In Defense of Thinking (But Not Too Much): The Significance of Theory in Dhamma Practice

Greetings, Friendlies.:)

“It’s just a theory. It doesn’t have anything to do with my practice.”

Some of us have been taught that theory—anything intellectual really—is disruptive to dhammic path-ing. Theory, we have been told, actively hinders liberation.

But that take, “theory is not good for practice” is itself a theory and it shapes our practice. 

In The Significance of Theory, Terry Eagleton suggests that theory becomes important when we are blocked by the limitations of our current practice. (He speaks of “politics” and “ideology”; I’m trans-culturating to “practice”.) When things are going well, when we are ice-skating along, we have no need to turn to theory. This is not because theory isn’t important; it is because the current theory already supports our path. Stopping our forward momentum to fiddle with theory would be a hindrance. 

But things are not always so smooth. Not just for an individual, but for a tradition—for an entire movement. We are immensely indebted to the traditions for preserving Gotama’s dhamma. But many of us are bumping into limitations of the teachings as we have received them. The undervaluing of three-fourths of the fourfold saṅgha, for example. Or the pedestal-izing of a particular pious aesthetic—one that discourages curiosity and is blind to the world of possibilities open to human beings.

Eagleton critiques those hostile to theory (who believe their views are just “common sense”) and those who entangle themselves in intellectual self-pleasure. He insists that theory must remain ethically engaged and grounded in lived experience.

What does that mean for us as practitioners? 

It means in part that those of us digging on theory must remember: not everyone needs it right now. Don’t go throwing theory in the way of someone who is gliding along. It’s not helpful; it will not endear you to them.

But it also means that when we do sense resistance, it may be worth considering the ground. What we interpret as forward motion may be laps on a carefully zambonied rink.

Your thoughts?