There is no "I" in "You"

[The Grand Nudger]

greater tendency toward skepticism in the east.

Re-asserting the position which you have failed to establish, or even provide a valid means of inference for determining.  You have instead referred to syncretized, western, re-imaginings of eastern traditions and passed that credibility onto long dead philosphers who were completely in ignorance of that which you have syncretized their positions for.  You have refused to consider any of the mountains of credulous and non skeptical things presented to you both in your lone example of an eastern tradition, and the links describing the wider eastern tradition, already provided to you.  Inexplicably, you've managed to avoid considering those portions of the western tradition which explicitly reference skepticism, and the western tradition of skepticism itself, as though they don't exist to fudge your equally non-existent math.

I have no particular interest in tearing down your favorite buddhist philospher.  There's no need, as I keep reminding you.  You have decided the comparative skepticism of the eastern and western traditions by means of a long running composition fallacy, manufactured itself, by nothing other than selection bias.  We can avoid discussing this misstep, entirely, or for as long as you like by bickering about whether or not your chosen example of a skeptical eastern philospher was a loon - for swallowing magical alternative medicines - for example....or we can address the fundamental mistake made in attempting to even -use- this in order to establish the claim made.

-I- can't use your metrics to establish your conclusion. This is the problem. If it can be decided by reference to a single subset of the larger tradition - and within that subset by reference to a single philospher, and even more microscopicly by reference to some but not all of their positions.... in no small part by needling reference to our re-imaginings of those positions.....then I need only find a skeptic -or someone I can imagine to have been a skeptic- in the western tradition (of which I'm sure we can both agree there are a great many), and any number of people who I consider to be less skeptical than the aforementioned in the eastern traditions (of which I'm sure we can both agree there are a great many)...in order to make precisely the opposite claim as you have by reference to the very same metrics. This should be a hint that somethings gone horribly awry, shouldn't it?