Free Inquiry, Tradition, and Modernity

In response to a recent inquiry about the Kalama Sutta, someone posed a thought-provoking question: “If free inquiry contradicts scriptures and the teachings of prominent Buddhist figures like the Dalai Lama, how should we proceed? Should we reshape Buddhism and the suttas to accommodate contemporary interpretations?”

This is an excellent question. When we discuss free inquiry, as illustrated in the Kalama Sutta, we must acknowledge that contradictions exist within most scriptures, whether Buddhist or Christian. Such inconsistencies are inherent to religious texts, shaped by the historical and cultural contexts in which they were produced, often reflecting many perspectives and interpretations. Many assume a singular voice authored these texts, but the reality is far more complex, with many texts undergoing redaction influenced by prevailing ideologies.

The Kalama Sutta advocates skepticism toward blind belief, including scriptural adherence. The Buddha urged personal investigation and direct experience, emphasizing “Come and see” over “Come and believe.” This distinction is vital; if your inquiry leads you to conclusions that diverge from scripture, what value is there in forcing compliance? Genuine understanding is born from personal reflection and exploration, not mere submission to authority.