I have been reading Why Buddhism is True lately. Started out feeling ambivalent about how the author had chosen to handle the subject but over time, learned a few things. As far as the "science" of why Buddhism is true - Wright has two favorite tropes. One is natural selection - the catch-all to explain every kind of human behavior singular or collective. It's a bit too Freudian for my taste - this one-size fits all theory. The second thing he overuses is experiments involving the human brain and using the data from it to "justify" the teachings of the Buddha. In faith, it seems a certain degree of blindness is desired and even helpful.
You plunge in a bit blind, realize the efficacy of the teachings through your own practice and then at some point see if it trues up with science. The desire to prove a Buddhism true is bit misbegotten and I struggled with that premise despite some redeeming qualities of the book. As a Hindu, I don't think I am interested in learning why Hinduism is true. In fact, that question is not particularly relevant to me. What I would like to learn instead is a set of daily practices I could follow to improve the quality of my life and to become a better person to those who have to deal with me. That would be reward enough no matter if the religion was true or not.
Comments