To be honest the same is said about Hinduism by some Hindus: It is a science, a philosophy, a way of life, experential rather than dogmatic. However, people who make such claims about their religion, seem to think that their religion being science, philosophy, a way of life, experiential rather than dogmatic is mutually contradictory with it being a religion. This is not the case. Many Hindus have realised this, and hence why we now call Hinduism the scientific religion or the philosophical religion
There is no denying that Hinduism has its roots in philosophical reasoning. The Hinduism that we know today as yoga, karma and reincarnation, dharma, prana, chakras, kundalini, advaita was enunciated in the Upanishads long after the Vedas were written. Thereafter arose the 6 Hindu philosophical schools where all of these concepts were investigated using critical thinking divorced from acceptance of tradition, and systematized and developed more precisely. The kind of reasoning that was used by these 6 main Hindu philosophical schools is based an epistemology known as the pramana method which basically means, “How can we methodically know what we know” it is basically skepticism which is the foundation of any science.
The 6 Hindu philosophical schools essentially rejected what the Vedas taught at the onset of their inquiries in order to reestablish the same concepts without reliance on scripture, but instead using ones own experiences and intellect to validate the scripture.
In the end the following pramanas were agreed upon by all schools as valid methods of gaining valid knowledge: perception, inference and direct experience. Any kind of knowledge begins with ones perception of what there is, but soon one realises that what there is, is phenomena and appearance, because our senses and meditate between reality and the observation of reality, so we always get a sensory view of reality as things as they appear, but not things as they are. In order to know these hidden things and the ultimate things one must use their faculty of reason/intellect.
This is where Hinduism triumphs over all other religions, including Buddhism. It has an incredible faith in reasoning. It is the only religion which demands logical argument and precise critical thinking for any proposition. This is why you will find Hinduism is full of discourses of hair splitting analysis of such things time space, time, causation, mind, consciousness.
There are many examples on youtube to show you how the Hindu mind works:
Swami Dayananda: Discourses on Self:
The following discourse, which is fairly long consisting of 11 parts of 16 min long or so, more than illustrates this reasoning strength of Hinduism and delinates how Hindus reason and how they establish their conclusions which later becomes their faith. Anybody who watches and studies this discourse will come up to par with my own knowledge of Hinduism.
Swami Chinmayananda: The logic of spirituality
Swamini Vimalananda: How to think
The above examples are common of how Hindu swami’s/risis give discourses. They are are very logical and easy to follow, they use plenty of logical arguments and examples and their conclusions are acceptable to rational people. This is no accident, logic itself is a tradition Hindus have studied for thousands of years. We have developed the art of logic into a precise science of critical thinking.
The razzle and dazzle of my own intellect is but a dull 5 watt bulb before the 100 watt bulbs of the swami and the 1000 watt bulb of the maharishi. So we Hindus are intellectual people and scientific people. Most of the conclusions known to science today such as atoms, cycles of nature, big bang theory, energy conservation, mechanics were known to us long before, and many of the conclusions science is coming to know today are likewise known to us. But we have not used the methods modern science have used: empiricism. We have used what is known as rationalism. Pure thinking, intellecutalization.
We have faith in reasoning, to an extent which even modern science lacks.
Now how does this contrast with Buddhism. Most forms of Buddhism are anti-reason. They eschew metaphysics, speculation, contemplation or any kinds of thinking. This is especially marked in Zen Buddhism. The Buddhist tries to directly perceive their own reality through their own experience. So the main focus of Buddhism is meditation, detached observation. It is subjective, as opposed to objective. It cannot strictly be called a science because there is no focus on measuring observation and then rationally explaining those observations which is what science and Hindu sages do, but what it does do is scientifically observe the subjective world. It is what Hindus call paravidya - higher science or spiritual science.
But Hinduism has Buddhism as well and in Hinduism it is called Yoga. It is the third way of knowing and the highest way of knowing: direct experience. It has exactly the same focus as Buddhism to directly experience reality through detached observation and through meditation. So all of Buddhism is basically the Yoga part of Hinduism. In fact the Yoga part is true Hinduism. So Buddhism could be said to be true Hinduism. Yet, Buddhism lacks the preliminary stage which is equally as important: developing the intellect.
Too many Buddhists fail to develop their intellect but rather just focus on sit down meditation and mindfullness practices. This is why they fail to give answers to “why and how” and questions. Ramana maharishi, who was strongly inspired by Buddhism, would rarely ever give a direct answer to a question. He would simply say, “Who is it that wants to know” in order to dissolve the questioner. However, what the Buddhists fail to realise that the practices they practice involved deep scientific thinking and observing the world, mind, body before they were developed. Just as the average man driving the car does not realise how much deep scientific thinking has gone into producing that car.
Buddhism is more about the finished product(practice) than the research and development(metaphysics that underpin the practice) in Hinduism, and because of this I find Buddhism to be an incomplete religion. It cannot really be called scientific or philosophical because it rejects thinking. Although the 8-fold path does prescribe “Right thinking” Buddhism has neglected this.
Try not to focus too much on one, or you will lose sight of the other.
