science seems to them to be implacable and authoritative and, because of that, remote and aloof. But I recognize a flip side of that coin—my simplistic notion of Buddhism and monastic life. I imagined they led a life of solitude and meditation, that being Buddhist meant retreating from the world. I thought science might be an unwelcome intrusion into their ascetic world.
I soon learned that Buddhism is described better as a philosophy than as a religion. It has no theology and eschews first causes. The Buddha was not a god, nor did he claim to be. Buddhism aligns with science in accepting natural causation and in trying to verify any worldview with observations. The Dalai Lama has stated his position succinctly: “If science proves some belief of Buddhism wrong, then Buddhism will have to change.” It is difficult to imagine similar words coming from the leaders of some other world religions. Buddhism’s empirical backdrop provides the foundation for a rich dialog with science.
