Faith in Belief Systems
-
It seems to me the Faith is central to many belief systems. There were many postings and quotations about Faith. Not sure if there was already a thread on this but since I mentioned about starting one, here it is.
I port over my previous posting (edited here):
The plain meaning of faith is: trust or which can be relied upon. However, there are many kinds of faith:
1) Good Faith
2) Blind Faith
3) Rational Faith
When you buy a loaf of bread, you expect it does not contain poison, that is based on good faith. When you accept that the tooth at the Relic Temple is Buddha's, knowing that Buddha wasn't the one who gave the tooth - that is based on blind faith. When you verify or authenticate the tooth and found that it is either the Buddha or some other and accept it, that is based on rational faith.
What then is
4) True Faith ??
What then is
5) Right Faith ??
Please feel free to speak your minds but focus on faith. The moderator's job is to keep the discussions within focus, not to sieve out what is pleasant or unpleasant, what is agreeable or not agreeable, or whether one is Buddhist or not. -
Good topic..
I have previously stated my views in Faith:
Only ordinary sentient beings like us have skeptical doubts.. or doubts in the triple gems. For me, I have faith in that the triple gems will lead me to Enlightenment, that if I follow the triple gems, I will certainly gain Enlightenment, Liberation, Bliss. This faith is required especially for a beginner who has just begun his inward journey to self-realisation, enlightenment. But this faith is not blind faith... not blind belief in just about everything just because "the Buddha said it"... but a kind of confidence just like you have confidence that many, uncountable people have gone through this before, this scientific method actually works, and that by doing this experiment you will see for yourself what is true and what is false.. just like a scientist. This 'scientific attitude' is important. (Do read the great article from a dharma talk by Ajahn Brahmavamso: Buddhism and Science article on 'Buddhism and Science')Originally posted by crescent:Have you ever doubt faith?
When we have a taste of what Dharma is like, we gain confidence. The more the Dharma works for us through practise, the more confidence we gain and the more insights we gain, the more we know that Buddha's teachings are true. And of course when one has an awakening into the ultimate reality and enters the stream, also known as a stream enterer, he cuts off the first three fetters one of which is "skeptical doubt". Why? Because he has already awakened to the ultimate truth and is absolutely certain of the teachings by his own personal, intuitive, experience.
Anyway here's a good article for you and everyone to read:
This is from the Kalama Sutra:Originally posted by An Eternal Now:http://www.dhammabooks.org/food_for_heart/samma_samadhi_detachment_with2.htm
SAMMA SAMADHI - DETACHMENT WITHIN ACTIVITY
Take a look at the example of the Buddha. Both in his own practice and in his methods for teaching the disciples he was exemplary. The Buddha taught the standards of practice as skilful means for getting rid of conceit, he couldn't do the practice for us. Having heard that teaching we must further teach ourselves, practice for ourselves. The results will arise here, not at the teaching.
The Buddha's teaching can only enable us to get an initial understanding of the Dhamma, but that Dhamma is not yet within our hearts. Why not? Because we haven't yet practiced, we haven't yet taught ourselves. The Dhamma arises at the practice. If you know it, you know it through the practice. If you doubt it, you doubt it at the practice. Teachings from the Masters may be true, but simply listening to Dhamma is not yet enough to enable us to realize it. The teaching simply points out the way to realize. To realize the Dhamma we must take that teaching and bring it into our hearts. That part which is for the body we apply to the body, that part which is for the speech we apply to the speech, and that part which is for the mind we apply to the mind. This means that after hearing the teaching we must further teach ourselves to know that Dhamma, to be that Dhamma.
The Buddha said that those who simply believe others are not truly wise. A wise person practices until he is one with the Dhamma, until he can have confidence in himself, independent of others.
On one occasion, while Venerable Sariputta was sitting, listening respectfully at his feet as the Buddha expounded the Dhamma, the Buddha turned to him and asked:
"Sariputta, do you believe this teaching?" Venerable Sariputta replied, "No, I don't yet believe it". Now this is a good illustration. Venerable Sariputta listened, and he took note. When he said he didn't yet believe he wasn't being careless, he was speaking the truth. He simply took note of that teaching, because he had not yet developed his own understanding of it, so he told the Buddha that he didn't yet believe, because he really didn't believe. These words almost sound as if Venerable Sariputta was being rude, but actually he wasn't. He spoke the truth, and the Buddha praised him for it.
"Good, good, Sariputta. A wise person doesn't readily believe, he should consider first before believing."
Conviction in a belief can take various forms. One form reasons according to Dhamma, while another form is contrary to the Dhamma. This second way is heedless, it is a foolhardy understanding, micchaditthi, wrong view. One doesn't listen to anybody else.
Take the example of Dighanakha the Brahmin. This Brahmin only believed himself, he wouldn't believe others. At one time when the Buddha was resting at Rajagaha, Dighanakha went to listen to his teaching. Or you might say that Dighanakha went to teach the Buddha, because he was intent on expounding his own views ...
"I am of the view that nothing suits me."
This was his view. The Buddha listened to DighanakhaÂ’s view and then answered,
"Brahmin, this view of yours doesn't suit you either." When the Buddha had answered in this way, Dighanakha was stumped. He didn't know what to say. The Buddha explained in many ways, till the Brahmin understood. He stopped to reflect and saw...
"Hmm, this view of mine isn't right."
On hearing the Buddha's answer the Brahmin abandoned his conceited views and immediately saw the truth. He changed right then and there, turning right around, just as one would invert one's hand. He praised the teaching of the Buddha thus:
"Listening to the Blessed One's teaching, my mind was illumined, just as one living in darkness might perceive light. My mind is like an overturned basin which has been up righted, like a man who has been lost and finds the way."
Now at that time a certain knowledge arose within his mind, within that mind which had been up righted. Wrong view vanished and right view took its place. Darkness disappeared and light arose.
The Buddha declared that the Brahmin Dighanakha was one who had opened the Dhamma Eye. Previously Dighanakha clung to his own views and had no intention of changing them. But when he heard the Buddha's teaching his mind saw the truth, he saw that his clinging to those views was wrong. When the
right understanding arose he was able to perceive his previous understanding as mistaken, so he compared his experience with a person living in darkness who had found light. This is how it is. At that time the Brahmin Dighanakha transcended his wrong view.
Now we must change in this way. Before we can give up defilements we must change our perspective. We must begin to practice rightly and practice well Previously we didn't practice rightly or well, and yet we thought we were right and good just the same. When we really look into the matter we upright ourselves, just like turning over one's hand.Kalama Sutra
"Rely not on the teacher/person, but on the teaching. Rely not on the words of the teaching, but on the
spirit of the words. Rely not on theory, but on experience.Do not believe in anything simply because you
have heard it. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. Do
not believe anything because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything because it is
written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and
elders. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is
conducive to the good and the benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it."
- the Buddha
Do read the full sutra here: http://www.alc.enta.net/kalama.htm -
Now let us take a comparative look at some of the qualities related to Buddhism, science and other religions, beginning with faith.
Most religions use emotion as the driving force for attaining their goals. Emotion arouses belief and obedience to the teachings, and emotions, particularly those that produce faith, are a necessary part of most religions. In other words, because faith is so crucial to them, emotion is encouraged. In contrast to other religions, Buddhism stresses wisdom, giving faith a place of importance only in the initial stages. Even then, faith is used with reservation, as wisdom is considered to be the prime factor in attaining the goal.
In order to clearly understand faith, it helps to analyze it into different kinds. Generally speaking, faith can be divided into two main kinds:
The first kind of faith is that which obstructs wisdom. It relies on inciting, or even enforcing, belief, and such belief must be complete and unquestioning. To doubt the teaching is forbidden, only unquestioning obedience is allowed. This kind of faith does not allow any room for wisdom to develop. Faith in most religions is of this variety. There must be belief and there must be obedience. Whatever the religion says must go, no questions asked. This feature of religion is known as dogma, the doctrine that is unquestionable, characterized by adherence in the face of reason.
The second kind of faith is a channel for wisdom. It stimulates curiosity and is the incentive for learning. In this world there are so many things to learn about; without faith we have no starting point or direction in which to set our learning, but when faith arises, be it in a person or a teaching, we have that direction. Faith, particularly in a person, awakens our interest and encourages us to approach the object of that interest. Having faith in the order of monks, for example, encourages us to approach them and learn from them, to gain a clearer understanding of the teachings.
An example of this kind of faith can be seen in the life story of Shariputra, the Buddha's foremost disciple. He became interested in the teachings of the Buddha through seeing the monk Assaji walking on alms round. Being impressed by the monk's bearing, which suggested some special quality, some special knowledge or spiritual attainment, he approached Assaji and asked for a teaching. This is a good example of the second kind of faith.
The second kind of faith is a positive influence, an incentive for learning. It also gives a point of focus for that learning. Energies are motivated in whatever direction faith inclines. A scientist, for example, having the faith in a particular hypothesis, will direct his enquiry specifically in that direction, and will not be distracted by irrelevant data.
These two kinds of faith must be clearly distinguished. The faith that functions in Buddhism is the faith, which leads to wisdom, and as such is secondary to wisdom. Buddhism is a religion free of dogma.
The second kind of faith is found in both Buddhism and science. It has three important functions in relation to wisdom:
1. It gives rise to interest and is the incentive to begin learning.
2. It provides the energy needed in the pursuit of that learning.
3. It gives direction or focus to that energy.
Apart from these main functions, well-directed faith has a number of further characteristics, which can be shown in the Buddhist system of practice. The goal of Buddhism is liberation, transcendence, or freedom. Buddhism wants human beings to be free, to transcend defilements and suffering. This freedom must be attained through wisdom, understanding of the truth, or the law of nature. This truth is as equally attainable by the disciples as it was by the Teacher, and their knowledge is independent of him. The Buddha once asked Shariputra, "Do you believe what I have been explaining to you?" Shariputra answered, "Yes, I see that it is so." The Buddha asked him, "Are you saying this just out of faith in me?" Shariputra answered, "No, I answered in agreement not because of faith in the Blessed One, but because I clearly see for myself that it is so." [Pubbakotthaka Sutta, Saim. S.V. 220]
This is another of Buddhism's principles. The Buddha did not want people to simply believe him or attach to him. He pointed out the fault of faith in others, because he wanted people to be free. This liberation, or freedom, the goal of Buddhism, is attained through wisdom, through knowledge of reality.
But how is wisdom to arise? For most people, faith is an indispensable stepping-stone in the development of wisdom. (For clear thinkers, those who have what is known as yoniso manasikara, [1] the need for faith may be greatly reduced.)
In order to attain liberation it is necessary to develop wisdom, and that development is in turn dependent on faith. This gives us three stages connected like links in a chain:
Faith leads to Wisdom leads to Liberation
Faith is the initiator of the journey to truth, which in turn leads to wisdom, which in turn leads to liberation. This model of conditions is the defining constraint on faith in Buddhism. Because faith is related to both wisdom and liberation, it has two characteristics:
1. It leads to wisdom.
2. It is coupled with, and leads to, liberation.
Faith in Buddhism does not forbid questions or doubts, nor demand belief or unquestioning committal in any way. Both Buddhism and science use faith as a stepping-stone on the journey to truth. Now the question arises, what kind of faith is it, which leads to wisdom? It is the belief that this universe, or the world of nature, functions according to constant and invariable laws, and these laws are accessible to man's understanding. This faith is the impetus for the search for truth, but because faith in itself is incapable of leading directly to the truth, it must be used to further develop wisdom. At this stage the faith of Buddhism and the faith of science look very similar. Both have a belief in the laws of nature, and both strive to know the truth of these laws through wisdom. However, the similarity ends here. From this point on, the faith of Buddhism and the faith of science part their ways.
I have said that the source of both religion and science is the awareness of problems in life, the dangers of the natural world. In search of a remedy for this problem, human beings looked on the natural environment with trepidation and wonder. These two kinds of feeling led to both the desire for a way out of danger, and the desire to know the truth of nature. From this common origin, religion and science part their ways. Science, in particular, confines its research exclusively to external, physical phenomena. Science does not include mankind in its picture of the universe, except in a very limited, biological sense. In other words, science does not consider the universe as including mankind, and does not look at mankind as encompassing the whole of the universe.
Looking at nature in this way, science has only one object for its faith, and that is the physical universe -- the faith that nature has fixed laws. In brief we could call this "faith in nature."
But the objective of Buddhism is to solve the problem of human suffering, which arises from both internal and external conditions, with an emphasis on the world of human behavior. At the same time, Buddhism sees this process as a natural one. For this reason, Buddhism, like science, has faith in nature, but this faith also includes human beings, because human beings are a part of nature, and they encompass the whole of nature within themselves.
To be continue in the link:
http://www.buddhistinformation.com/role_of_faith_in_science_and_bud.htm
The Role of Faith in Science and Buddhism
By Bhikkhu P.A. Payutto
_/\_ -
Wow! Really good articles. Reading on rational faith really increase my faith!
-
Interesting topic and I think I will skew a little to talk about science and faith since AEN was discussing a related thread yesterday.
Faith is necessary because there is no certainty in knowledge. Even in exact science, no certainty is to be found. Of course certainty versus probable knowledge is a topic relating to Epistemology (the theory on Knowledge) but still, it is pivotal towards understanding why the need for faith at all. How science has led to the common misunderstanding that faith is not necessary is amazing but it is mostly due to the predictive nature of these scientific theories derived from thorough experimentation. This is, however, mainly due to the fact that the pool of data made available for the derivation of these theories does not go beyond our man-size world. As we know, Newtonian physics or classical science works well for a man-size world but not quite well in the macro and micro universe. Our ordinary experiences do not permit us to experience something having the mass of a star or traveling at half-speed of light, we presume that the entire universe must obey the laws of the man-size world. But when we are exposed to things not so ordinary, like traveling at a speed much faster then our ordinary experience of ‘speed’, we are lost because phenomena just don’t behave the way we expected it to be. The idea that time travel slower when they are approaching the speed of light and halt at speed of light is mind boggling. Similarly when scientists begin to deal with the universe of the outer space – the macro universe, they are dealing with much more massive objects than the man-size world, a billion times more. The idea that space curves and time halt at the speed of light came as a shocked to the classical scientists. This applies true when we deal with the micro universe of the quantum world. The world of the electrons does not comply with Newtonian nor Einstein theory. This includes the spooky non-local behavior of particles that AEN brought up in another thread. When Heisenberg introduced the ‘uncertainty’ principle, it is so weird that even Einstein rejected it and thus, Einstein famous remark -- “God does not play dice”. But “God does not play dice” is a belief system! I can’t remember where I read it but I could clearly recalled that even Stephen Hawking used phrases like “official dogma”, “deep emotional attachment to determinism” to describe scientists like Einstein. Stephen Hawking even went further to say that Einstein was doubly wrong when he said “God does not play dice”.
I will not dwell too deeply into it but the purpose is simply to illustrate that our knowledge is nothing certain nor absolute. Science is itself a belief system for us to better understand the phenomenon existence. It is its certainty in predictability within a prescribed environment that convinces us that faith is not necessary. It creates the impression of certainty and made a probable knowledge appears absolute but in actual case, science itself is a belief system and a great deal of faith (maybe good and rational faith in this case) is vested in science unknowingly.
My 2 cents. -
Originally posted by Thusness:
Thanks for your great and detailed illustration!
Interesting topic and I think I will skew a little to talk about science and faith since AEN was discussing a related thread yesterday.
Faith is necessary because there is no certainty in knowledge. Even in exact science, no certainty is to be found. Of course certainty versus probable knowledge is a topic relating to Epistemology (the theory on Knowledge) but still, it is pivotal towards understanding why the need for faith at all. How science has led to the common misunderstanding that faith is not necessary is amazing but it is mostly due to the predictive nature of these scientific theories derived from thorough experimentation. This is, however, mainly due to the fact that the pool of data made available for the derivation of these theories does not go beyond our man-size world. As we know, Newtonian physics or classical science works well for a man-size world but not quite well in the macro and micro universe. Our ordinary experiences do not permit us to experience something having the mass of a star or traveling at half-speed of light, we presume that the entire universe must obey the laws of the man-size world. But when we are exposed to things not so ordinary, like traveling at a speed much faster then our ordinary experience of ‘speed’, we are lost because phenomena just don’t behave the way we expected it to be. The idea that time travel slower when they are approaching the speed of light and halt at speed of light is mind boggling. Similarly when scientists begin to deal with the universe of the outer space – the macro universe, they are dealing with much more massive objects than the man-size world, a billion times more. The idea that space curves and time halt at the speed of light came as a shocked to the classical scientists. This applies true when we deal with the micro universe of the quantum world. The world of the electrons does not comply with Newtonian nor Einstein theory. This includes the spooky non-local behavior of particles that AEN brought up in another thread. [b]When Heisenberg introduced the ‘uncertainty’ principle, it is so weird that even Einstein rejected it and thus, Einstein famous remark -- “God does not play dice”. But “God does not play dice” is a belief system! I can’t remember where I read it but I could clearly recalled that even Stephen Hawking used phrases like “official dogma”, “deep emotional attachment to determinism” to describe scientists like Einstein. Stephen Hawking even went further to say that Einstein was doubly wrong when he said “God does not play dice”.
I will not dwell too deeply into it but the purpose is simply to illustrate that our knowledge is nothing certain nor absolute. Science is itself a belief system for us to better understand the phenomenon existence. It is its certainty in predictability within a prescribed environment that convinces us that faith is not necessary. It creates the impression of certainty and made a probable knowledge appears absolute but in actual case, science itself is a belief system and a great deal of faith (maybe good and rational faith in this case) is vested in science unknowingly.
My 2 cents. [/b]
And thanks to Isis for the article too
-
Sort of off-topic but just to point out that faith plays a vital role in our life and we are always investing faith in people, theories, concepts and belief systems unknowingly. Human is not just a rational being; to understand ourselves, we must also examine our emotional, mythical and psychological makeup.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Thanks for your great and detailed illustration!
To touch on what is ‘true’ and ‘right’ free of our belief systems is a philosophical question that I do not wish to get into. Coming into contact with Buddhism is more of coincidental. My deepening of faith in Buddha’s words came only as a result of practice. It is experiential and subjective. It is sort of ‘I know because I experience it.’ -
For a Christian like me, my faith lies in Jesus Christ whom I believed have redeemed me from my sins. There is nothing which I can do to earn my salvation becoz salvation is given freely by God for whoever believe in his son.
It is not accurate to say that other faith systems apart from Buddhism practices blind faith. In the bible, we are told:
1 John 4:1 (New International Version)
1 John 4
Test the Spirits
1Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.
This clearly shows that in Christianity we are encouraged to countercheck. By what standards? By the word of God. Because the Holy spirit will never contradict the word of God. This is why it is important for Christians to be grounded in scripture. Being grounded in scripture ensured the believer to have sound theology, which in turn ensured our faith to the be the right faith instead of one which is based on emotions/hearsay. -
Originally posted by laoda99:
Thanks for sharing Laoda99.
For a Christian like me, my faith lies in Jesus Christ whom I believed have redeemed me from my sins. There is nothing which I can do to earn my salvation becoz salvation is given freely by God for whoever believe in his son.
It is not accurate to say that other faith systems apart from Buddhism practices blind faith. In the bible, we are told:
1 John 4:1 (New International Version)
1 John 4
Test the Spirits
1Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.
This clearly shows that in Christianity we are encouraged to countercheck. By what standards? By the word of God. Because the Holy spirit will never contradict the word of God. This is why it is important for Christians to be grounded in scripture. Being grounded in scripture ensured the believer to have sound theology, [b]which in turn ensured our faith to the be the right faith instead of one which is based on emotions/hearsay.
[/b]
'Right' implies complying with a pre-determined set of criteria. I think we must be aware of the distinction between "right faith" and "right attitude towards faith". If a certain belief system has a criterion "that one should have full trust in God", then 'testing God' is not 'right faith'. A half-hearted devotion will deny the relationship as well as the experience with God. To a rationalist this approach may not be appealing, but to some sages, their wisdom have penetrated deep enough to understand the entirety of our psychological and spiritual makeup. I do not see it as wrong. It is a practice that will similarly yield religious experiences. One should not be afraid to be blind in total devotion. Nevertheless if such practices are understood wrongly or fall under the hands of unscrupulous religious leaders, it can be devastating.
On the other hand, I think "right attitude towards faith" do require us to question and check the basis of our belief systems. For the latter, it is the process of authentication that deepens the faith; however this can be quite challenging psychologically and dangerous too. It can lead one to a state of total confusion.
Both approaches are different in nature. In Buddhism there are different paths to suit different people, it is not a one and for all cases. It ‘staged’ one according to their suitability and developed the necessary conditions for us to progress further. Spirituality is not an easy journey, we will learn along the road. -
Faith is over rated... meaning... do not have faith in anything... live for the moment.
Yet, before you can come to this stage, to not have faith in anything, you must have faith that the answer is not to have faith in anything!
hahahahaha!!!!!
-
Is it even possible at all???Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:Faith is over rated... meaning... do not have faith in anything... live for the moment.
Yet, before you can come to this stage, to not have faith in anything, you must have faith that the answer is not to have faith in anything!
hahahahaha!!!!!
Please go through Thusness's post (start from the first)
-
lol Possible because it is "checked" against REALITY... why would you need faith for REALITY?Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Is it even possible at all???
Please go through Thusness's post (start from the first)
You need faith for beliefs.. like this guy here:
1. Belief in Jesus (Why should anyone believe in Jesus?)Originally posted by laoda99:For a Christian like me, my faith lies in Jesus Christ whom I believed have redeemed me from my sins. There is nothing which I can do to earn my salvation becoz salvation is given freely by God for whoever believe in his son.
It is not accurate to say that other faith systems apart from Buddhism practices blind faith. In the bible, we are told:
1 John 4:1 (New International Version)
1 John 4 Test the Spirits
1 Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.
This clearly shows that in Christianity we are encouraged to countercheck. By what standards? By the word of God. Because the Holy spirit will never contradict the word of God. This is why it is important for Christians to be grounded in scripture. Being grounded in scripture ensured the believer to have sound theology, which in turn ensured our faith to the be the right faith instead of one which is based on emotions/hearsay.
2. Belief in what the Bible says is true (Why should anyone believe in the Bible?)
3. Their "counter check" is what? More beliefs! If you do not believe in what the Bible says is true then counter check what? How to counter check?
Buddhism is better because the "counter check" is REALITY. How can you go wrong when the counter check is REALITY?
What happens when Buddhist beliefs cannot be "checked" against REALITY?
ahhhhh! that is the million dollars question... -
You do have good points tooOriginally posted by AndrewPKYap:1. Belief in Jesus (Why should anyone believe in Jesus?)
2. Belief in what the Bible says is true (Why should anyone believe in the Bible?)
3. Their "counter check" is what? More beliefs! If you do not believe in what the Bible says is true then counter check what? How to counter check?
Buddhism is better because the "counter check" is REALITY. How can you go wrong when the counter check is REALITY?
What happens when Buddhist beliefs cannot be "checked" against REALITY?
ahhhhh! that is the million dollars question...
To answer your last question let me quote from my first post:
...The Buddha said that those who simply believe others are not truly wise. A wise person practices until he is one with the Dhamma, until he can have confidence in himself, independent of others.
On one occasion, while Venerable Sariputta was sitting, listening respectfully at his feet as the Buddha expounded the Dhamma, the Buddha turned to him and asked:
"Sariputta, do you believe this teaching?" Venerable Sariputta replied, "No, I don't yet believe it". Now this is a good illustration. Venerable Sariputta listened, and he took note. When he said he didn't yet believe he wasn't being careless, he was speaking the truth. He simply took note of that teaching, because he had not yet developed his own understanding of it, so he told the Buddha that he didn't yet believe, because he really didn't believe. These words almost sound as if Venerable Sariputta was being rude, but actually he wasn't. He spoke the truth, and the Buddha praised him for it.
"Good, good, Sariputta. A wise person doesn't readily believe, he should consider first before believing."... -
Hope you don't feel offended... but that is the reason I told you many times not to simply "cut and paste"
That is also why I told you eons ago that if you do not discard Buddhist teachings, how can you learn/know/realize anything?
When you talk to people, you show them Buddhist teachings... but within yourself there is no Buddhist teaching... there is only the truth. -
Ok so... when beliefs cannot check against reality, then, there is only reality?Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:Hope you don't feel offended... but that is the reason I told you many times not to simply "cut and paste"
That is also why I told you eons ago that if you do not discard Buddhist teachings, how can you learn/know/realize anything?
When you talk to people, you show them Buddhist teachings... but within yourself there is no Buddhist teaching... there is only the truth. -
wat is reality in buddhist terms?
-
You need to know when you are living in BELIEFS and when you are living in REALITYOriginally posted by An Eternal Now:Ok so... when beliefs cannot check against reality, then, there is only reality?
You do not need to discard ALL beliefs (not in collision with REALITY), just the delusions in your head (beliefs in collision with REALITY). -
Icic...Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:You need to know when you are living in BELIEFS and when you are living in REALITY
You do not need to discard ALL beliefs (not in collision with REALITY), just the delusions in your head (beliefs in collision with REALITY).
Beliefs in collision with reality = unfounded, non-factual belief? -
Thusness defines reality as such:Originally posted by laoda99:wat is reality in buddhist terms?
A moment is a reality by itself in its entirety.
Each moment is totally new and different and complete, and gone instantaneously. -
Problem is, we do not know EVERYTHING about REALITY.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Icic...
Beliefs in collision with reality = unfounded, non-factual belief?
That which we do not know about REALITY, we depend on BELIEFS but we know fully and understand fully that we are depending on BELIEFS.
In this way, every Belief is questionable and every thing we know about REALITY is questionable.... hahahahaha that is the REALITY!
It is not easy to REALIZE all these things that are written here, but when you do, you become LIBERATED. -
Icic.. thanks for sharingOriginally posted by AndrewPKYap:Problem is, we do not know EVERYTHING about REALITY.
That which we do not know about REALITY, we depend on BELIEFS but we know fully and understand fully that we are depending on BELIEFS.
In this way, every Belief is questionable and every thing we know about REALITY is questionable.... hahahahaha that is the REALITY!
It is not easy to REALIZE all these things that are written here, but when you do, you become LIBERATED.
And yes that is why faith is needed because there is no certainty in knowledge, to deny it is also to confuse it further, instead, being part of our makeup it is to be 'lived with'. -
I doubt people know that they are depending on Beliefs.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:Problem is, we do not know EVERYTHING about REALITY.
That which we do not know about REALITY, we depend on BELIEFS but we know fully and understand fully that we are depending on BELIEFS.
In this way, every Belief is questionable and every thing we know about REALITY is questionable.... hahahahaha that is the REALITY!
It is not easy to REALIZE all these things that are written here, but when you do, you become LIBERATED. -
How did you conclude "that is why faith is needed"?Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Icic.. thanks for sharing
And yes that is why faith is needed because there is no certainty in knowledge, to deny it is also to confuse it further, instead, being part of our makeup it is to be 'lived with'. -
So how am I wrong in what I said?Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:How did you conclude "that is why faith is needed"?
(btw i did not say blind faith is needed) -
This is very true also... readers please also refer to my 2nd reply and A.H.Almaas's writings which I quoted: For my thoughts are not your thoughtsOriginally posted by Thusness:Thanks for sharing Laoda99.
'Right' implies complying with a pre-determined set of criteria. I think we must be aware of the distinction between "right faith" and "right attitude towards faith". If a certain belief system has a criterion "that one should have full trust in God", then 'testing God' is not 'right faith'. A half-hearted devotion will deny the relationship as well as the experience with God. To a rationalist this approach may not be appealing, but to some sages, their wisdom have penetrated deep enough to understand the entirety of our psychological and spiritual makeup. I do not see it as wrong. It is a practice that will similarly yield religious experiences. One should not be afraid to be blind in total devotion. Nevertheless if such practices are understood wrongly or fall under the hands of unscrupulous religious leaders, it can be devastating.
On the other hand, I think "right attitude towards faith" do require us to question and check the basis of our belief systems. For the latter, it is the process of authentication that deepens the faith; however this can be quite challenging psychologically and dangerous too. It can lead one to a state of total confusion.
Both approaches are different in nature. In Buddhism there are different paths to suit different people, it is not a one and for all cases. It ‘staged’ one according to their suitability and developed the necessary conditions for us to progress further. Spirituality is not an easy journey, we will learn along the road.