Science and Religion 2M

3

SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

In the newspapers and textbooks one usually reads about ‘reli- gion’ and science. Advocates defend religion; its opponents attack it. Both sides tend to assume that there is an essence, a single viewpoint, ‘religion,’ which either is or is not compatible with science. But is there such a thing as ‘religion’ in the singular? The goal of this chapter is to bring to light the very different kinds of concerns that are raised across the world’s religious traditions.

The order of presentation is particularly important here. Most readers in the West will implicitly have Christianity in mind when they begin reading a text on religion and science. I begin with this religion, not to set it above the others but because it will be the best-known to most readers whether they are reli- gious or not. Also, many of the issues that formed the back- drop for the previous two chapters arise directly from Christian interests and concerns. This is an important point: the some- times harsh confrontations between science and religion stem, in many cases, from features unique to Christianity, such as the belief in a physical resurrection of Jesus. The goal of this chapter is to discover how vastly different are the concerns that different religious traditions bring to the discussion with science. Perhaps there is no field of ‘science’ and ‘religion’ (in the singular) at all!

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

37SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

CHRISTIANITY Think for a moment about the central beliefs of traditional or ‘orthodox’ Christianity. (We won’t try to decide which of these core beliefs are found in the Bible and which come from else- where.) God exists eternally as an immaterial being consisting of three eternally interacting persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. In six ‘days’ God created the entire universe ‘ex nihilo,’ out of nothing. Man and Woman were created directly by God on the sixth day as the consummation of creation. Humans are unique and are given the role ‘to cultivate [the earth] and care for it’ (Genesis 2:15). Although they were given a perfect home on earth, the Garden of Eden, Man and Woman broke from that pure communion with God for which they were created, and they were expelled from the Garden. God chose Israel as His special people, and when the Israelites strayed, He sent many prophets to call them back to Him. Finally he sent His own Son, Jesus Christ, who was fully God and fully man, God incarnate. Through his crucifixion and bodily resurrection from the dead, Jesus became the Savior, the head of the Church, and the only means to salvation from sin. At some point Christ will come again and vanquish his foes; God will end this universe and bring about ‘a new heaven and a new earth.’

It doesn’t take much reflection to realize that this is not exactly the way that science describes things. What should a Christian do about these conflicts? One option is to dispense with science altogether. If Christianity is true in exactly the terms I just used, then most of the sciences are not. Of course, the denial of sci- ence for the sake of Christianity – a view traditionally known as fundamentalism – can be a pretty uncomfortable stance to take in a world where virtually everything, from the phone in your pocket to the airplane you take on vacation, is built using scientific knowledge. For this reason many Christians around the world seek ways to integrate the beliefs of their tradition with scientific conclusions. Efforts at integration can concen- trate more on preserving the Christian tradition or more on avoiding conflicts with science. Let’s consider one example of each approach.

Perhaps God did create humanity and is guiding the universe toward the final outcome that God intends. But according to

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

38 SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

this view, which many call theistic evolution, God could have accomplished his purposes using somewhat less direct means. Perhaps each ‘day’ of God’s creation was actually a period in the evolution of the cosmos, lasting billions of years. Perhaps God created Adam and Eve using the natural laws established at the moment of creation, including a process of biological evolution that God established and guided.

Note that, on this view, God still does intervene in the natural order at least at some points. God needed to place a soul in the first man and woman so that they would be unique in the ways that Genesis describes. God needed to protect the Israelites, for example, by parting the Red Sea, and to send prophets to reveal to them the divine nature and will. Above all on this view, Chris- tianity requires for God to become incarnate as Jesus Christ and, after Jesus was crucified, to resurrect him bodily from the dead. No natural process could accomplish this miraculous event; only a direct supernatural act of God could bring it about. Christians don’t have to reject science as an accurate description of the world as God has created it, according to theistic evolution. But one does need to affirm at least the miracles of creation, reve- lation, and resurrection, along with whatever miracles may be required for providence, answers to prayer, and God’s guidance of history toward its final consummation.

This is the point where the conflict arises between Christians. As we have seen, some believe that the miracles just mentioned are essential; Christianity without miracles just isn’t Christian. Other Christians challenge this assumption. Christianity cannot be credible if it conflicts with science, they say, and science just doesn’t allow for direct divine interventions that alter the course of nature. The first view affirms that Christianity requires physical divine action; the second, that it is sufficient for God to engage in forms of spiritual divine action.

So which mandate is the more urgent: not to alter the beliefs about God’s supernatural interventions that have been central to Christianity across the centuries, or not to base one’s faith on assertions that are incompatible with the core methods and con- clusions of science? On this question our two groups diverge. If God were sometimes to set aside the laws of nature for the divine ends, argue the defenders of spiritual divine action, would not God

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

39SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

then be responsible for every other time that God fails to inter- vene and allows (say) innocent children to suffer horribly? ‘But the problem is not just that your view makes God responsible for suffering and evil,’ they continue; ‘it’s also a question about what science requires. Imagine that you are in the lab running an experiment, and one of your results differs radically from the others. On your view, you have to consider the possibility that the abnormal result was caused by a direct divine intervention into the physical world. If a miracle is always possible, how can one continue to do strict empirical science?’

‘No problem,’ replies the other group. ‘God is Creator, all-powerful, and all-good. Being Creator, God made the laws of the universe to reflect his own purposes; being all-powerful, God can set aside those laws when necessary; and being all- good, he will carry out miracles in the world whenever it brings about better results, and not otherwise. Miracles are necessary to respond to suffering, build faith for believers, reveal the divine nature, and open the path to salvation. Science can discern nat- ural laws and patterns, but it cannot determine when God may need to make exceptions to those laws. In his wisdom God knew that miracles are necessary, above all the physical resurrection of Jesus. So science needs to step back and adapt itself to that fact.’

But what about religions other than Christianity? It turns out that radically different concerns arise when other religions enter into dialogue with contemporary science. In many cases, the relationships that emerge are not nearly as conflicted as the ones we have observed so far. This helps explain the frustration that members of other traditions frequently voice about Western books on religion and science:

You Christians are preoccupied with a very peculiar list of Chris- tian concerns. When you encounter conflict with science, you mark all religions with the same branding iron and dismiss them all as a result. But this approach is both inaccurate and unfair. Why don’t you study our traditions in their own light, and not just in the shadow of Christianity?

Let us spend some time, then, with each tradition separately. We commence with Judaism, in order to show how significantly

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

40 SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

different from Christianity are the concerns of historical Jewish thought and of contemporary Jewish thinkers. We then move on to Islam and some of the Eastern traditions.

JuDAISM Those who are aware of the way in which the discussion between Christians and science has gone will be immediately struck by the vastly different world of Jewish thought and obser- vance. The Christian questions – at least those that are covered in the media today – often involve sharp oppositions: How can miracles occur? How can a man be raised from the dead? How can the Bible be inerrant in its historical and (implicit) scientific claims? How can God create the world in six days? How can God guide all of history toward his intended goals? How is one to understand the Second Coming of Christ, the judgment, and the establishing of a ‘new heaven and a new earth’?

With a few exceptions, to which we will return, the Jewish discussion with science has been very different. For centuries most rabbinical commentators have not worried about the exact historical details about how the text of the Torah arose, nor have they worried whether it is exactly correct on all scientific and historical details. Because obedience of the Law is central to Jewish identity, interpreting the legal requirements was viewed as more urgent, since the primary task of the rabbis was to guide Jews in their religious observance.

Specific events in the history of the Jewish people further influenced Jewish thinking. The second destruction of the Tem- ple in 70 C.E. led Jewish scholars to interpret specific predic- tions and prophecies in the Hebrew Bible more metaphorically and less historically. God’s calling to his chosen people was obvi- ously broader than maintaining the Temple cult, which is what a literal reading of the Torah would have led one to expect. More- over, the concerns of a people in diaspora, with no homeland and often fighting for survival in the face of persecution, were more pressing and more concrete. The Shoah (or Holocaust) in the twentieth century raised very fundamental questions about God’s presence and care for Jews, questions that could not be

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

41SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

answered by a literal reading of the Tanakh (the Jewish Bible) alone.1

Now add to all these factors the incredible influence of Maimonides (1135–1204) and the tradition of ‘negative theology’ – a tradition extended into the Jewish mystical or ‘Kabbalistic’ tradition. The net result was a very different understanding of those theological debates that don’t directly bear on observance. Among Jewish commentators, one finds a widespread willing- ness to treat many claims in the Hebrew Bible as metaphorical or figurative: the six days of creation, concrete historical claims, divine miracles, and details that might otherwise resemble sci- entific claims. There are even passages in rabbinical commentary (midrash) that suggest that rabbis should be guided by the best (i.e., most reasonable) interpretation of the Torah even if there were a direct sign from God in favor of a different interpretation. It doesn’t take much reflection to realize that this attitude will produce a very different sort of religion-science debate than one finds in the books by the best-known Christian thinkers.

Judaism is a minority religion in almost all of the countries of the world. The number of observant Jews is also declining in most countries. Among the many reasons are the facts that Juda- ism is not a proselytizing religion (one has to be born of a Jewish mother to be Jewish) and that observance of the Law is demand- ing and often inconvenient. Given this decline, it is a matter of great Jewish concern that observant couples who want to have children are able to do so. This fact has led Jewish scholars and scientists to take a strong interest in fertility treatments and in genetic studies that might reduce the incidence of genetic dis- eases. Arguably, the rich tradition of interpreting the Torah and the commentaries on the Torah, and the value placed on study as contributing to Jewish identity and practice, have given ethics a particularly important place in Jewish thought and practice.

These factors, though presented here only in the briefest out- line, help explain some of the distinctively Jewish emphases in the religion-science debate. Consider these three. First, Jewish thinkers have generally been welcoming of, rather than resistant to, new scientific breakthroughs in fundamental physics, cosmol- ogy, origins of life research, evolutionary biology, and ecology.2

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

42 SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

Overall, one encounters little anxiety or defensiveness about science in general or about new scientific theories. When Jewish authors relate scientific theories to the Tanakh, the Jewish Bible, they tend to write comfortably about how the results are consis- tent with Jewish identity. Analogies are drawn with teachings in the Torah and midrash, and writers tend to draw positive parallels for Jewish thought, identity, and practice. In reading these works, you generally don’t detect the worry that Jews face a bunch of dangerous conceptual conflicts that must be overcome.

Second, ethical and political questions often move to the forefront; they tend to be far more important than the ques- tion of how Jewish beliefs could be true in light of science. For most Jewish scholars and educated readers, the more interesting questions lie elsewhere: How are humans different from other animals? What is distinctive about human existence? Are humans basically selfish rather than altruistic? Are we primarily individ- ualistic or social? When are genetic interventions allowed, and when are they wrong? Could scientists someday build a robot that would be indistinguishable from biological persons?

When scientific results seem to show why Jewish observance is healthy or rational or functional, they naturally receive more positive attention; results that seem to undercut Jewish practices are reviewed with concern (and sometimes dismissiveness). Jew- ish authors have written some of the best analyses of the ethics of scientific research and practice, and their subtle and complex analyses often set the standard for other authors.3 Finally, another tradition of Jewish writing offers more mystical readings of the scientific results. Where this tradition predominates, science is generally used as a means for emphasizing the spiritual connec- tion humans can have with the universe and with its Creator.4

The third and final area concerns the responses of Ortho- dox Jewish thinkers. Here a different set of concerns comes to the fore. Consider three examples. The Orthodox biologist Carl Feit at Yeshiva University grapples with the apparently reductive implications of contemporary genetics.5 Cyril Domb, like some Orthodox thinkers, tries to reconcile a more literal reading of Genesis with contemporary scientific evidence, in a fashion that many Christian and Muslim readers will find familiar.6 Finally, the biologist Robert Pollack at Columbia University argues for

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

43SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

a sharp separation between the results of science and Jewish belief and practice. He resists efforts to integrate the two and argues that they belong to sharply separate realms.7

Authors from the three largest Jewish denominations – Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform – have great concern for the nation of Israel. For many Jews, Zionism is not just a political question but a deeply religious conviction as well. Books that suggest a historical or archeological basis for the early occupa- tion of Palestine by the Israelites attract great attention in Israel, as do archeological data that might help in dating the first or second destruction of the Temple or providing details about its construction.

There is one final feature about Judaism and science that distinguishes it from Christianity-science dialogues: the capac- ity to disagree with grace. Rabbis have always disagreed about virtually every topic they have written about, so Jewish schol- ars don’t expect a convergence of opinion. Early in my career I remember watching three Jewish scholars in a heated dispute over science-religion topics and thinking, ‘They’ll never talk to each other again after this battle!’ Yet when the Friday after- noon session ended, the three scholars donned their coats and prepared to walk to the synagogue together for the opening of Shabbat. Christians have much to learn from this capacity to disagree gracefully.

ISLAM Islam was one of the first traditions to engage ‘natural philoso- phy,’ the predecessor to modern science. Muslim philosophers first translated Aristotle’s writings into Arabic, which later led to their translation into Latin and their growing influence in the West. But until recently the dialogue between Islam and modern science seemed to be a far lower priority.

In the past few years, however, the discussion has begun to receive intense attention. It is far more multifaceted than most readers realize. Some thinkers mirror the oppositional language of the more conservative wings of the Christianity-science debate. Others affirm the possibility of integrating Islam and contemporary science, as in the assurance of Fethullah Gülen that

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

44 SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

‘Science cannot contradict religion, for its purpose is to under- stand nature and humanity, which are each a composition of the manifestations of God’s Attributes of Will and Power.’ A third group describes Islam as the ‘bridge’ between the Western theis- tic traditions and the more mystical traditions of the East.

Seyyed Hossein Nasr speaks for many Muslims, both in the Arab world and in the West, when he challenges the identifica- tion of all science with Western science and calls for a distinctively ‘Islamic science.’ According to Nasr, materialism, naturalism, and reductionism – assumptions of a worldview hostile to God – have come to dominate contemporary Western science. Looking back to the medieval writings on nature by Jewish, Muslim, and Christian authors, these scholars argue that it is not necessary for science to be anti-religious. Thus Muslims (and, by implication, other theists) should develop and practice forms of science that do without these assumptions:

Any science that could legitimately be called Islamic science, and not be disruptive of the whole Islamic order, must be one that remains aware of the ‘vertical cause’ of all things, along with the horizontal, a science that issues from and returns to the Real (al-Haqq), Who is the Cause of all things.8

Reductionism and materialism are not intrinsic features of sci- ence; they are unfortunate by-products of decoupling the pur- suit of knowledge from the search for wisdom. Many Muslim scholars argued that we should look first for signs (āyāt) of the Creator’s hand in the world around us. Once we have the cor- rect metaphysics in place, there is no reason for Muslims not to develop specific scientific theories and technologies. But if one does not first acknowledge God, Muslim philosophers argue, science will be working in opposition to the Creator of all things – and thereby fall inevitably into falsehood.9

Islamic science offers an alternative to materialistic science. Its defenders focus on a close reading of the Qur’an as a guide for knowing when science has drawn correct conclusions and when it errs (or goes beyond the evidence) and begins to man- ifest materialist and anti-theological prejudices. Like the Chris- tian critics of ‘secular’ science, these authors emphasize the role

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

45SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

played by political factors – in particular, by Western imperi- alist interests – in how science is done, and therefore in the conclusions that secular scientists reach. Western science pro- motes Western interests. When these are recognized, they argue, it becomes possible to develop forms of science that can pro- mote the insights of Islam.

What kinds of questions interest Islamic writers and readers? Distinctive themes include the dependence of all knowledge and truth on God; the order in nature as reflecting God’s cre- ative activity; the need to begin with an initial divine creation in order to account for the world as we see it; the uniqueness of human beings in comparison to the animals; questions about what is the essence of humanity; the purposiveness of creation; the teleology or directedness of evolution, and hence the gen- eral preference for intelligent design over Darwinian biology. Muslim authors describe the essence of human beings as moral and religious beings, looking to both science and revelation to understand what are our moral and religious obligations. One frequently reads lists of signs (āyāt) that the universe is meant to run according to principles of justice, along with discus- sions of what those principles are. These scholars often trace the evidence that God is directing the entire process toward some particular outcome, including signs of divine judgment. History-based (and sometimes science-based) arguments are offered for the uniqueness of Islam and its superiority to other religions. Similar to the Jewish case, Muslim authors also look for scientific evidence that Islamic law (sharia) is conducive to human health and happiness.

Some Muslim authors hold that it is sufficient to study the Qur’an, Hadı̄th (the words and deeds of Prophet Mohammed), and Sharia. But many thinkers also emphasize the study of phi- losophy as an important means for expanding beyond narrow views of science. If metaphysical language is dismissed as mean- ingless, how can one possibly recognize the role of the Creator? Thus, Nasr writes,

Modern science must be studied in its philosophical foundations from the Islamic point of view, in order to reveal for Muslims exactly what the value system is upon which [science] is based and how this

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

46 SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

value system opposes, complements, or threatens the Islamic value system.10

Muslims believe almost universally that the Qur’an was dic- tated by Allah to his prophet Mohammed, which means that the text in its original Arabic form expresses a direct commu- nication by God. Many equate being a Muslim with regarding the Qur’an as the literal words of God. Nevertheless, there are an increasing number of Muslim thinkers who argue for the necessity of developing a Muslim hermeneutic, that is, principles for interpreting the Qur’anic texts in light of science and phi- losophy. Religion-science discussions take a very different form when they can lead to reinterpretations of both the science and the religion.

An important book by Nidhal Guessoum, Islam’s Quantum Question: Reconciling Muslim Tradition and Modern Science,11 argues for the possibility that there can be multiple readings and inter- pretations of some of the Qur’an’s passages. Sometimes the best interpretation is not literal but allegorical. The principles for alle- gorical interpretation can be traced back to the great medieval Islamic philosopher Ibn Rushd (Averroes). When there appears to be a contradiction, ‘the (religious) Text must be allegorically understood and subjected to interpretation by those whom the Qur’an calls “rooted in knowledge.” ’ Reclaiming these classic Islamic ideas in the ways that Guessoum and others are suggest- ing would greatly reduce the tension between Islam and con- temporary science. If this method of reading is accepted,

one [could] convince the Muslim public of a given idea (say the theory of biological evolution), not by proving that it can be found in the qur’an but rather by showing that at least one intelligent reading and interpretation of its verses is fully consistent with the scientific theory in question.12

Some Muslim thinkers go even further. A movement known as ‘progressive Muslims’ is seeking to develop a ‘critical- progressive Islamic hermeneutics.’13 One can also find more radically secu- larist readings of Islam and science. Rather than sharing Gues- soum’s attempt to reconcile the core of Islam with science with the aid of classical Islamic philosophy, these Muslim thinkers

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

47SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

argue for a more liberal form of Islam that can fit within the parameters of contemporary science. The Turkish Muslim phi- losopher Taner Edis, for example, opposes the ‘Islamizing’ of science. He writes:

The best way to achieve Muslim harmony with science might be to promote liberal tendencies within Islam. . . . [The moderate Muslim intellectuals] think of Islam as a godly and yet sophisticated civiliza- tion rather than a rigid set of divinely ordained rules of conduct. . . . They perceive a meaning in the universe that transcends mere mate- rial goings-on without contradicting scientific statements about sub- atomic particles or the evolution of frogs.14

We close with two interesting features of the recent Islam- science discussion. One dimension involves the growing envi- ronmental movement among Muslims, including a rich use of the Islamic tradition to foster ecological awareness and concern.15 The other stems from the long Muslim tradition of mysticism and negative theology, which influences many Muslim responses to science. Sufi mystics have traditionally emphasized the unknowability of God, holding that one can experience God only through nature, other human beings, and mystical experi- ence. Think of the famous line from Haféz, ‘Creator, pour rain from the clouds of generosity, I will become dust and get out of your way.’ Sufi authors beautifully and poetically evoke the divine in and through nature, encouraging spiritual rather than literal interpretations of contemporary science and its conclusions. One can trace this emphasis on God in and through all things all the way back to the thirteenth-century mystic Ibn ‘Arabī. Perhaps you can hear something of this approach in the words of the French astrophysicist and Muslim Bruno Guiderdoni:

I would like to protect religion from [the] kind of misunderstand- ing where religion is submitted to the approval of scientists or the judgment of science. There is [a] whole dimension of spiritual life that is completely neglected by this scientific approach that is just interested in ‘scientific facts.’ We are not looking for facts in religion. We are looking for our inner transformation, for the improvement of our societies, and for the fruits which will come, insha’ Allah, in the Hereafter.16

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

48 SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

Clearly these more mystical Islamic voices offer a path to a less conflictual relationship with contemporary science than one sees in thinkers like Nasr. They also evidence important connec- tions with some of the Eastern traditions, to which we now turn.

HINDuISM Hindu thinkers have been at the forefront of the religion- science discussion in several different areas. One contribution has been to emphasize common features that run across the world’s tra- ditions. Gandhi famously praised Jesus as an important spiritual teacher and identified with some core Christian positions. (He is reported to have said, ‘I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.’) Many Hindu thinkers like to cite the text from the Gospel of John, ‘The kingdom of God is within you.’ Deepak Chopra concludes,

Christ-consciousness, God-consciousness, Krishna-consciousness, Buddha-consciousness – it’s all the same thing. Rather than ‘Love thy neighbor,’ this consciousness says, ‘You and I are the same beings.’

This Hindu emphasis tends to lift attention above the specific doctrinal (historical, philosophical) claims defended by the dif- ferent religions and to concentrate attention instead on what they share in common. When one moves to this level, many of the specific conflicts with science decrease in importance.

What is it in the Hindu tradition that encourages this approach to our topic? Hinduism began as a series of sacred practices based on the Vedas, extremely ancient sacred texts that were mostly focused on carrying out specific rituals and heal- ings. The Vedas spoke of the activity of a very large number of gods, of their natures, and of the appropriate forms of devotion required of believers. But in the centuries that followed, deep philosophical reflection on these gods and practices gave rise to the highly rarified religious and philosophical system known as Vedanta. These reflections are contained in the Upanishads, which are among the most sacred scriptures of Hinduism, and in later writings. The Upanishads still speak of numerous gods, but they tend to relativize the gods as manifestations of a single

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

49SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

ultimate reality, Brahman. The world of appearance and change is also relativized; it is now seen as maya, illusion. (Whether it is a total illusion, or only a lower level of reality in comparison to Brahman, remains a matter of intense debate.)

This more philosophical form of Hinduism leads to a very dif- ferent sort of religion-science discussion; it also helps to account for the more mystical approach of many Hindu writers. The world can be accepted in its various forms of manifestation, and it can be studied by scientists without any conflict. But Hindu thinkers will generally insist that, in the end, all these phenomena are manifestations of one single ultimate reality. All living things are contained within Brahman and express its being in one way or another. Regularities in physical movement – what scien- tists call natural laws – are manifestations of the inner nature of Brahman. Understood in this way, Hindu belief does not seem to come into significant conflict with the sciences.

It does, however, lead to a particular focus: the study of con- sciousness. Brahman exists in an eternal and unchanging state of existence, consciousness, and bliss (Sat-cit-ānanda). According to the great mystical philosopher Sankara, whose writings are at the center of the ‘non-dual’ (advaita) tradition in Hinduism, these are the only three qualities that Brahman possesses; it is other- wise wholly without attributes (nirguna Brahman). As a result, we can know ultimate reality only through blissful awareness, which means only through our own meditation and conscious- ness. This has led Hindu thinkers to study the evolution and functioning of consciousness with the same sort of intensity that Buddhist thinkers have (as we will see in a moment).

Since there is only the one Brahman and all things are part of it, Hindu scholars have usually resisted any ultimate dualism of mind and body. This has made them interested in studying the ways in which mind-body connections work in human exis- tence. They have generally been integrationists and interaction- ists, advocating a holistic approach to the human person. (We return to traditional Indian medicine shortly.) But there is also a deeper reason for the focus on consciousness, one that can lead to some conflict with contemporary science. The Upanishads also affirm that there is an eternal principle in each living thing, a soul or Ātman. It is this Ātman that is reincarnated again and

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

50 SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

again through the cycle of birth and rebirth (samsara). Hindu practice and thought exist for the ultimate purpose of liberation from this cycle (nirvana). Thus many Hindu scholars hope that the empirical study of consciousness will shed some light on the nature of this ultimate metaphysical principle, Ātman. This focus on an eternal soul has led to some conflict with Western scientists and their approaches to the study of the human person.

The conservative wing in the Hinduism-science discussion exhibits certain parallels with the conservatives in the Chris- tian and Muslim traditions. Perhaps its most extreme form is manifested in those thinkers who maintain that all the major scientific discoveries of the modern period are already present in the Vedas, the original Hindu scriptures. This school defends the superiority of Hinduism over other traditions, highlighting contemporary science where it supports core tenets of Hindu thought and challenging scientific results that appear to be opposed to them.

Mainstream Hindu thought does not make these claims. In some religions devotees are unlikely to be practicing scientists, but one often encounters Hindu practitioners who are physicists, engineers, neuroscientists, or doctors. As a Hindu physicist once told me, ‘Scratch a scientist in India, and you are likely to find a deeply devout spiritual person.’ By and large they experience no tension between their science and their spiritual practices: keeping an altar in the home, bringing offerings to temples, and practicing the traditional ceremonies. Hindu belief and practice are likely to affect their ethical judgments, their beliefs about what is morally right and wrong, and their political stances on the burning issues in Indian politics today.

Outsiders sometimes find it difficult at first to work their way into Hindu writings on science and spirituality. Texts may include the ancient Sanskrit terms and details of Vedantic metaphys- ics; contemporary topics are often explained in terms of the six classical philosophical schools of India; and scientific details are interspersed with narratives from the Vedas, the Upanishads, and the Bhagavad Gita. But one quickly comes to recognize the deep sense of spiritual connection that lies beneath and fuels the tra- ditional accounts. The metaphysical details and stories of gods are meant not as ends but as means to direct the meditator’s attention beyond appearances (maya) to the ultimate unity of all things.

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

51SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

Writings on Hinduism and modern science have been dom- inated by a very different set of concerns than one finds in the Abrahamic faiths. In first place comes the study of the nature and efficacy of consciousness. In quantum physics, in evolution- ary biology and ecosystem studies, in medicine and all aspects of human studies, Hindu scholars have sought to show that con- sciousness plays an indispensable role in the functioning of the universe. Purely materialistic explanations cannot be sufficient.

This same commitment motivates the extensive work on mind-body connections. Hindu authors invariably seek to uncover the mental or spiritual dimensions in the phenomena that scientists (one-sidedly) study. They look for scientific results that show the possibility of enhancing human potential through yogic and other practices. In conferences in India I have heard audience members ask about how yoga affects the unborn fetus, whether sending energy can help plants become more healthy, and how science can explain the ability of some swamis to trans- port their consciousness to other locations.

Traditional Indian medicine, or ayurveda (the ‘science of life’), seeks to restore the balance of mind and body. Treatment is holis- tic; it involves herbal remedies and other medical techniques, but also meditation, mantras, and rites of purification. Because all persons are composites of prakŗti and purusa, or (roughly) fun- damental matter and pure consciousness, medical science must learn to address both sides of human existence. Two specialists, Agrawal and Tiwari, write,

Today, Ayurveda is increasingly popular because it speaks of those ele- mentary concepts of (1) contact with nature, (2) holism, and (3) we are what we eat. . . . Its principles are utilized, not only to treat individuals who are ill, but also to prepare balanced meals and construct harmo- nious environments. Ayurveda brings to life the concepts of preven- tive health care and health promotion. The ultimate goal of Ayurveda is to help the individual discover a personal knowledge of living.17

Admittedly, there are also strands of Hindu thought that are somewhat harder to synthesize with the attitudes and results of Western science. Some authors seek empirical demonstration of the super- and paranormal abilities of the most advanced yogis. Books and conversations in India include accounts of their

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

52 SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

abilities to levitate, to stop their breathing, to survive without food or oxygen, and to recall experiences from one or more past lives. These phenomena are sometimes taken as empirical, ‘sci- entific’ evidence that the doctrines of karma and reincarnation are true.

Still, Hindu scholars across the sciences are less known for these proofs and more for their emphasis on the mystical dimen- sion of reality. The mathematical order and lawfulness of the physical universe, they argue, can and should prompt a deep spiritual response. Authors frequently encourage readers to dis- cern the Ātman in plants and animals throughout the biosphere. Physiology, neurology, and medicine need to be pursued not ‘mechanically’ but with an awareness of the spiritual dimensions of human existence. Above all else, Hindus emphasize the one- ness of all reality in, or as, Brahman. They encourage meditation and spiritual reflection on science, with the goal of realizing the ultimately mental nature of all existing things as manifestations of a single reality and experiencing the connection of all existing things.18

Thus, for example, the Indian physicist George Sudarshan writes, ‘In the Hindu tradition . . . the spiritual quest is in fact not distinct from the scientific, aesthetic or, for that matter, any academic pursuit.’ He adds,

In my own life, I have been privileged to experience the joy and ecstasy of discovery in both the scientific and spiritual domains. In such moments, the distinction between scientific and spiritual paths van- ishes for me. In fact, the feeling is identical for both.

To support this view, Sudarshan appeals to a set of spiritual beliefs and practices:

The Hinduism of Central and South Asia believes instead that God manifests Himself, or Herself, in many ways and in many contexts. My tradition affirms that any spiritual search, whether academic or not, is bound to lead to God. Within Hinduism, there is nothing which is not sacred. God is not an isolated event, something separate from the universe. God is the universe.19

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

53SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

BuDDHISM Buddhism is widely regarded as the easiest religion to synthe- size with contemporary science.20 One could argue whether this reflects a permanent feature of Buddhism or whether it sig- nals how much Buddhist belief and practice have successfully adapted to the modern scientific world, at least in the West. Still, the outcome is the same in either case: Buddhist belief and prac- tice today have become the poster child for successfully integrat- ing religion and science.

Especially in comparison with Christianity and Islam, Buddhism – or at least Western Buddhism – seems to have slid into the scientific age with surprisingly little friction, conflict, or disharmony. Buddhist thinkers and practitioners frequently emphasize that this religion (if they still consider it to be a reli- gion) focuses on meditation; it is primarily a way of seeing the world and a mode of existing in the world. They admit that Tibetan Buddhists and Japanese Pure Land Buddhists (to name just two examples) held and continue to hold a wide vari- ety of very specific religious and metaphysical beliefs. But the spokespersons for Buddhism in the West today tend to focus on meditative practices rather than demanding strict adherence to traditional beliefs. (Scholars dispute whether this approach reflects the core of the Buddhist stance or rather a smart and creative move on the part of its best-known teachers.) Thus, for example, the Dalai Lama has famously proclaimed that, if contemporary science conflicts with any tenets of Tibetan Bud- dhism, he will side with science and against the tradition.21 A more recent book by His Holiness, Beyond Religion: Ethics for a Whole World, emphasizes mindfulness and ethical living over tra- ditional religious belief and practice – an amazing move by the spiritual leader of Tibetan Buddhism, a major world religion.22

In some ways, this ‘minimalist’ Buddhist approach is not unlike the mystical Hindu approach that we encountered earlier, but its metaphysical sparseness is probably unmatched across the world’s traditions. The ‘minimalist’ Buddhist practitioner engages in a variety of meditative practices. She holds certain values about living with and treating other living things. At most, she will espouse some very general metaphysical beliefs (though she

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

54 SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

may not think of them as metaphysical at all!), such as the belief that all things are interrelated or interdependent, or that all that exists is ‘inter-being.’23 She may or may not affirm the traditional doctrine of reincarnation.

If you have participated in these sorts of dialogues you will know that this minimalism can produce a sometimes humorous dynamic in dialogues with scientists. Scientists are used to inter- actions with Christians or Muslims, who more often challenge core tenets of scientific method or express metaphysical beliefs that stand in some significant tension with accepted scientific laws. In dialogue with Western Buddhists, by contrast, the scien- tist is likely to be surprised when they emphasize that there can be no possible jive between Buddhism and science. He senses that his Buddhist discussion partners hold some beliefs that don’t exactly jive with the way contemporary science approaches the questions, but he has trouble putting his finger on exactly where the differences lie. At conferences this leads to some amusing exchanges, in which the scientists say, ‘Well, surely you must believe something more than meditation and compassion. Surely “inter-being” and “Dependent Arising” are metaphysi- cal assertions for which one will need some evidence.’ And the Western Buddhists will often reply, ‘No, we’re not making any metaphysical claims at all. Our words are only expressions of our feelings about existence, or subjective impressions that arise during meditation. So there is no possible conflict and no need for metaphysical justifications.’ ‘But surely you’re making some metaphysical claims.’ ‘No, we aren’t!’ ‘Yes, you are!’

It is harder than you would think to resolve this debate. It does seem strange for a scientist to tell a religious person that they are too minimalist and that they ought to hold more robust metaphysical beliefs, beliefs that would conflict more dramati- cally with science! After all, many scientists have been calling on the religious traditions to reinterpret their beliefs so that they become guidelines for ethics and spiritual practices rather than metaphysical (or, worse, quasi-scientific) claims. Many of these same scientists point to Buddhism as an ideal and example in this regard.24

But on one point the skeptic is probably right: for Buddhism the world is not a value-free natural system. Both as a whole and

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

55SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

in every part, the natural world is shot through with value. The reason is not because it is created by a transcendent God – for Buddhists, it isn’t – but because the Buddha taught that every- thing is of value just as it is and for being what it is. Meditation and Buddhist practice are not about escaping from the world but about developing a deeper practice of compassion for all living things because of what they most truly are, each possess- ing its own unique value. One sees this reflected in the poem ‘Dewdrops on a Lotus Leaf,’ by the famous Zen Buddhist author Ryokan (1758–1831):

The wind has settled, the blossoms have fallen; Birds sing, the mountains grow dark – This is the wondrous power of Buddhism.

The Enlightened One perceives the infinite value of each indi- vidual precisely because there is no other reality or ground or transcendent source except the one reality that exists.

The result is a comprehensive and rather demanding ethic, one that presupposes a world suffused with values. Yet doesn’t this picture of the world stand at some distance from the natural- ized, value-free picture of the world that today’s natural sciences paint? It certainly seems to be a far cry from the reductionist drive of science, with its attempt to explain all phenomena in terms of their most basic constituents and laws. Indeed, the Bud- dhist worldview is the opposite of reductionism, since it affirms the full and irreducible value of every manifestation of life in the universe, of every life form, no matter what its evolutionary history or level of complexity. Moreover, it places great value on the phenomenon of consciousness or awareness, which – at least in the forms in which human beings experience it – is an extreme latecomer in the field of evolution.

This difference leads us to one of the really distinct features of the science-Buddhism dialogue: the focus on consciousness. Buddhist scholars are very strongly motivated to engage in the study of consciousness, its origins, and its effects. They do not have any compulsion to link consciousness with some immaterial soul that carries and produces it. As a result, they are extremely interested in studying the natural emergence of consciousness,

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

56 SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

its evolution, its manifestations in humans and other animals, its contents, and its effects. That in turn inclines Buddhists to be allies with scientists across the whole range of sciences that bear on consciousness: the human sciences, of course, but also cog- nitive science, neuroscience, evolutionary psychology, genetics, and the classical Darwinian accounts of evolutionary history. If one is interested only in how consciousness arises and what its dynamics are, one need not fear or resist results of any of these disciplines, for all shed light on that question.

The other Buddhist focus is on the contents of conscious- ness. The technical name for this study is ‘phenomenology’; it involves the study of phenomena as they are presented to con- scious awareness and as we immediately experience them. Bud- dhist focus on lived experience has actually helped to produce a new area of cooperation between scientists and Buddhists that many take to be a model for science-religion work to come. Known as the study of the ‘neural correlates of consciousness,’ this approach focuses on the correlations between perceived conscious states and brain activity. Famous experiments have been carried out (among others) by Richard Davidson and his team at the University of Wisconsin – studies that were directly supported by the Dalai Lama, who asked some of his closest monks to participate and who personally toured the research facility. The monk being studied, drawing on thousands of hours of religious practice, would place himself in a meditative state, engaging, for example, in compassion meditation. Changes in his brain state were measured using real-time brain-imaging tech- niques such as fMRI scans. Specific stimuli were then applied, such as sounding a loud noise near his ears or lightly prick- ing his skin with a pin. The brain responses were measured and then contrasted with the responses of the same subject when not meditating and with the responses of untrained meditators. Davidson and his colleagues found that those with training and practice in meditation showed greater activity in areas of the brain dedicated to paying attention and making decisions.

What makes these results particularly interesting is that the scientific data produced could not have been acquired without refer- ence to the mental or conscious state that the subject was in. This sci- entific research studies human beings in their full or ‘emergent’

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

57SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

form; it depends on the conscious awareness and intentions that the subjects themselves produce and experience. Rather than ‘reducing’ consciousness, the experimenters were presuppos- ing consciousness. Put differently, the scientific knowledge was acquired, in part, by means of the religious beliefs and practices of the subject, rather than by asking the researcher to view reli- gious beliefs as mistaken or at least irrelevant.

Scientists may welcome this sort of experimental method because it provides data on how mental experiences and brain states are correlated. For their part, Buddhist thinkers are enthu- siastic about scientific evidence that shows that the discipline of meditation can actually alter one’s perception of the world. Some scholars suggest that religion-science discussions should concentrate on partnerships of this kind where there can be satisfaction on both sides, rather than on those areas where reli- gious belief and scientific results stand in dramatic tension.

Of course, Buddhists have not limited themselves to assisting scientists; in other areas they attempt to go beyond the results of science. Numerous Buddhist thinkers have engaged in intro- spective or ‘phenomenological’ studies as a means for acquiring knowledge.25 B. Alan Wallace, for example, a leading scholar/ practitioner of Buddhism and science, is working toward ‘a new science of consciousness.’26 Beyond the realm of natural science ‘is a state in which words and concepts are suspended,’ a state where theory ‘is nothing more than a conceptual overlay.’ The final goal of Buddhist practice is not science but ‘the overcoming of all the usual barriers between the individual and the ultimate ground of being.’

Now the Buddhism-science dialogue also has its critics. Some argue that the pro-scientific statements are actually nothing more than good propaganda. Buddhism is, after all, a religious system, and it includes a large number of ‘superstitious’ beliefs that clash with the scientific mindset – just spend some time in a Tibetan monastery talking with the monks, they say, and you’ll hear a much more metaphysical account of Buddhism. Other critics argue that the focus on the subjective contents of consciousness cannot be scientific, because it is not objec- tively testable and verifiable. It is fine for Buddhist subjects to participate in scientific experiments as long as the terms of the

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

58 SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

collaboration are set by the laboratory researchers. But the critics warn against allowing meditative practices (and the convictions they produce) to bypass scientific testing and pass for knowledge of reality. Belief in reincarnation, for example, is basic to all the traditions of Buddhist doctrine and is presupposed in most Bud- dhist rituals. Yet reincarnation actually presupposes something essential about a person that can continue from life to life. This belief, the critics note, cannot be consistent with any naturalist understanding of the world, and actually flies in the face of what we know about the dependence of ‘mind’ on states of the brain and body.27

CONCLuSIONS AND FuRTHER quESTIONS TO EXPLORE At the beginning of this chapter I noted that critics frequently allege that religion, by its very nature, stands in tension with sci- ence. To speak in such generalities, I suggested, does not do jus- tice to the incredible diversity of religious traditions and interests.

Some amazing cultural upheavals are taking place as each of the world’s major religious traditions encounters modern sci- ence and begins to interact with it. In every case there is change. Some traditions immediately go into battle mode, placing them- selves for decades or even centuries in an oppositional stance to most of what contemporary science stands for. They criticize specific results (especially those that conflict with their own tra- ditional beliefs); they challenge the assumptions that underlie science, such as materialism and naturalism; they interpret sci- ence as a worldview and then contrast it to their own beliefs about ultimate reality. These traditions will often offer their own competing form of science in its place, as in Islamic science or various forms of Native American science. Other religions are torn for decades or centuries between ‘modernist’ and ‘tradition- alist’ schools; one thinks of the intense debate over Modernism that rocked the Catholic Church in the late nineteenth cen- tury and continues into the present. Still other traditions such as Buddhism seem to slide effortlessly into the scientific age with little friction or conflict or disharmony.

Studying the various traditions in their distinctness should not obscure common themes across the traditions. Intelligent design

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

59SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

has adherents in Christianity, Islam, and even among some Jews and Hindus. Likewise, ‘progressive’ or liberal approaches across the traditions share important features in common. Orthodox Jews and conservative Christians sometimes share a common interest in using science to defend the accuracy of the Hebrew Bible, and Muslims have similar interests for the Qur’an. Hindus and Buddhists are interested in evidence from the neurosciences that meditation can change brain states and, in particular, that the neurological responses of advanced meditators are different from those in the brains of ordinary people.

Certainly the diversity we have encountered in this chapter undercuts the claim that all religions are simply hostile to science. In fact, some will respond, shouldn’t other traditions emulate the remarkable harmony that arises (for example) in many dis- cussions of Buddhism and science? Shouldn’t one focus on the areas of overlap and compatibility, holding them up as a model for those religious traditions that are caught in a much more volatile relationship with contemporary science? Is it possible that Christianity or Islam could discover a similar harmony? Or is the rejection of science that one sees in many Christian and Muslim authors simply intrinsic to these traditions?

Our exploration suggests one final possibility: that the reli- gions, when one abstracts from their specific beliefs and tra- ditions, may together point toward a more general feature of human existence that we might call ‘human spirituality.’ The term ‘spirituality’ connotes experiences of wholeness, integra- tion, timelessness, or meaningfulness that many people report. These experiences may come unbidden to an individual; they may arise as a response to great sadness or inner turmoil; or they may result from disciplined spiritual practices such as medita- tion or prayer pursued over many years. Why should one say that such spiritual experiences have to stand in tension with the scientific project? After all, in and of themselves they make no knowledge claims. They seem more strongly connected with specific internal states and impressions about human existence as experienced by a particular individual. Or perhaps they are by-products of an inner encounter with God or some deeper dimension of reality.

Interest in the spirituality approach to science has grown rap- idly in recent years. It’s no coincidence that these same years have

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

60 SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

seen a rapid decrease in participation in organized religion. The no-longer-affiliated or “Nones” have described themselves as “spiritual but not religious” or as “spiritual independents.” They may practice yoga or meditation without much attention to tra- ditional Hindu or Buddhist teachings. They may find spirituality in different places: in nature or music, in being with friends or making love. They may tie together bits of sacred texts and prac- tices without feeling that they have to be at home in just one. Whether they locate their spirituality in the world just as it is, in ethics and political action, in the ongoing evolution of the cosmos, or in deep experiences of interconnectedness, they are bringing new kinds of emphasis, and new energy, to the explo- ration of religion and science.

It is interesting to read the comments on spirituality by some of the most vocal science-based opponents of religion, such as Richard Dawkins and Daniel Dennett, against this backdrop. Both individuals have commented in public that they know something of spiritual experience; both are happy to call them- selves ‘spiritual but not religious.’ If the most vocal opponents of religion are willing to countenance the spiritual dimension of human existence, how could anyone argue that spirituality (in this sense) and science are intrinsically incompatible? And if they aren’t incompatible, couldn’t one also work within the various religious traditions to identify features that express the spiritual dimension in similar ways? These are, it turns out, pre- cisely the features that can be most easily synthesized with the sciences. Buddhists and indigenous traditions might initially play a leading role, but I think it will turn out that this project can be extended to many other traditions with equal success. I expect that the results will foster a renewed sense of awe and wonder toward the universe as science is helping to unfold it to us. We return to this topic in the final chapter.

quESTIONS FOR REFLECTION AND DISCuSSION 1 You have now had the chance to look at a number of the

world’s religions. Based on this new, broader perspective, what kinds of factors within a religion promote dialogue with the sciences and a positive attitude toward scientific evidence? What characteristics tend to produce conflict?

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

61SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

2 What do the religions discussed in this chapter have in com- mon with each other? What are some of the areas where they differ?

3 Stage a debate between representatives of these different reli- gions, with people role-playing any that are missing. See what strengths and weaknesses emerge as you think through their relationships with each other and with science.

4 Does the harmony (or possible harmony) of Buddhism and science offer a model that other religions could emulate? (For example, could Christianity become like Buddhism?) Are there intrinsic features of the other religions that make it more difficult for them to achieve the same harmony? Or could there be other forms of harmony between religion and science that (say) Christianity and Islam could establish?

5 Different religions pose different kinds of questions to sci- ence or about the limits of science. Which questions mat- ter most to you, and which matter least? Do you find one religion’s set of questions more interesting than another? (Note: it may not be the religion that you belong to or are most familiar with.) Can you name some beliefs, practices, or questions that do not arise within any of the religions that we have covered so far?

6 What responses do you have to the rapid growth of the spir- itual independents, people who are ‘spiritual but not reli- gious’ (SBNR)? If you were (or are!) SBNR, how might you approach science differently than people who belong to a religion? Do traditional religions have the same resources . . . or more . . . or fewer?

NOTES 1 Steven T. Katz, Shlomo Biderman and Gershon Greenberg, eds., Wrestling

with God: Jewish Theological Responses During and After the Holocaust (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007).

2 An excellent overview is Noah J. Efron, Judaism and Science: A Historical Introduction (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2007). See also Lenn E. Goodman, Creation and Evolution (Abingdon: Routledge, 2010), for a help- ful example. Goodman shows how Jews can affirm the best of evolutionary biology while remaining committed to the normativity of their texts and practices.

3 See Jacob Bronowski, Science and Human Values (New York: Messner, 1956). Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

62 SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

4 See Daniel Matt, God and the Big Bang: Discovering Harmony Between Science and Spirituality (Woodstock, VT: Jewish Lights Publishing, 1996); Joel R. Primack and Nancy Ellen Abrams, The View from the Center of the Universe: Discovering Our Extraordinary Place in the Cosmos (New York: Penguin Riv- erhead, 2006). Joel Primack is a leading astrophysicist and a secular Jew; his approach to integrating science and spirituality is markedly different from Orthodox treatments of the same topics.

5 Carl Feit, ‘The Order of Creation and the Emerging God: Evolution and Divine Action in the Natural World,’ in Geoffrey Cantor and Marc Swetlitz, eds., Jewish Tradition and the Challenge of Darwinism (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2006).

6 Cyril Domb and Aryeh Carmell, eds., Challenge: Torah Views on Science and Its Problems (London: Association of Orthodox Jewish Scientists; New York: Feldheim, 1976).

7 Robert Pollack, The Faith of Biology and the Biology of Faith: Order, Meaning, and Free Will in Modern Medical Science (New York: Columbia University Press, 2000).

8 Seyyed Hossein Nasr, ‘Islam and Science,’ in Philip Clayton, ed., Oxford Handbook of Religion and Science (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), 85.

9 Similar sets of concepts can be described in a more moderate or a more strident tone. The writings of the Iranian philosopher and physicist Mehdi Golshani are more moderate in tone, e.g., Issues in Islam and Science (Tehran: Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies, 2004), and The Holy Qur’an and the Sciences of Nature (New York: Global Scholarly Publications, 2003).

10 Nasr, ‘Islam and Science,’ 73. 11 Nidhal Guessoum, Islam’s Quantum Question: Reconciling Muslim Tradition

and Modern Science (London: I.B. Tauris, 2011). 12 Ibid. 13 Adis Duderija, ‘The Interpretational Implications of Progressive Muslims:

Qur’an and Sunnah Manhaj in Relation to [the] Construction of a Nor- mative Muslimah Representation,’ Journal of Islam and Christian – Muslim Relations 19/4 (2008), 409–427. For an online source, see Duderija, ‘The Political Dimension of Critical-Progressive Islamic Hermeneutics,’ www. pol.mq.edu.au/apsa/papers/Refereed%20papers/Duderija%20The%20 Political%20Dimension.pdf.

14 Taner Edis, An Illusion of Harmony: Science and Religion in Islam (Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2007), 203–204.

15 Richard C. Foltz, et al., eds., Islam and Ecology: A Bestowed Trust (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2003); Saleem H. Ali, Treasures of the Earth: Need, Greed and a Sustainable Future (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2009); İbrahim Özdemir, The Ethical Dimension of Human Attitude Towards Nature: A Muslim Perspective (Istanbul: Insan Publications, 2008).

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

63SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

16 Bruno Guiderdoni, ‘Are Science and Islam Compatible?’ http://science- islam.net/article.php3?id_article=618&lang=en. For an in-depth inter- view with this French astrophysicist and convert to Islam, see W. Mark Richardson and Gordy Slack, eds., Faith in Science: Scientists Search for Truth (New York: Routledge, 2001), 70–86.

17 D. P. Agrawal and Lalit Tiwari, ‘Ayurveda: The Traditional Indian Medicine System and Its Global Dissemination,’ www.indianscience.org/essays/t_es_ agraw_ayurveda.shtml. The same website, edited by Rajiv Malhotra and Jay Patel, includes a wide variety of articles on the history of Indian science and technology.

18 Sangeetha Menon, ed., Consciousness, Experience, and Ways of Knowing: Per- spectives from Science, Philosophy and the Arts (Bangalore: National Institute of Advanced Studies, 2006); Pranab Das, ed., Global Perspectives on Science and Spirituality (West Conshohocken, PA: Templeton Press, 2009); Makarand Paranjape, ed., Science, Spirituality and the Modernization of India (London: Anthem Press, 2009).

19 George Sudarshan, ‘One Quest, One Knowledge,’ in W. Mark Richardson, et al., eds., Science and the Spiritual Quest: New Essays by Leading Scientists (London: Routledge, 2002), 252, 251, 250.

20 The single most important resource is B. Alan Wallace, ed., Buddhism and Science: Breaking New Ground (New York: Columbia University Press, 2003). Among its many excellent chapters I particularly recommend Jose Ignacio Cabezón, ‘Buddhism and Science: On the Nature of the Dialogue,’ 35–70. For a dialogue on physics and Buddhism I recommend Matthieu Ricard and Trinh Xuan Thuan, The Quantum and the Lotus (New York: Crown Publishers, 2001).

21 Somewhat more cynical observers have called this a public relations ploy, emphasizing how strict is the adherence to a wide variety of doctrinal claims in the monasteries in Tibet. Certainly it would be mistaken to pre- tend that Tibetan Buddhism does not include, and in many ways rest upon, a rather specific set of beliefs about ultimate reality, causality, and the details of reincarnations, scriptures, and ethics. Still, whether essentialist or innova- tive, the attitude that the Dalai Lama reflects has a huge influence on how the traditional beliefs are understood and related to evolving science.

22 Dalai Lama XIV, Beyond Religion: Ethics for a Whole World (Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin, 2011).

23 See Thich Nhat Hanh, Interbeing: Fourteen Guidelines for Engaged Buddhism, 3rd edn. (Berkeley, CA: Parallax Press, 1998); Understanding Our Mind (Berkeley, CA: Parallax Press, 2006).

24 Matthieu Ricard and Trinh Xuan Thuan, The Quantum and the Lotus: A Journey to the Frontiers Where Science and Buddhism Meet (New York: Crown Publishers, 2001); Richard J. Davidson and Anne Harrington, Visions of

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

64 SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

Compassion: Western Scientists and Tibetan Buddhists Examine Human Nature (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001).

25 On Buddhist phenomenology, see Dan Lusthaus, Buddhist Phenomenology: A Philosophical Investigation of Yogācāra Buddhism and the Ch’eng Wei-shih lun (London: Routledge Curzon, 2002); Chandra B. Varma, Buddhist Phenom- enology: A Theravada Perspective (Delhi: Eastern Book Linkers, 1993). More recently, see Evan Thompson, ed., The Problem of Consciousness: New Essays in Phenomenological Philosophy of Mind (Calgary, Alberta: University of Calgary Press, 2003), and Evan Thompson, Mind in Life: Biology, Phenome- nology, and the Sciences of Mind (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2007).

26 Among many publications, see B. Alan Wallace, The Taboo of Subjectivity: Toward a New Science of Consciousness (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000). The quotes are from 110 and 179f.

27 Traditional Tibetan Buddhists hold a number of commitments that stand closer to the Hindu concerns and are somewhat harder to reconcile with contemporary science, including belief in reincarnation, karma, the Bud- dha mind, and the continuing existence of Bodhisattvas.

SuGGESTIONS FOR FuRTHER READING Ali, Saleem H., Treasures of the Earth: Need, Greed and a Sustainable Future (New

Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2009). Bronowski, Jacob, Science and Human Values (New York: Messner, 1956). Cantor, Geoffrey and Marc Swetlitz, eds., Jewish Tradition and the Challenge of

Darwinism (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2006). Clayton, Philip, ed., Oxford Handbook of Religion and Science (Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 2006). Das, Pranab, ed., Global Perspectives on Science and Spirituality (West Consho-

hocken, PA: Templeton Press, 2009). Davidson, Richard J. and Anne Harrington, Visions of Compassion: Western Sci-

entists and Tibetan Buddhists Examine Human Nature (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001).

Domb, Cyril and Aryeh Carmell, eds., Challenge: Torah Views on Science and Its Problems (London: Association of Orthodox Jewish Scientists; New York: Feldheim, 1976).

Edis, Taner, An Illusion of Harmony: Science and Religion in Islam (Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2007).

Efron, Noah J., Judaism and Science: A Historical Introduction (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2007).

Foltz, Richard C., et al., eds., Islam and Ecology: A Bestowed Trust (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2003).

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .

65SCIENCE AND THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS

Golshani, Mehdi, Issues in Islam and Science (Tehran: Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies, 2004).

Goodman, Lenn E., Creation and Evolution (Abingdon: Routledge, 2010). Guessoum, Nidhal, Islam’s Quantum Question: Reconciling Muslim Tradition and

Modern Science (London: I.B. Tauris, 2011). Hanh, Thich Nhat, Interbeing: Fourteen Guidelines for Engaged Buddhism, 3rd edn.

(Berkeley, CA: Parallax Press, 1998); Understanding Our Mind (Berkeley, CA: Parallax Press, 2006).

Lopez, Jr., Donald S., Buddhism and Science: A Guide for the Perplexed (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2008).

Matt, Daniel, God and the Big Bang: Discovering Harmony Between Science and Spirituality (Woodstock, VT: Jewish Lights Publishing, 1996).

Menon, Sangeetha, ed., Consciousness, Experience, and Ways of Knowing: Perspec- tives from Science, Philosophy and the Arts (Bangalore: National Institute of Advanced Studies, 2006).

Özdemir, Ābrahim, The Ethical Dimension of Human Attitude towards Nature: A Muslim Perspective (Istanbul: Insan Publications, 2008).

Paranjape, Makarand, ed., Science, Spirituality and the Modernization of India (London: Anthem Press, 2009).

Pollack, Robert, The Faith of Biology and the Biology of Faith: Order, Meaning, and Free Will in Modern Medical Science (New York: Columbia University Press, 2000).

Primack, Joel R. and Nancy Ellen Abrams, The View from the Center of the Uni- verse: Discovering Our Extraordinary Place in the Cosmos (New York: Penguin Riverhead, 2006).

Ricard, Matthieu and Trinh Xuan Thuan, The Quantum and the Lotus (New York: Crown Publishers, 2001).

Thompson, Evan, Mind in Life: Biology, Phenomenology, and the Sciences of Mind (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2007).

Wallace, B. Alan, ed., Buddhism and Science: Breaking New Ground (New York: Columbia University Press, 2003).

Clayton, P. (2018). Religion and science : The basics. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from lehman-ebooks on 2019-06-11 13:05:39.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

8. R

ou tle

dg e.

A ll

rig ht

s re

se rv

ed .