A scientific, experiment-based approach towards spiritualism and ancient Indian texts could serve us well.
There is much that Science has contributed towards our physical well-being. There is also a lot that we can learn from it to inform our thinking. To me, one thing that stands out is its approach to any subject. Science starts with the premise that it may not know the truth but is open to new ideas (theories), so long as they pass logical tests. These tests (also called experiments or empirical observations) should be able to satisfy certain conditions. There are several ways in which this approach may be summarized. Here is how I see it: Firstly, the theory should predict (experimentally verifiable) things that other theories do not. Secondly, the experiments should be replicable, so that anyone can repeat them and validate the results. Thirdly comes analysis, debate, and further experimentation. In other words, the theory, even after acceptance, should be able to withstand ongoing scrutiny. For example, Newton’s theory of gravitation passed early tests. But, as scientific thought and instrument technologies evolved, the theory was substituted with Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity. This ongoing scrutiny, observation, and testing are used to ensure that everything new we are learning is fitting well with what we already know. When things don’t fit together, some of our past theories need to be re-tested, refined, or changed.
Science thus becomes an ongoing journey. Experiments can succeed or fail, but Science relentlessly pursues the truth by starting from a position of modesty (“I may not know, but I am willing to learn”) and dispassionate logic. Strong advocacy, faith, and even powerful voices supporting a claim are insufficient. Any theory needs to prove itself to be elevated to reach a position of acceptance. For example, mighty institutions like the Church ultimately bowed to science after it proved that Earth was not the center of the Universe. And this is how it should be. Without passing logical validation, nothing should be accepted regardless of the source.
Applying Science to spiritual practices and texts
Spiritual texts talk about a lot of things. Bhagwad Gita, the epitome of Indian spiritualism, covers a wide range of topics – from basic knowledge of the soul, spiritual intelligence, and the creation around it, to essence of yoga, to yoga paths to peace and happiness through action, worship, knowledge, and meditation, to characteristics (modes) of nature – to name just a few.
While many see reading the book as an elevating experience, its teachings were originally written in the words of ancient Sanskrit Language and have many layers of meanings. For this reason, interpretation and internalization of these teachings should be done carefully and using a scientific mindset. Accepting anything on faith or dogma is fraught and that remains especially true for books like Gita, that cover expansive grounds.
Science to the rescue
Science provides a potential way forward here. A spiritual process inspired by it can remain logical, although it may vary a bit from the 3-steps described above. A person could start from a place that is important to him (such as personal happiness), test if what Gita advises works for him, and then go forward from there. With that logic, here are a few places to start: Gita teaches about the path to happiness through action, worship, knowledge, and meditation (see article on TAME – for my thoughts on how to move forward on path of meditation). Depending on personal preference, a person could start from any of these, plan personal tasks (experiments), and do these tasks for a few weeks or months to see if they increase his level of happiness. Regardless of the outcome of the experiment, he should not abandon the pursuit of happiness through scientific inquiry, just as science does not abandon the pursuit of truth in the face of failed experiments.
A note on spiritual experiments
It is important to understand that while the spirit of skepticism, inquiry, and logic should guide our spiritual exploration, the underlying steps used to design a spiritual experiment or accepting / rejecting a suggested spiritual action may be different from how theories are accepted / rejected in science. This is so because while objective and numerical criteria can be set for scientific experiments, the bar for the success of spiritual experiments is set based on observations of the self. Such observations would be difficult to quantify and make as objective as they can be in science. So, the bar to accept or reject the outcomes of a spiritual experiment would depend upon how much that initiative appears to have improved the person’s own happiness and well-being.
Why go through this elaborate process of designing and running experiments? Isn’t this just doing a task and seeing if it works well? Yes, it is. And it’s also true that treating this as an experiment also retains a level of objectivity and rigor that is often missing in the way we perform personal tasks. Attachment to a set of beliefs can easily slide into dogma. The modesty and sense of fallibility that Science teaches us is invaluable in protecting against such thinking. Besides, treating the task as an experiment can also spur a person to try and make objective observations about himself. For example, go for one month without meditation and at end of each day put down on a scale of 1-10 how happy you have been. Then in the next month, do meditation for 30 minutes in the morning and repeat the recording of happiness level at end of each day. Finally, compare the average score of first month with that of the second to see if meditation is making a difference to your level of happiness.
An additional point here is replicability of experiments. In the spiritual realm, what works for me may not work for you. This could be because our preferred spiritual paths are different. For example, I could advance quickly by following a regular routine of meditation. You, on the other hand, may prefer the path of action, knowledge, or worship. And even if you are drawn towards meditation, I may be at a more basic level compared with you. So, the meditation techniques you use may be too advanced for me right now. For this reason, replicability does not work as effectively as it does in science. But this difference in peoples’ preferences and level of advancement does call for humility and acceptance of the fact the people are different and at different levels of advancement in their spiritual journeys. So, a spiritual experiment that a person says works for him may not work for me now. But it might in the future.
Closing note: It takes time
Spiritual experiments are time-consuming. They need patience and persistence to bear fruit. Including them in daily routine is thus vital. This aspect of spiritual advance is both discouraging and encouraging. Discouraging, because significant spiritual advance is likely be slow in coming (although some progress is visible fairly quickly). It can seem at times like pushing against an immovable wall. And related spiritual experiments need to be pushed into our busy lives in the form of a regular routine. Yet, it is also encouraging because these experiments offer profound hope that happiness can come from practicing simple routines. We may not need social or economic status to be happy. Instead, we may just need to have enough to meet our basic needs and the perseverance to push forward in our spiritual journey.
