Last semester in a course here at DRBU, we compared William James’ Pragmatism to some of the views in Buddhist Sutras. Looking back on some of the topics of the course, I think it’s fair to say that a lot of people who come to Buddhism are first interested in it for pragmatic reasons.
… but often his answers would address the framing or underlying assumptions of the question, investigating the pragmatic outcomes of the path of inquiry.
As a philosopher, the Buddha is known for occasionally not answering certain questions. Rather, he would direct his disciples towards other paths of inquiry, paths that he saw as having more helpful pragmatic results. He would address his students’ questions, but often his answers would address the framing or underlying assumptions of the question, investigating the pragmatic outcomes of the path of inquiry. Through dialogue, he and his questioner would investigate various ways of looking at important questions, and where the results of these perspectives might lead. The Buddha often emphasises that the time and energy that we invest into inquiry is very important, and so pragmatically speaking, we should choose a path of inquiry that will lead us to the desired results without wasting our efforts. A classic example of this sort of dialogue concludes with the Buddha’s parable of the poisoned arrow:
“It’s just as if a man were wounded with an arrow thickly smeared with poison.
His friends & companions, kinsmen & relatives would provide him with a surgeon, and the man would say, ‘I won’t have this arrow removed until I know whether the man who wounded me was a noble warrior, a brahman, a merchant, or a worker.’
He would say, ‘I won’t have this arrow removed until I know the given name & clan name of the man who wounded me…
until I know whether he was tall, medium, or short…
until I know whether he was dark, ruddy-brown, or golden-colored…
until I know his home village, town, or city…
until I know whether the bow with which I was wounded was a long bow or a crossbow…
until I know whether the bowstring with which I was wounded was fiber, bamboo threads, sinew, hemp, or bark…
until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was wild or cultivated…
until I know whether the feathers of the shaft with which I was wounded were those of a vulture, a stork, a hawk, a peacock, or another bird…
until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was bound with the sinew of an ox, a water buffalo, a langur, or a monkey.’
He would say, ‘I won’t have this arrow removed until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was that of a common arrow, a curved arrow, a barbed, a calf-toothed, or an oleander arrow.’
The man would die and those things would still remain unknown to him.”1
I tend to be very curious, especially when it comes to ideas. I like to think about anything that seems interesting, in whatever way I happen to be interested. Big questions, questions about the nature of humanity, or our place in the universe are so vast that I could invest all of my energy into them, and still continue to be extremely curious. It’s a big, exciting endeavor, but it’s so complex that it can also become very discouraging if the method of investigating is not skillful.
… studying the Dharma can be a way to keep that curiosity alive, and to continue asking….
This issue is precisely where the Buddha’s pragmatism is aimed. What I’ve always found compelling about Buddhism is that the Buddha teaches a method. He doesn’t simply teach that we should believe that one thing is true and something else is false. He teaches methods of investigating the deepest questions, and is deeply concerned about whether or not these methods are effective. I think for anyone approaching life with this kind of curiosity, studying the Dharma can be a way to keep that curiosity alive, and to continue asking, with confidence that one day we will find the answers.