Let’s consider a thought experiment: You have a pill that can extend your life by six months. Alternatively, you could give this pill to a stranger similar to you, and it would add five years to their life. What would you choose in this test of generosity?
Researchers posed this question to several groups: Tibetan Buddhist monks, non-religious Americans, American Christians, ordinary Buddhists in Bhutan, and Hindus in India. Surprisingly, the results showed that Tibetan Buddhist monks were the least likely to give the pill to a stranger.
This was unexpected because one might assume that Buddhist monks, with their teachings on compassion, would be more generous. However, the study revealed that Buddhist monks were more attached to their own lives and more afraid of dying compared to other groups, thus choosing personal extension over helping another.
It’s important to note that the monks in the study were novices. But even with their limited experience, the point remains that these monks were less willing to give generously than average Buddhists with less practice.
This raises questions about who is drawn to monastic life. Does it attract more self-centered individuals, or does the monastic lifestyle itself foster selfishness due to the status involved? For example, Sravasti Dhammika, a Western monk, noted that in the Theravadin world, the excessive reverence for monks can lead to complacency and pride. Furthermore, monks in Burma have been implicated in atrocities against the Rohingya and monks in Sri Lanka in violence against the Hindu Tamil population. This suggests that being a monk doesn’t always correlate with higher ethical behavior.
Interestingly, the study challenges the assumption that becoming a monk inherently makes one a better person. There are times when spiritual practice can lead to selfishness and neglect of important relationships under the guise of non-attachment.
For me, imagining living six months knowing I had deprived someone of five years is uncomfortable. I’d rather give up the pill to avoid such distress. Yet, there are times my own practice has led to selfish behaviors, justifying unkindness under the pretense of a higher calling.
The main takeaway from the study is the importance of constantly checking if we are truly being kind.
I even contacted one of the study leaders to suggest another interpretation, asking if the anxiety from a recent life change could explain the novices’ responses. However, I was informed that the study included both novices and fully ordained monks, and their behavior didn’t vary with experience or age. Thus, the results call for further investigation on how long-term serious meditation might change these findings.
The desire for an idealized, perfected self might ironically lead to more self-centered thinking rather than self-transcendence. It’s possible that some monks believed that their brief period of practice could contribute more to humanity than another’s five years in less impactful roles. Yet, this assumption warrants further questioning and research to understand the real motives behind their choices.
In conclusion, this study underscores that even those dedicated to spiritual practices like monks are human and flawed. It doesn’t automatically make them better individuals and, in some cases, it can even have the opposite effect. The complexity of human motives and behaviors continues to be an intriguing subject for further study and reflection.