Over the last ten years, we have seen an explosion of discussions of the science behind mindfulness, its effects, and so on. There are congresses and organizations that link scientific research and Buddhism, and sometimes it might seem that with this connection the scientific world gets a "benevolence credential" and connection with awakenment through sharing the same stage with the Buddha's world. Some of this research takes a view on awakenment and practice from the perspective of current work in Physics, but the bulk of it comes from the neurosciences. Science in general and neuroscience in particular are both very appealing to humankind: both deal with life as phenomenon and neuroscience specifically deals with perception, cognition and emotion; in short science deals with what defines us as living beings. Neuroscience is thus a useful example for considering how science and mindfulness practice might come together.
It is curious that neuroscience has been a locus of conversation between buddhists and scientists, and a place from which buddhist scientists do research. We find that under its same umbrella there are somehow gentle approaches of exploring our mind alongside the darkest and most aggressive way of researching, with vivisection, or the use animals, at its core. The use of animals, of living beings, in order to get a quick result is widespread in science. It is accepted as a fact. Nevertheless it is the most vivid setting sun expression of aggression towards life. And sadly enough, it is an actual expression of how much science sees the world: a dead collection of elements ready to be grasped and used.
That view can reach unimaginable acts of cruelty that are well documented by many organizations that work on animal rights. Added to that is the actual paradigm of Science, that the observer has no relation whatsoever with what is observed, all this makes science an area ripe with the potential of expressig the solidity of egohoood. It is "my" thesis, it is "my" theory that has to be proved, it is "my way" of seeing things. Also, there are many more aspects that contribute to darken this view, for instance huge commercial and funding pressures that often have a big influence on researchers and their aims.
Nevertheless, not a single word against vivisection has been uttered in those arenas. So, as community, are we aware as that the numbers in a graphic of a scientific paper or its pictures meant the life of a living being? What do we think about this? On one hand, Shambhala Buddhism is a view and practice that has compassion, egolessness, gentleness at its very heart and activity. This non- aggressive approach toward ourselves and our world brings healthiness and peace to every sentient being that has a connection with it. On the other hand, science has a vast variety of approaches regarding how to see and deal with our world.
As Shambhala practitioners we do have an ethical point to view on life and society, and we know this view should be present in all aspects of our society and life, so what to do with Science?
Our aspiration is to bring this issue to the community and to see where this conversation unfolds, in a not so distant future perhaps a Shambhalian way of having science?
