I’ve long been simultaneously attracted and repulsed by spirituality. Growing up in Berkeley, California during the 70s, I instinctively dodged the Moonies, Rajneeshies, ESTers and Hare Krishnas. But then I joined a karate dojo and the sensei led us in seated meditation. Mediation seemed like something I could and should do. So I decided to practice at home, on my own, for at least ten years. The practice stuck.

Over the years I’ve attended Tibetan, Zen and Theravada groups. I’ve heard many, many beneficial teachings. But I was always irritated by the fuzzy-headed “everything is everything” gushing of New Age-y followers. How could I become less confused by hanging out with such confused people? 

Eventually, I stopped reading spiritual books and switched to science books about the mind. Then I found Stephen Batchelor’s After Buddhism. He explained that Buddhist practice did not aim toward a fantastic insight into cosmic truth that will cause me to live happily-ever-after. Rather, Buddhist practice is a prescription for living an ethical life with more well-being. Mostly, I value discussions of Buddhist practice that set realistic expectations.

Based on that secular approach, I’ve read and written a fair amount about Buddhism. In Thailand I visit temples and sometimes go on meditation retreats. But when friends ask if I’m a Buddhist, I’m not sure how to answer.

I recently hit on a way that explains my engagement with Buddhism. I should say: ‘I try to be Buddhist just like we’re all Newtonians.’

We’re all Newtonians not because we have blind faith in Newton’s claims. We’re all Newtonians because his theories are verifiable and useful to our lives. His theories explain enduring laws of mechanical physics. They describe how things move in the world. We accept Newton’s laws of motion because they keep us safe and effective. They keep us out of trouble.

First Law: An object in motion stays in motion, unless acted on by a force. This law tells us that when we see a rock thrown at our head, we’d better duck or deflect it away.

Second Law: Massive objects require more force to move. This law tells us if we overload a wheelbarrow with dirt, we’re going to have to push hard to get it moving.

Third Law: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. This law tells us that when we push that heavy wheelbarrow, we’d better have stable footing, otherwise we’ll slip back from the reaction force.

Nobody believes Newton's laws as part of a dogma, doctrine or creed. No declaration of faith is required. We don’t have to work hard to penetrate any mystery. In fact, we accept their validity at birth. Research in developmental psychology has shown that infants demonstrate some understanding of basic physical principles such as object permanence and solidity.

What’s more, we don’t make a big deal out of it. Every ordinary person understands how the physical world works at this level. We call this ‘common sense’.

While Newton came up with profound and useful insights, he didn’t have privileged transcendent knowledge into cosmic mysteries. This is obvious when we consider some of Newton’s crazier efforts.

Newton spent years trying to create the Philosopher’s Stone, a mythical substance he hoped would: 1) turn base metals into gold and 2) grant humans immortality. He also theorized that metals were generated within the Earth, which he described as a ‘cosmic vegetable.’ His writings are filled with mystical language, including esoteric symbols like ‘Neptune’s Trident’ and ‘Mercury’s Caducean Rod’.

Clearly, we don’t believe everything Newton said. What’s more, there are many truths about the physical world he never discovered. While Newton’s theories laid the framework for classical mechanics, they have been refined and expanded by subsequent science. In particular Newton’s notion of absolute space was supplanted by Einstein’s notion of relative space.

But our knowledge of physics didn’t stop with Einstein either. Individual geniuses make tremendous contributions. But no individual has ultimate insight into the cosmos. The pinnacle of human knowledge is never reached by one person alone. We build better and better knowledge over time. Our knowledge improves because we discover it collectively.

So, Isaac Newton was not fully enlightened to all the mysteries of physics. He did not possess the mind of God. Same with Siddhartha Gautama, the historical Buddha.

Like Newton, Buddha was most certainly a genius. His genius was in the area of spirituality, which I define secularly as questions of how to lead an ethical life of well-being.

The Buddha appreciated that life is a challenge for humans. Over time, he developed a set of prescriptions for how to live ethically and how to cultivate well-being. Like Newton, Buddha’s insights are powerful in so far as they describe how the world really works. Like Newton’s laws, understanding Buddha’s prescriptions can help keep us safe and effective. They keep us out of trouble.

But like Newton, Buddha had some had some crazy theories which were commonly held in his time. The Buddha believed in reincarnation and heavenly realms. And while his contribution was great, it was not complete. The Buddha had no scientific framework for his theories.

Fortunately, his prescriptions have been enhanced by the cumulative scientific efforts to better understand well-being. Positive psychology has more closely defined the mental habits that lead to well-being. Neuroscience has explained how these mechanisms work. The Buddha didn’t know any of this.

Also, as with Newton’s laws, Buddha’s theories work best when internalized. That’s why I try to learn from experience which theories actually work. For example:

1. It is possible through meditation and mental training to more quickly let go of negative mind states like greed, anger and worry and to cultivate more positive mind states like kindness, joy, calmness and patience. The neuroscientists call this neuroplasticity. Over time, we can get better at inclining away from troublesome mental states and fostering more positive ones.

2. All things are conditioned by the myriad causes that came before. We cannot control all these causes. But we do have some control over our actions. Through our actions we can put in the causes for well-being…or we can put in the causes for distress. Good habits (exercise, kindness, generosity, eating well, being kind) condition towards well-being. Bad habit (drinking, drugs, anger, outrage, lying, stealing, cheating) condition toward distress.

3. While we want to put in the causes of well-being, well-being itself is temporary and never ultimately satisfactory. Nothing will yield complete and enduring satisfaction. Whatever we have we will ultimately lose. Therefore, there is nothing that can be secured and everything to let go of.

The Buddha has more useful prescriptions. But I am only interested in ones like these that can be independently verified. I ignore the transcendent, mystical and supernatural claims.

I try to internalize useful prescriptions — not as creed or dogma — but because they reflect how the world really works. If I can internalize them then, like intuitive physics, they might guide me as a kind of spiritual ‘common sense’.