Understanding The Kālāmas- Lessons in Ethics, not Epistemology

I know of no other sutta that is as widely coveted as it is misunderstood, in my humble opinion, than that of the Kālāma Sutta (the Kesamutta Sutta is its official suttanta name). It is the battle cry for modern Buddhists all over the world, pointing to its teaching to validate a form of Buddhism that is individualistic and rational. The common impression of the sutta is that it is a lesson on epistemology, the mode in which we know the truth, however, upon closer examination, I believe this is a lesson about ethics more than the process in which we understand reality.

The sutta in question contains a teaching of the Buddha to the Kālāmas in which he implores them to "know for yourselves" in regards to what is right and what is wrong. It is in this proclamation of the Buddha to "know for yourselves" that many Buddhists cling to when describing the sutta as a lesson for individuality. That may be a hasty interpretation as the sutta explores ethical structures, which I will briefly discuss below, that don't seem to agree with this individualistic explanation.

The passage in question is as follows (I will use Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation, as that seems to be the most preferred one amongst those who interpret this sutta as individualistic):

            Come, Kālāmas, do not go by oral tradition, by lineage

            of teaching, by hearsay, by a collection of scriptures, by logical

            reasoning, by inferential reasoning, by reasoned cogitation, by

            the acceptance of a view after pondering it, by the seeming

            competence [of a speaker], or because you think: 'The ascetic

            is our guru.' But when, Kālāmas, you know for yourselves:

            'These things are unwholesome; these things are blameworthy;

            these things are censured by the wise; these things, if accepted

            and undertaken, lead to harm and suffering/ then you should

            abandon them

The Buddha was not asking the Kālāmas to reason out their experience in some modern sense. The idea that this sutta is about discerning what is the truth based on empirical evidence seems to be misleading. The modern interpretation that many modern Buddhists are talking from this sutta is that we should somehow construct reality on past experiences in some form of a method based on induction and prediction, much like the scientific method. However, the Buddha said not to trust logical reasoning, inferential reasoning or by reasoned cognition. In fact, the Buddha is not discussing the truth of reality so much as the ethical nature of reality, what is good and bad:

              But when, Kālāmas, you know for yourselves:

             These things are unwholesome; these things are blameworthy

This then becomes a question of what is right and wrong, and this notion of right and wrong appears to have objective qualities, not just a subjective view of what an individual may consider right or wrong. The Buddha goes on to give a lesson of morality towards  the end of the sutta:

            a mind imbued with loving-kindness. . . with a mind imbued with

            compassion;. .with a mind imbued with altruistic joy .. .with a

            mind imbued with equanimity

The Buddha appears to be imploring the Kālāmas to believe objective values of right and wrong for themselves, yet warns against using reason and inference. This implies a sense of meaning and tradition which includes an accepted model of ethical, a model proposed by the Buddha. I suggest that the Buddha is asking the Kālāmas to participate in the culture of Buddhism from an individual foundation of faith. To know what is right and wrong, not from induction or empirical reasoning, but "for yourself".

Another thing people may not realize is that the very next sutta after the  Kālāma Sutta, in the Anguttara Nikaya, the Sālha Sutta, gives the exact same lesson verbatim. However, in this sutta the Buddha goes on to give a lesson of reincarnation and the means to escape rebirth through enlightenment. These lessons to "know for yourselves" are within a context that specifies a particular model of normative ethics; what is right and wrong and how one should act. On closer examination, these lessons may not be so much about one's own common sense, but one's own faith in the objective morality the Buddha teaches.

This modern Buddhist reliance on the Kālāma Sutta seems to point to the need people have for some kind of individualistic and rational choice when deciding on a spiritual path within everyday life. However, this explination may be misguided, as some interpretations of this sutta seem to be biased towards a modern perspective.

Modern Buddhism appears to have a need to define individualism as a virtue, especially in regards to the Kālāma Sutta. Whether or not modern Buddhism, as it exists today, is a good thing for Buddhism is not so much in question as the need it seems to have to verify modern characteristics of society through 2500 year old scripture. The Kālāma Sutta was not a discourse for modern rational thinking, it was not calling people to be more individualistic socially. Rather, it was a teaching on individual belief within the communal tradition of Buddhism. The belief in the Buddha's teachings must be made individually and with determination. This does not mean that the community or the tradition is not important, and it certainly does not mean the teachings are not an intricate part of that decision. It is saying that one should learn from the teacher, participate in the traditions, be a member within the community, and to do all of these things from a decision that one has made on their own; a decision that the Buddha's teachings are true.

This new form of individualistic Buddhism is not necessarily bad for Buddhism in itself. However, the tendency for this type of Buddhism to validate its individualism through ancient doctrine is bad for the religion, Trying to make individualism a virtue is fine. Constructing a modern interpretation of Buddhism is fine. Conceptualizing the teachings from a perception of modern values is fine. However, distorting the teachings and misinterpreting the doctrine in order to validate this form of Buddhism is not only harmful to the individuals, it is harmful to Buddhism as a whole. There is no need to imply the Buddha modeled his teachings around ideals he never held in order to construct a doctrine that agrees more with an individualistic identity. A modern development can be a good thing for Buddhism, but that is what it is, a development. Understanding what the teachings actually mean is necessary for this development though, and not claiming that the modern western construct of the Dhamma is actually what the Buddha was teaching.