Would Buddha do it?

Re: “Don’t limit monks”, (Editorial, Oct 16).

The myopic decree to forbid Buddhist monks from expanding their intelligence and studying subjects not directly related to Buddhism will not preserve Buddhism or enhance a monk’s awareness of reality.

In the 21st century, knowledge and information is increasing exponentially and any institution desiring to stay relevant must address this by expanding their knowledge base, not retarding it. The Dalai Lama in his book The Universe in a Single Atom says that Buddhism must incorporate Science. If science shows a Buddhist tenet is wrong, then Buddhism must adjust accordingly.

This flexible willingness to adapt is crucial in order to adjust to change — and we are certainly in a time of rapid change.

There are numerous fields of study from brain research to historical trends of monasticism that would benefit a monk as he attempts to gain enlightenment. Why would someone intentionally limit another’s quest for truth and understanding?

If Buddhism is to be a part of society’s future here, it has to adjust accordingly to the changes that society is encountering. If not, it will swiftly be left out of the composition. Already, most people I speak to claim they are Buddhist, but almost none say they meditate.

If someone could be shown the science that documents the physiological and psychological benefits of meditation practices, maybe they would be more inclined to practise it personally.

Finally, what would Buddha do? Would he say to avoid knowledge and wisdom and remain ignorant or would he encourage seeking?