Author Topic: Why buddhism?  (Read 436 times)

Offline ground

  • Member
  • Posts: 2088
    • View Profile
Why buddhism?
« on: August 07, 2017, 09:50:38 pm »
Here I would like to investigate into the question what may be valid reasons for one being interested in buddhism today.

There are many religious beliefs cultivated in the context of buddhism by followes of buddhism which do not comply with what one can validly know.
E.g. Religious believers of buddhism claim that buddhism leads to the cessation of suffering through cessation of the cycle of rebirths. But since rebirth cannot be validly understood non-metaphorically what might it be that ceases to be 'reborn' metaphorically?

Also, is 'suffering' a valid translation of dukkha? If it were then according to buddhism everything in life would be suffering. But based on direct perception and inference one can validly know that suffering is only a potential aspect of life.

So what is dukkha that can be ended according to buddhism really?

A possible way to investigate into 'dukkha' would be to look up what is to be eliminated by the buddhist path according to authentic buddhist texts.


What is to be eliminated by the buddhist path?

Here are the categories and their elements indicating what has to be eliminated on the path to liberation. Of course these categories are partially overlapping:

1. Asava (fermentations, effluents, outflows, taints):
fermentation of sensuality
fermentation of becoming
fermentation of ignorance

2. Kilesa (defilements — in their various forms):

passion (lobha)
aversion (dosa)
delusion (moha)

3. Nivarana (hindrances):
sensual desire (kamacchanda)
ill-will (vyapada)
sloth and drowsiness (thina-middha)
restlessness and worry (uddhacca-kukkucca)
doubt (vicikiccha)

4. Fetters (sanyojana, samyojana):
Self-identity views
uncertainty
grasping at precepts & practices
sensual desire
ill will
passion for form
passion for what is formless
conceit
restlessness
ignorance


So one may conclude that the presence of all these elements is what characterises dukkha and the absence of all these elements is what characterises cessation of dukkha.


But then, why should one be interested in getting rid of these elements?

There is really no valid reason based on valid direct perception and inference why one should decide 'I want to get rid of all these aspects of dukkha'.

If one wants to get rid of something or - positively expressed - if one wants to achieve something then that 'something' must be a directly perceptible phenomenon acccessible to one's direct perception without having to undergo the brain-washing of a philosophy or ideology before.


So it turns out that is really a matter of asking oneself: what do I expect from life? And: Is there something about buddhism that can be useful to achieve what I want to achieve in life or what I want to get rid of to make life more comfortable?

The basic question of what dukkha can stand for would seem to be: Is there persistent unease in my life? Is there a persistent unease that spoils too many aspects of life?

What might be the cause of that unease? Discontent, hatred and aversion, depression, fear of death, timidity, general fearfulness, insatiable greed, frustration because of never getting exactly what one wants, unsatisfied sexual desires, unsatisfied material desires, unsatisfied aesthetic desires, desire in general ... ?


I think that unease is perhaps the best translation of dukkha. It leaves open what may cause this unease in a specific individual and is empty of the exaggeraton 'suffering'.

So it is up to investigate for every individual whether there is a persistent, maybe only subliminal unease in its life that spoils too much. If present, this unease could be directly perceived by means of introspection and thus could be validly known in contrast to all these phenomena that do appear quite technical and contrived due to buddhist nomenclature.

If there is no unease at all then buddhism is of no use. If there is no unease then actually one should neither be interested in buddhism nor interested in any kind of irrational religious belief.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2017, 09:53:24 pm by ground »

Offline ground

  • Member
  • Posts: 2088
    • View Profile
Re: Why buddhism?
« Reply #1 on: August 07, 2017, 09:51:12 pm »
What are aims that are worthwhile to pursue?

They must be directly perceptible in order to be existents.

There must be an immediate benefit realizing these aims which must be directly perceptible too.

Their realization must neither cause unease nor add to pre-existent unease but must either reduce or eliminate pre-existent unease.

If there is the slightest uncertainty whether the realization of an aim may be beneficial then it is not worthwhile to pursue because it is not based on valid knowledge.

Therefore only an aim which is the cessation of what is already validly known and which is validly known to be or to cause or to add to unease can be based on valid knowledge of the benefit of its realization. Why? Because it is the current presence of that which is or causes or adds to unease so that the cessation of its presence and the resulting reduction or cessation of unease necessarily is beneficial.

In contrast to these aims that are worthwhile to pursue aims that are the realization of what is not validly known necessarily are a case of doubt because the realization strived for is based on speculative thought and belief in benefits which are merely objects of hope. Such aims are not worthwhile to pursue.

This shows that the buddhist approach to strive for the realization of cessations (negative phenomena) necessarily is a valid approach provided unease and its causes are validly known.

Offline Samana Johann

  • Not a member, just an endured/enduring guest.
  • Member
  • Posts: 580
  • Doing forest monk in Cambodia
    • View Profile
    • sangham.net
Re: Why buddhism?
« Reply #2 on: August 07, 2017, 10:10:06 pm »
Do you like others to follow you, or what? Looks like you got similar sickness then others here to repeat the same again and again. Does it make you sad when nobody listen to your ideas? Maybe you need another nick-name and try another birth.

The Fox and the Grapes



Quote
Driven by hunger, a fox tried to reach some grapes hanging high on the vine but was unable to, although he leaped with all his strength. As he went away, the fox remarked 'Oh, you aren't even ripe yet! I don't need any sour grapes.' People who speak disparagingly of things that they cannot attain would do well to apply this story to themselves.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2017, 10:33:48 pm by Samana Johann »
[ sangham.net Online monastery ✦ accesstoinsight.eu ✦ old used account Hanzze ]

Offline VisuddhiRaptor

  • Member
  • Posts: 374
    • View Profile
Re: Why buddhism?
« Reply #3 on: August 08, 2017, 01:08:20 pm »
Do you like others to follow you, or what?

Like a hungry ghost, Ground is searching for disciples.  :teehee: :lmfao:

Offline The Artis Magistra

  • Member
  • Posts: 455
    • View Profile
Re: Why buddhism?
« Reply #4 on: August 08, 2017, 02:45:19 pm »
Do you like others to follow you, or what?

Like a hungry ghost, Ground is searching for disciples.  :teehee: :lmfao:

I may not be as perceptive as you, but I did not get the impression that ground is seeking students or to develop any sort of cult or sect. I am also a little confused as to what you various faithless sorts are disagreeing on. Rahul, ground, you VisuddhiRaptor, all seem to be of the same sort of ilk ultimately.

You all seem to deny any sort of supernatural or magical sort of things associated with your Buddhisms and all appear to be militantly atheistic with no belief in any life after death, making non-existence the eventuality if not the goal (since for those who won't be reborn, there is truly no suffering in death and never existing again), which was not an option or goal for the superstitious Buddhists of the past who did not believe death offered a true escape from experiences.

Offline The Artis Magistra

  • Member
  • Posts: 455
    • View Profile
Re: Why buddhism?
« Reply #5 on: August 08, 2017, 02:47:04 pm »
I'd like to know more about what each of you disagree on specifically and to get a clearer picture on your disputes and maybe also a little extra information on why such should even matter to people who do not believe in continued experience?

Offline philboyd

  • Member
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
Re: Why buddhism?
« Reply #6 on: August 08, 2017, 07:29:47 pm »
Is it possible that positive repercussions (without direct knowledge  of) can be  a result of a virtuous life style? Are the the teachings and practice of Buddhism a vehicle to that end? Is there any validity to a spiritual faith in this possibility?
« Last Edit: August 08, 2017, 07:33:39 pm by philboyd »
Peace

Offline The Artis Magistra

  • Member
  • Posts: 455
    • View Profile
Re: Why buddhism?
« Reply #7 on: August 08, 2017, 08:04:44 pm »
Is it possible that positive repercussions (without direct knowledge  of) can be  a result of a virtuous life style? Are the the teachings and practice of Buddhism a vehicle to that end? Is there any validity to a spiritual faith in this possibility?

I'd say yes. I'm a religious, spiritual Buddhist. There is another sort of person in this world who might associate with Buddhism or call themselves Buddhist but is not really religious or spiritual and instead the logical conclusion of their ideas is that all activity is worthless and not really worthwhile since good or bad all things end in death forever.

Offline ground

  • Member
  • Posts: 2088
    • View Profile
Re: Why buddhism?
« Reply #8 on: August 16, 2017, 09:11:54 pm »
From that it follows that enlightenment and buddhahood are not aims that are worthwhile to pursue from a perspective of rationality and valid knowledge. Why? Because both cannot be directly perceived and thus there is no basis that would support their existence.

So again, only cessations are aims that are worthwile to pursue because that which shall cease can be directly perceived, i.e. validly known, and thus its cessation, i.e. its absence, can be validly known too.

This may be misunderstood as an outright rejection of mahayana buddhism but actually what is said here is just that the aims of mahayana buddhism cannot be validly known in contrast to cessations. Cessations can be validly known because if a phenomenon can be validly known its cessation necessarily can be known too. The aims of mahayana buddhism are objects of belief only.

But this is not to say that theravada buddhism is based on valid knowledge completley since it teaches aims that are cessations. No, theravada buddhism e.g. teaches rebirth as well altbough rebirth cannot be validly known. It teaches the different paths of stream winner etc. that cannot be validly known and it teaches permanent cessations which cannot be validly known since although cessations can be validly known it cannot be validly known whether those are permanent.


So what's the point of all this?

The point of all this is to show that although all the different forms ob buddhism are pervaded by beliefs buddhism may be deprived of all beliefs and turned into a form of science which is based on valid knowledge exclusively.

But one would also have to drop belief in permanent cessations and pragmatically accept attenuations as a sign for the validity of buddhism's analytical approach.

The analytical approach is:
Quote
Those who are islands unto themselves... should investigate to the very heart of things:[2] 'What is the source of sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair? How do they arise?' [What is their origin?]

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.043.wlsh.html


I.e. the analytical approach is investigation into the causality of what one wants to get rid of because if the cause of a specific unease is absent then the specific unease is absent too.

But investigation into the causality necessarily leads to an infinite regress. And for the purpose of blocking this infinite regress the model of dependent origination has been fashioned which is to be applied to one life only however.

Quote
"And what is dependent co-arising?
ignorance
fabrications
consciousness
name-&-form
six sense media
contact
feeling
craving
clinging/sustenance
becoming
birth, i.e. a sentiment of existence
[specific unease]

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.002.than.html


Preliminary analysis

One may take this dependent origination as a hypothesis and investigate what members of the chain may be used to interrupt this chain.
50% of the members can be excluded from the outset:
1. The 1st member ignorance cannot be based on valid knowledge because one cannot validly know the opposite which is knowledge but one would have to believe what is to be set as knowledge.
2. Actually one may assign the following members fabrications, consciousness, name-&-form, six sense media to the characteristics of life or conscious being and therefore it would not appear reasonable to try to eliminate those.

The second half of the set of members contact, feeling, craving, clinging/sustenance, becoming, birth i.e. a sentiment of existence in contrast to the first half appear to be optional for life and conscious being and since they result in what one wants to get rid of, the specific unease, interruption of the chain in this half appears to be more reasonable since it may occur without cessation of life and conscious being.

End of Preliminary analysis




Anyway, after all these elaborations I now answer the question 'Why buddhism?' from my perspective (feel free to answer it from your perspective):

1. Because buddhism can be rationally applied based on valid knowledge just like a science.

2. Because buddhism can be applied if a persistent unease is observed that spoils too much in life (which actually is the condition for being interested in buddhism at all).

3. Because buddhism can focus on cessation of unease exclusively and therefore can be based on valid knowledge through direct perception and does not have to rely on speculative belief.

4. Because buddhism can follow the scientific approach: logical hypothesis -> experiment -> valid theory that can be applied to modify reality.


Maybe after the invention of 'secular buddhism' this may result in 'secular scientific buddhism'  :teehee:
« Last Edit: August 16, 2017, 09:26:12 pm by ground »

Offline Samana Johann

  • Not a member, just an endured/enduring guest.
  • Member
  • Posts: 580
  • Doing forest monk in Cambodia
    • View Profile
    • sangham.net
Re: Why buddhism?
« Reply #9 on: August 16, 2017, 11:00:14 pm »
From that it follows that enlightenment and buddhahood are not aims that are worthwhile to pursue from a perspective of rationality and valid knowledge. Why? Because both cannot be directly perceived and thus there is no basis that would support their existence.



Grund talks so much nonsens that my person is really facinated how many blind even talk with him more than 2, 3 times.

I guess Ground can directy perceive the coke (assumend) being in the refrigerator and the taste of the meal in the restaurant befor ordering and that there is electricity in the cable so that he finds it worthwhile to act.

If the world has real foolish blind believers, who think their ideas are real, that Ground is an outstanding sample. Not understanding the diverent between beliving (trust), believing on certain experiances, seeing with defilemnts an seeing clear. Why is that so? Because he perceives only his ideas, is neither able to see with defilements nor clear.
[ sangham.net Online monastery ✦ accesstoinsight.eu ✦ old used account Hanzze ]

Offline ground

  • Member
  • Posts: 2088
    • View Profile
Re: Why buddhism?
« Reply #10 on: August 17, 2017, 12:45:08 am »
From that it follows that enlightenment and buddhahood are not aims that are worthwhile to pursue from a perspective of rationality and valid knowledge. Why? Because both cannot be directly perceived and thus there is no basis that would support their existence.



Grund talks so much nonsens that my person is really facinated how many blind even talk with him more than 2, 3 times.

It is you who responds to all of my postings.  :teehee:

I guess Ground can directy perceive the coke (assumend) being in the refrigerator and the taste of the meal in the restaurant befor ordering and that there is electricity in the cable so that he finds it worthwhile to act.

If one is thirsty or hungry then drink or meal are whorthwile to attain because these can be directly perceived. Or are you begging for air castles when going for alms?  :fu:

If the world has real foolish blind believers, who think their ideas are real, that Ground is an outstanding sample.

That's a problematic expression because there is a variety of different understandings of 'real'.

So let's better talk about existence. What can be directly perceived does exist. My ideas exist. Why do they exist? Since I can perceive them directly.
Now since you cannot perceive my ideas but you can only perceive your ideas my ideas necessarily do not exist for you as your ideas necessarily do not exist for me.

However ideas expressed with linguistic signs are visible or audible for many. These expressions of ideas may be designators of existents or nonexistents. Consider ideas expressed as 'body' or 'feeling' ... these are existents because they can be directly perceived. Since body and feeling can be directly perceived these can be validly known.
Now consider ideas expressed as 'enlightenment' or 'buddhahood'. Are these designators of existents or of nonexistents? 'enlightenment' or 'buddhahood' cannot be directly perceived so they cannot be validly known. However 'enlightenment' or 'buddhahood' could be defined to be validly known as definienda by means of definitions.
See the difference? For body and feeling you do not need definitions since body and feeling are accessible to direct perception. body and feeling are not known merely as definienda but as functioning existents.
Now if you wanted trace back the definitions of 'enlightenment' or 'buddhahood' to directly perceptibles what do you think you woud need to arrive at in order to arrive at valid knowledge of 'enlightenment' or 'buddhahood'? you would necessarily arive at cessations. But when people talk about 'enlightenment' or 'buddhahood' they have miraculous capacities in mind which are nonexistent.
So better to avoid any ambiguity and refer to that what can be validly known: cessations.

Not understanding the diverent between beliving (trust), believing on certain experiances, seeing with defilemnts an seeing clear. Why is that so? Because he perceives only his ideas, is neither able to see with defilements nor clear.

Not following the buddha's advice ...
Quote
"Monks, be islands unto yourselves,[1] be your own refuge, having no other; let the Dhamma be an island and a refuge to you, having no other. Those who are islands unto themselves... should investigate to the very heart of things
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.043.wlsh.html

... Johann is unable to see the difference between belief and validly knowing for oneself.
Why is that so? Because being a believer his ideas are caused by written and heard words exclusively but not by investigation 'to the very heart of things'.

But hey, that's fine because there are several kinds of buddhism of which one kind is belief buddhism and the other kind is analytical buddhism.   :fu:
« Last Edit: August 17, 2017, 01:07:24 am by ground »

Offline Samana Johann

  • Not a member, just an endured/enduring guest.
  • Member
  • Posts: 580
  • Doing forest monk in Cambodia
    • View Profile
    • sangham.net
Re: Why buddhism?
« Reply #11 on: August 17, 2017, 02:24:56 am »
Simply tolling.
[ sangham.net Online monastery ✦ accesstoinsight.eu ✦ old used account Hanzze ]

Offline VincentRJ

  • Member
  • Posts: 179
    • View Profile
Re: Why buddhism?
« Reply #12 on: August 17, 2017, 03:05:57 am »
... Johann is unable to see the difference between belief and validly knowing for oneself.
Why is that so? Because being a believer his ideas are caused by written and heard words exclusively but not by investigation 'to the very heart of things'.

Hey! Ground,
I got the impression from previous discussions that you were not a great fan of the Kalama Sutta.  :wink1:

Offline Ron-the-Elder

  • Member
  • Posts: 4486
  • May all beings live rightly and harmoniously.
    • View Profile
Re: Why buddhism?
« Reply #13 on: August 17, 2017, 03:58:27 am »
My impression is that ground asks valid questions in this thread, but I do not see him doing anything else than setting up responders for debate.

My suggestion is to work hard to eliminate any current practices, which cause harm (in any way that we recognize) thereby eliminating dukkha , and as a result empting our lives and those adjacent to us of their consequences.

While we may not achieve nibbana due to past kamma, we may at least affect the overall trend in this or in other life-times.

Of course this does not eliminate the possibility of disease or disaster, but, according to Buddha's teachings, will reduce the undesirable consequences resulting from our own intentional actions.

Then there is our ignorance with which we have to deal.  The only way to handle that if we don't believe in the effectiveness of personal dhamma study, verification and validation of what we have learned is to use the scientific method of trial and error, which as ground points out, may take many life-times.   But, so be it.  What better thing could we be doing for the next few millennia?  :-P

In any event, thanks in advance for the continued thought-provoking questions and the great responses, if and when sincere. :listen:

Please make certain of their beneficial intent as it seems from many of the response in this thread that nobody here takes much to "pissing up a rope".   :r4wheel:
What Makes an Elder? :
A head of gray hairs doesn't mean one's an elder. Advanced in years, one's called an old fool.
But one in whom there is truth, restraint, rectitude, gentleness,self-control, he's called an elder, his impurities disgorged, enlightened.
-Dhammpada, 19, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.

Offline Samana Johann

  • Not a member, just an endured/enduring guest.
  • Member
  • Posts: 580
  • Doing forest monk in Cambodia
    • View Profile
    • sangham.net
Re: Why buddhism?
« Reply #14 on: August 17, 2017, 08:45:24 am »
When one believes, that putting an effort, lift the will, to order food of what he does not valid know if it will be that what is desired, says such lies in the frame of valid perceive able, while putting an effort, lifting the will, to go beyound Dukkha, makes no sense because it is not perceiveable in doing so by following the Buddhas advices, he can not be called to either understand seeing nor not seeing and the line of discussion shows that there is no way to make him understandable that any action is based on believe till one reaches real knowledge an vision.

If the way to gain the best possible for one self would be just by following ones ideas, preoccupations and limited knowledge would be a way for gain, the one must live like an reptil which has no parents and teacher. Under this circumstances Ground would have gained his knowledge like reptil, denying that his way till today was noting but learned from others. There is no allaround validity in his logig to be seen. It's just a luring taktic for people with less of no faith.

As Nyom Ron said, it so importand to do everything possible to counteract doubt and as also sad, most importand for that are admirable friend, those who had secured their faith with a first glimps of vision and knowledge, because it's totally insecure and does not look like in this time, that the next generation while be provided by admirable people and even the possibility to meet the good teaching, not to speak of gaining even a human existen in this world time or meeting a Buddhas teaching. The conditions are not bettering, really not.

And the talk is actually about Dhamma-Vinaya of the Buddha, where "Buddhism" might be not for everyone a useful synonym as Buddhism is most just a more or lesser followed by blind "Groundisms" which has mostly no shame to simply misuse the Teachers reputation to put it as lable abouve ones ideas to let it serve a livelihood, some amout of pleasure for what ever wordily gain.

For those who know by valid perceiving that they would not have anything gained without generouse an good-willed people with compassion:

Quote
Upanisa Sutta: Prerequisites

Dwelling at Savatthi... "Monks, the ending of the effluents is for one who knows & sees, I tell you, not for one who does not know & does not see. For one who knows what & sees what is there the ending of effluents? 'Such is form, such its origination, such its disappearance. Such is feeling, such its origination, such its disappearance. Such is perception, such its origination, such its disappearance. Such are fabrications, such their origination, such their disappearance. Such is consciousness, such its origination, such its disappearance.' The ending of the effluents is for one who knows in this way & sees in this way.

"The knowledge of ending in the presence of ending has its prerequisite, I tell you. It is not without a prerequisite. And what is the prerequisite for the knowledge of ending? Release, it should be said. Release has its prerequisite, I tell you. It is not without a prerequisite. And what is its prerequisite? Dispassion... Disenchantment... Knowledge & vision of things as they actually are present... Concentration... Pleasure... Serenity... Rapture... Joy... Conviction... Stress... Birth... Becoming... Clinging... Craving... Feeling... Contact... The six sense media... Name-&-form... Consciousness... Fabrications... Fabrications have their prerequisite, I tell you. They are not without a prerequisite. And what is their prerequisite? Ignorance, it should be said.

"Thus fabrications have ignorance as their prerequisite, consciousness has fabrications as its prerequisite, name-&-form has consciousness as its prerequisite, the six sense media have name-&-form as their prerequisite, contact has the six sense media as its prerequisite, feeling has contact as its prerequisite, craving has feeling as its prerequisite, clinging has craving as its prerequisite, becoming has clinging as its prerequisite, birth has becoming as its prerequisite, stress & suffering have birth as their prerequisite, conviction has stress & suffering as its prerequisite, joy has conviction as its prerequisite, rapture has joy as its prerequisite, serenity has rapture as its prerequisite, pleasure has serenity as its prerequisite, concentration has pleasure as its prerequisite, knowledge & vision of things as they actually are present has concentration as its prerequisite, disenchantment has knowledge & vision of things as they actually are present as its prerequisite, dispassion has disenchantment as its prerequisite, release has dispassion as its prerequisite, knowledge of ending has release as its prerequisite.

"Just as when the gods pour rain in heavy drops & crash thunder on the upper mountains: The water, flowing down along the slopes, fills the mountain clefts & rifts & gullies. When the mountain clefts & rifts & gullies are full, they fill the little ponds. When the little ponds are full, they fill the big lakes. When the big lakes are full, they fill the little rivers. When the little rivers are full, they fill the big rivers. When the big rivers are full, they fill the great ocean. In the same way:

"Fabrications have ignorance as their prerequisite, consciousness has fabrications as its prerequisite, name-&-form has consciousness as their prerequisite, the six sense media have name-&-form as their prerequisite, contact has the six sense media as its prerequisite, feeling has contact as its prerequisite, craving has feeling as its prerequisite, clinging has craving as its prerequisite, becoming has clinging as its prerequisite, birth has becoming as its prerequisite, stress & suffering have birth as their prerequisite, conviction has stress & suffering as its prerequisite, joy has conviction as its prerequisite, rapture has joy as its prerequisite, serenity has rapture as its prerequisite, pleasure has serenity as its prerequisite, concentration has pleasure as its prerequisite, knowledge & vision of things as they actually are present has concentration as its prerequisite, disenchantment has knowledge & vision of things as they actually are present as its prerequisite, dispassion has disenchantment as its prerequisite, release has dispassion as its prerequisite, knowledge of ending has release as its prerequisite."


Since Ground and other in this un-culture may have heard and learned actually much, it is to hope for them, that they trust and remind when dukkha actually appears when it reaches and amount they had not perceived till today, spending their times away on a huge amount of past merits which are running out.In that way they possible could gain the stream latest by death, but having performed so much unskillful in this live, the chance is very small but merely additional pain by remourse will approach.

An older short account on Grounds and other secular topics:

Quote
Depending Co-disappearing, as taught by the Buddha

"Believe" is actually the most required prerequisite, not only to listen to the Dhamma but also to put an effort to get results you are not able to know for now.
It is a modern delusion that there is even any action (effort) without believing in first place and of cause such a beloved view was long time used to sell Dhamma of the Buddha to people in broad and use it as opposition to other religions.
The different is just, that you can put your believe at least to a prove which others mostly not can and they also lack of samples (people) who have reached the promised.
For some more understand of what actually believe (no need to quarrel about the certain word for it: following something what actually is not really known and seen now) you may read:
Faith In Awakening
Refuge: An Introduction to the Buddha, Dhamma, & Sangha
The Truth of Rebirth: And Why it Matters for Buddhist Practice
or
A Look at the Kalama Sutta, by Bhikkhu Bodhi (1998; 4pp./12KB)
 
Quote
Some popular contemporary teachings claim that the Buddha advocates putting one's trust solely in what one can know and experience directly for oneself. In fact, when we take into careful consideration the context of this sutta, it becomes clear that this interpretation altogether misses a much more important point.
 
Altogether it's the root factor in the depending co-arising that leads to the end of suffering: Upanisa Sutta: Prerequisites  "...stress & suffering have birth as their prerequisite, conviction (saddha) has stress & suffering as its prerequisite, joy has conviction as its prerequisite...release has dispassion as its prerequisite, knowledge of ending has release as its prerequisite."
The condition that one has unshakable faith into Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha incl. virtue describes a person who has entered the stream and is already no more able to miss the finally aim. (DN 16)
How ever, it also runs sometimes this way: "When this was said, Upaka said, 'May it be so, my friend,' and — shaking his head, taking a side-road — he left." (Ariyapariyesana Sutta: The Noble Search) Circle of Life and suffering and the way out of it


As the Buddha counted, and most of you may act so in the same way, wher assosiating, and perceiving with proper attention and attentive that a person does not bear ill-will, gread and delusion in one, one starts to tend to this person and leads him an eare. Usually is the acceptance in the sphere of "on my side (of by believes)" to chose ones assosiates, teacher and friends.

Quote
[The Buddha:] "There are five things that can turn out in two ways in the here-&-now. Which five? Conviction, liking, unbroken tradition, reasoning by analogy, & an agreement through pondering views. These are the five things that can turn out in two ways in the here-&-now. Now some things are firmly held in conviction and yet vain, empty, & false. Some things are not firmly held in conviction, and yet they are genuine, factual, & unmistaken. Some things are well-liked... truly an unbroken tradition... well-reasoned... Some things are well-pondered and yet vain, empty, & false. Some things are not well-pondered, and yet they are genuine, factual, & unmistaken. In these cases it isn't proper for a knowledgeable person who safeguards the truth to come to a definite conclusion, 'Only this is true; anything else is worthless."

[Kapadika Bharadvaja:] "But to what extent, Master Gotama, is there the safeguarding of the truth? To what extent does one safeguard the truth? We ask Master Gotama about the safeguarding of the truth."

[The Buddha:] "If a person has conviction, his statement, 'This is my conviction,' safeguards the truth. But he doesn't yet come to the definite conclusion that 'Only this is true; anything else is worthless.' To this extent, Bharadvaja, there is the safeguarding of the truth. To this extent one safeguards the truth. I describe this as the safeguarding of the truth. But it is not yet an awakening to the truth."

— MN 95


That's the Ground of Ground, and that is what he believes to be the way till the end. But the question s not about just to live ones truth, but to gain awaking that goes beyoun all kinds of stress and suffering:

Quote
"Yes, Master Gotama, to this extent there is the safeguarding of the truth. To this extent one safeguards the truth. We regard this as the safeguarding of the truth. But to what extent is there an awakening to the truth? To what extent does one awaken to the truth? We ask Master Gotama about awakening to the truth."

"There is the case, Bharadvaja, where a monk lives in dependence on a certain village or town. Then a householder or householder's son goes to him and observes him with regard to three mental qualities — qualities based on greed, qualities based on aversion, qualities based on delusion: 'Are there in this venerable one any such qualities based on greed that, with his mind overcome by these qualities, he might say, "I know," while not knowing, or say, "I see," while not seeing; or that he might urge another to act in a way that was for his/her long-term harm & pain?' As he observes him, he comes to know, 'There are in this venerable one no such qualities based on greed... His bodily behavior & verbal behavior are those of one not greedy. And the Dhamma he teaches is deep, hard to see, hard to realize, tranquil, refined, beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise. This Dhamma can't easily be taught by a person who's greedy.

When, on observing that the monk is purified with regard to qualities based

-MN 95


But if one of the obstacles are present in a person in this existence, there even a Buddha in his/here presence can not help out:

Quote
"Endowed with these six qualities, a person is capable of alighting on the lawfulness, the rightness of skillful mental qualities even while listening to the true Dhamma. Which six?

"He is not endowed with a (present) kamma obstruction, a defilement obstruction, or a result-of-(past)-kamma obstruction; he has conviction, has the desire (to listen), and is discerning.

"Endowed with these six qualities, a person is capable of alighting on the lawfulness, the rightness of skillful mental qualities even while listening to the true Dhamma."

AN 6.86


And the truth of it, we can observe all the day on what ever placewe meet others. "Sad" but beings are hires of their actions, nobody can help out in regard of conditions.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2017, 08:54:37 am by Samana Johann »
[ sangham.net Online monastery ✦ accesstoinsight.eu ✦ old used account Hanzze ]

 


SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal