Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.

Faith vs Belief

fivebellsfivebells Veteran
edited May 2010 in Meditation
If you try to practice meditation by holding to beliefs, you will inevitably come into conflict with your experience. Beliefs are conditioned ways of interpreting experience. As your capacity in attention deepens, you will see beyond your conditioning, and the beliefs you hold will lead you to dismiss what you experience then, or lead you to shut it down.
The terms used here, "faith" vs "belief," are problematic, because theusage is not idiomatic. But I think the distinction he's drawing from them is very important for everyone no matter what their views.
«13

Comments

  • patbbpatbb Veteran
    edited April 2010
    fivebells wrote: »
    The terms used here, "faith" vs "belief," are problematic, because the usage is not idiomatic. But I think the distinction he's drawing from them is very important for everyone no matter what their views.
    To me, faith means believing blindly. A collection of deeply ingrained beliefs.

    Perhaps it could be "faith vs observation of experiences"?
  • edited April 2010
    It seems like this fellow regards belief as a closed system which leaves no possibility of any other ideas or associations that aren't related to the conditioned cleesas. (bundles) And he seems to use "faith" as being an open system where new ideas are welcomed or possibilities are not limited.
    IMO they are very much similar in the way most English speaking people use the words. In fact they seem interchangeable, especially when used in religious ways.
    I agree with the practice though of not letting the mind form belief, but for me that includes faith, the result being an open/empty mind that sees and allows all possibilities. "To not admit a fly, but allow the parade to drive through".
  • FoibleFullFoibleFull Canada Veteran
    edited April 2010
    Faith, belief, know.

    I am told that in the Tibetan language there are two words that mean "to know".

    One means you know because someone told you ... my sister says her husband wore his winter coat yesterday.

    One means you know because you experienced it for yourself ... I saw my sister's husband wearing his winter coat yesterday.

    Unfortunately, the English language makes no recognition of the distinction. Too often, belief is confused with knowing (#1), and knowing (#1) confused with knowing (#2).
  • jinzangjinzang Veteran
    edited April 2010
    Two forms of the copula, one which indicates direct knowledge, the other hearsay.
  • edited April 2010
    thich naht hanh described nirvana as "freedom from views"
  • Faith has many meanings in English and it takes just a little discernment. In Buddhism there is not a place for beliefs - so when we refer to faith we are using it in the context of "confidence".

    "Having heard and understood the Dhamma, he has the faith to practice the Dhamma", simply means to have the confidence to practice the Dhamma. No "belief" is inferred in the use of the word faith in this context.

    In the Dhamma,

    Matthew
  • federicafederica Seeker of the clear blue sky... Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator
    edited May 2010
    Quite so.

    Hello. :)
  • federica wrote: »
    Quite so.

    Hello. :)

    TY :)

    Hello back
  • DhammaDhatuDhammaDhatu Veteran
    edited May 2010
    Buddha described nirvana as freedom from greed,hatred & delusion.

    :)
  • DhammaDhatuDhammaDhatu Veteran
    edited May 2010
    Nonsense.

    Why practise awareness?

    Because one has an underlying belief it will lead to freedom.

    The Buddha in his stainless clarity taught the first spiritual power is faith or belief.

    The quotee does not even understand their own mind.

    Their very statement is one of belief, even if that belief is what they perceive as "non-belief".

    :eek2:
  • Nonsense.

    Why practise awareness?

    Because one has an underlying belief it will lead to freedom.

    The Buddha in his stainless clarity taught the first spiritual power is faith or belief. .....

    Dhamma Dhatu,

    As I posted above it seems you are confusing the meanings of faith. Faith in a Buddhist context really relates to confidence. One practices meditation because having heard and understood the teachings one has the confidence in the correctness of the teachings to try them out. If one practices well and with dedication this faith is soon replaced by experiential personal knowledge. It is a mere stepping stone.
    Buddhism is free from compulsion and coercion and does not demand of the follower blind faith. At the very outset the skeptic will be pleased to hear of its call for investigation. Buddhism from beginning to end is open to all those who have eyes to see and minds to understand. The Buddha never endeavored to wring out of his followers blind and submissive faith in him and his teaching. He tutors his disciples in the ways of discrimination and intelligent inquiry. To the inquiring Kalamas the Buddha answered: "Right is it to doubt, right is it to question what is doubtful and what is not clear. In a doubtful matter wavering does arise."
    (emphasis mine)

    So if we take the "belief" type of faith out of Buddhism and replace it with the "confidence" type of faith we get to what the Buddha taught as the factors for enlightenment:
    Further says the Buddha, "Just as, monks, in a peaked house all rafters whatsoever go together to the peak, slope to the peak, join in the peak, and of them all the peak is reckoned chief: even so, monks, the monk who cultivates and makes much of the seven factors of wisdom, slopes to Nibbana, inclines to Nibbana, tends to Nibbana."2
    The seven factors are:
    1. Mindfulness (sati)
    2. Keen investigation of the dhamma (dhammavicaya)3
    3. Energy (viriya)
    4. Rapture or happiness (piti)
    5. Calm (passaddhi)
    6. Concentration (samadhi)
    7. Equanimity (upekkha)
    You see "belief" doesn't make the list.

    "Keen investigation" follows from hearing and understanding the Dhamma - and having the confidence (or "faith") to put into practice that which one has learned, and thus walk the path of self discovery and liberation through gnosis.

    Warmly,

    In the Dhamma,

    Matthew

    Quotes from From "The seven factors of enlightenment" by Piyadassi Thera on AccessToInsight.org
  • DhammaDhatuDhammaDhatu Veteran
    edited May 2010
    As I posted above it seems you are confusing the meanings of faith.
    I am not confused.
    Faith in a Buddhist context really relates to confidence. One practices meditation because having heard and understood the teachings one has the confidence in the correctness of the teachings to try them out.
    This is still a belief.
    So if we take the "belief" type of faith out of Buddhism and replace it with the "confidence" type of faith we get to what the Buddha taught as the factors for enlightenment:
    It makes no difference. It is still based in belief.

    This when was belief something inherently superstitious?
    1 : a state or habit of mind in which trust or confidence is placed in some person or thing
    2 : something believed; especially : a tenet or body of tenets held by a group
    3 : conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence

    dictionary

    You see "belief" doesn't make the list.

    Matthew
    Saddha is not on many of the Buddha's lists. Your point is mute.

    In AN 4.34, the Buddha states the highest saddha (faith) is in viraga (dispassion), having faith abandoning craving & attachment will lead to liberation.

    This is instant enlightenment rather than the slow path of the factors of enlightenment.

    In short, what was once trust is transformed into convinction via enlightenment.

    It is still belief.

    :buck:
  • Dhamma Dhatu,

    I think you mean my point is "moot". However the distinction is clear in the dictionary you quoted:

    "1 : a state or habit of mind in which trust or confidence is placed in some person or thing
    2 : something believed; especially : a tenet or body of tenets held by a group
    3 : conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence"

    Only one of these relates to belief in the sense most people use that word. The 1st and 3rd are the meanings implied in the Pali canon.

    And yes, there are also many lists where Saddha does make it, yet in Buddhism we are principally dealing with reality so again come back to the "confidence" sense of the word rather than blind belief if the Dhamma is to be of practical value.

    Warmly,

    In the Dhamma,

    Matthew
  • edited May 2010
    patbb wrote: »
    To me, faith means believing blindly. A collection of deeply ingrained beliefs.
    That belief is YOUR conditioning.

    Faith == "sticking to the program" (nothing more)
  • edited May 2010
    Dhamma D,

    DD: This is still a belief.

    S9: Perhaps confidence is a kind of belief, but not a blind belief by any means.

    If you see something works, of course it is simply a belief (not really a wild guess) that it will more than likely happen again, esp. if you do the exact same things in order to produce it.

    Yet in a way, the same word “belief” holds such totally different connotations that in truth they are not really the same word at/all, even though they are spelled the same way.


    Don’t you think, too, that we have confidence in the Buddha words/instructions because in having started to follow them, we can see early improvements in our own life and well being, right away? It gives us a small but promising taste of what could follow.

    So in this way, confidence is built on personal experience, and also we are inspired to continue. This type of belief or confidence is not second handed, and because of this it is not so easily shaken by the first difficulty.

    Respectfully,
    S9
  • edited May 2010
    Dhamma D,

    DD: This is instant enlightenment rather than the slow path of the factors of enlightenment.

    S9: Realization/Enlightenment isn’t even instantaneous. Even that is too slow for the “Ever Immediate Now.”

    When we are finally ‘Realized,’ we see the whole idea that we were not ‘Awake,’ yet, was the lie. We see that we are all Buddhas, and always have been Buddhas, right along. We only dream that we are not. Or at least that is what Gautama said.

    Sleep doesn’t change into Waking. Sleep is like a cloud blocking our vision of the “Ever Present Wakefulness of Pure Consciousness.”

    Peace,
    S9
  • NomaDBuddhaNomaDBuddha Scalpel wielder :) Bucharest Veteran
    edited May 2010
    fivebells wrote: »
    The terms used here, "faith" vs "belief," are problematic, because theusage is not idiomatic. But I think the distinction he's drawing from them is very important for everyone no matter what their views.

    Faith is personal and belief is for the whole group of people who adhere to the same dogmas...
  • DhammaDhatuDhammaDhatu Veteran
    edited May 2010
    When we are finally ‘Realized,’...
    like your Self

    :lol:
  • edited May 2010
    .”

    When we are finally ‘Realized,’ we see the whole idea that we were not ‘Awake,’ yet, was the lie. We see that we are all Buddhas, and always have been Buddhas, right along. We only dream that we are not. Or at least that is what Gautama said.

    S9


    Could you provide some evidence and link for this, please, Sub9


    .
  • DhammaDhatuDhammaDhatu Veteran
    edited May 2010
    When we are finally ‘Realized,’ we see the whole idea that we were not ‘Awake,’ yet, was the lie. We see that we are all Buddhas, and always have been Buddhas, right along. We only dream that we are not. Or at least that is what Gautama said.
    Where did Gautama say this? Please quote it?

    I would say you are confusing Gautama with Ramana Maharshi.

    Please kindly stop replying to my posts with your Hinduism chatter. :rolleyesc
    Bhikhhus, it is because of not understanding and not penetrating the Four Noble Truths that you and I have roamed and wandered through this long course of samsara.

    Through many a birth in samsara have I wandered in vain, seeking in the builder of this house. Each new birth bringing more suffering.

    O house-builder, you are seen! You will not build this house again. For your rafters are broken and your ridgepole shattered. My mind has reached the Unconditioned; I have attained the destruction of craving.

    Gautama
    There is no greater mystery than this, that we keep seeking reality though in fact we are reality. We think that there is something hiding reality and that this must be destroyed before reality is gained. How ridiculous! A day will dawn when you will laugh at all your past efforts. That which will be on the day you laugh is also here and now.

    Ramana Maharshi
  • DhammaDhatuDhammaDhatu Veteran
    edited May 2010
    Ever Present Wakefulness of Pure Consciousness.”
    nb6xpz.gif
  • edited May 2010
    Faith is sort of loyalty or allegiance that that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence, while belief is mental acceptance and conviction of truth.
    Both still rest on cognitive knowledge that that deals with mental processes and behavior. Mostly, faith and belief is referring to "Gradual" school" whereas Implicitness and absoluteness is towards "Sudden" school.

    The only difference is that by nature some men are quick-witted, while others are dull in understanding. Those who are enlightened realize the truth in a sudden, while those who are under delusion have to train themselves gradually. But such a difference will disappear when we know our own mind and realize our own nature.
  • DhammaDhatuDhammaDhatu Veteran
    edited May 2010
    Wilfred wrote: »
    Faith is sort of loyalty or allegiance that that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence, while belief is mental acceptance and conviction of truth.
    I disagree.

    Whatever word we use, be it 'belief', 'faith', 'trust', 'conviction' or 'confidence', learned Buddhists have always held there are two kinds of faith (saddha), namely, blind faith & bright faith.

    :smilec:
  • Dhamma Datu,
    I disagree.

    Whatever word we use, be it 'belief', 'faith', 'trust', 'conviction' or 'confidence', learned Buddhists have always held there are two kinds of faith (saddha), namely, blind faith & bright faith.

    :smilec:

    Sloppiness with language does not make a great friend on the path. "'belief', 'faith', 'trust', 'conviction' or 'confidence'" - all mean differing things, and often different things to different people.

    Sharon Salzberg writes eloquently and informatively on the issue:
    I think that belief and faith sometimes go together. It's not that they are mutually exclusive—we can believe something and also have faith in it. I would use the word belief to refer to something more in the realm of an idea about things. It can be something that we have never really examined, and therefore we don't have a quality of faith in it that comes from seeing for ourselves that it is true. It's more just an idea that we have. Beliefs are often these assumptions that we have about so many things that are really fabrications of the mind, not based on an actual, personal experience of things. pixel.gifIt's not that all belief is wrong; some belief might reflect a true or a deeper understanding of things. But because it's untested, perhaps, or not even acknowledged as a belief, I would distinguish it from that quality of faith which only deepens as it's tested. And the practice is a great deal about examining these things and seeing what has some basis in actual experience and what is just a construction that has been made up.
    pixel.gif I prefer to think of faith (as Coleridge says of poetry) as "the willing suspension of disbelief." So rather than thinking of it as the assumption or the taking up of a belief, it's the willing suspension of disbelief—a willingness to be open, to explore, to investigate.
    Here she delineates belief and faith perfectly:

    Belief is based on assumption/acceptance of unexamined concepts.

    Faith is different: "suspension of disbelief" - i.e. acceptance of something transitionally, in order to investigate it's voracity, based on confidence/trust that it may be beneficial - and this confidence or trust is based on an encounter with a person or teaching that seems to work or have benefit - and it is a transitional state until you have experienced and proved it's efficacy for yourself through experience.

    It is worth noting that disbelief in something, if unexamined, is no different to belief in something. Thus the suspension of disbelief is the suspension of a form of belief that leaves you open to explore.

    These may - or may not - be the "blind" and "bright" faith you are referring to - but suspension of disbelief is not the same thing as belief, in any way whatsoever.

    Warmly,

    In the Dhamma,

    Matthew

    Faith - by Sharon Salzberg
  • edited May 2010
    This is going to get me yelled at, but I mostly agree with what Dhamma Dhatu states. Any form of faith is belief.

    Now, hear me out... ;) Though we call our attachments this or that does not change their reality, only our perception of them. Even confidence is a belief; it is not self-knowledge, it is not wisdom. That we use the word confidence implies that we're "pretty sure", but this is still on the conceptual level of understanding.

    Whichever word that we use, to have either faith (confidence), faith (belief), or belief of any form is the realm of the conceptual. It is the mundane, not the supramundane.

    That being said, whether this faith/belief is bad or good is subjective. The deeper the understanding of the concepts, and the greater the effort involved, the closer one moves from belief... to faith... to realization, insight, self-knowledge. Wisdom.

    All of our attachments, including that which we believe, are conditioned. Continue to study and to practice; to see rightly that which blinds us from the true nature of all reality, of all phenomena and ourselves. Come to know that the nature of reality is selfless, and then understand your own selfless nature; this is our path. This is why many are here.
  • Stephen,
    Stephen wrote: »
    This is going to get me yelled at, but I mostly agree with what Dhamma Dhatu states.

    Not going to get you yelled at by me :)
    Stephen wrote: »
    Any form of faith is belief.
    Stephen wrote: »
    ... the closer one moves from belief... to faith... to realization, insight, self-knowledge. Wisdom.

    However, I would suggest you make your mind up and delineate with a little more finesse. If "any form of faith is belief", then there can not be "movement" from belief to faith. You can't move - and stay in the same place - at the same time.

    Warmly,

    In the Dhamma,

    Matthew
  • edited May 2010
    What I was trying to convey is that there are varying levels, or degrees, of belief. Faith and confidence are among them.

    If you take faith to mean blind belief, I would put that low on the scale. If you take faith to mean confidence (born of understanding, study, experience, etc.), I would put that high on the scale.

    The scale, and belief itself, becomes unnecessary when wisdom is acquired. This is all subjective of course; there is no literal scale. I'm only trying to convey the progression.

    Blind Faith/Belief -> Belief -> Faith/Confidence -> Realization; Wisdom


    ~
  • federicafederica Seeker of the clear blue sky... Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator
    edited May 2010
    These are not levels. These are definitions.
  • aMattaMatt Veteran
    edited May 2010
    I like the term authentic confidence. For me, it is an understanding that is rooted directly in clear and present observation. Beliefs and faith and whatnot seem to point toward objects, conventions that exist outside the view.
  • DhammaDhatuDhammaDhatu Veteran
    edited May 2010
    Let us examine where the Buddha used the term 'saddha':
    Saddha<SUPERSCRIPT>1</SUPERSCRIPT> (adj.) [orig. adj. of saddha<SUPERSCRIPT>2</SUPERSCRIPT>, but felt to be adj. of saddhā; cp. BSk. śrāddha AvŚ <SMALLCAPS>i.</SMALLCAPS>83, 383] 1. believing faithful D <SMALLCAPS>i.</SMALLCAPS>171; S <SMALLCAPS>i.</SMALLCAPS>43; <SMALLCAPS>ii.</SMALLCAPS>159 sq.; A <SMALLCAPS>i.</SMALLCAPS>150; <SMALLCAPS>ii.</SMALLCAPS>164, 227 sq.; <SMALLCAPS>iii.</SMALLCAPS>3 sq., 34, 182; <SMALLCAPS>iv.</SMALLCAPS>38, 145, 314 sq.; <SMALLCAPS>v.</SMALLCAPS>10 sq., 124 sq.; Sn 188, 371; Dh. 8; Pv <SMALLCAPS>i.</SMALLCAPS>10<SUPERSCRIPT>4</SUPERSCRIPT>; <SMALLCAPS>iv.</SMALLCAPS>1<SUPERSCRIPT>86</SUPERSCRIPT>; DhA <SMALLCAPS>ii.</SMALLCAPS>82. -- as(s)addha unbelieving PvA 42, 54, 67, 243 & passim (see a˚). -- 2. credulous Sn 853; Dh 97.

    :)
  • DhammaDhatuDhammaDhatu Veteran
    edited May 2010
    "Faith, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for faith? 'Suffering' should be the reply.

    Upanisa Sutta
    Here, a human being experiences suffering. They have an intimate experience of suffering. Then they hear or read the Buddha's teaching about suffering and its cessation. Due to their experience, which accords with the teaching, their mind develops faith. This is wise faith or bright faith, because it is supported by experience.

    :)
  • DhammaDhatuDhammaDhatu Veteran
    edited May 2010
    Below is from MN 47,which as about examining the mind & behaviour of the Buddha, before developing faith:

    2vd4t4m.jpg

    Here, faith is supported by reasoning or direct experience. It is bright faith rather than blind faith.
  • DhammaDhatuDhammaDhatu Veteran
    edited May 2010
    Monks, among all things conditioned and unconditioned, dispassion is reckoned the best of them all: the crushing of all infatuation, the removal of thirst, the uprooting of attachment, the cutting off of the round [of becoming], the destruction of craving, dispassion, Nibbana.

    Those who have faith in the dhamma of dispassion have faith in the best; and for those who have faith in the best, the best results will be theirs.

    AN 4.34
    Now the type of faith above must come from experiencing.

    It is having a taste of freedom and 'pouring on the fuel' of more & more abandonment.

    It is shifting into the 4th gear of abandonment (rather than plodding along in 1st gear), powered by faith.

    :smilec:
  • DhammaDhatuDhammaDhatu Veteran
    edited May 2010
    However, I would suggest you make your mind up and delineate with a little more finesse. If "any form of faith is belief", then there can not be "movement" from belief to faith.
    The above sounds like a saying of a rebel without a cause.

    Even what the rebel regards as "belief" can have efficacy:
    "And what is the individual released through conviction? There is the case where a certain individual does not remain touching with his body those peaceful liberations that transcend form, that are formless, but — having seen with discernment — some of his fermentations are ended, and his conviction in the Tathagata is settled, rooted and established. This is called an individual who is released [liberated] through conviction.

    Kitagiri Sutta

    :)
  • DhammaDhatuDhammaDhatu Veteran
    edited May 2010
    "Excellent, Sariputta. Excellent. Those who have not known, seen, penetrated, realized, or attained it by means of discernment would have to take it on conviction in others that the faculty of conviction... persistence... mindfulness... concentration... discernment, when developed & pursued, gains a footing in the Deathless, has the Deathless as its goal & consummation.

    Whereas those who have known, seen, penetrated, realized, & attained it by means of discernment would have no doubt or uncertainty that the faculty of conviction... persistence... mindfulness... concentration... discernment, when developed & pursued, gains a footing in the Deathless, has the Deathless as its goal & consummation."

    Pubbakotthaka Sutta
    The sutta above distinguishes well blind faith & bright faith.

    Please note here faith is a spiritual power.

    Sariputta does not say here, due to realisation, faith ceases.

    Certainly not.

    Faith is a requirement of the path, just like faith in one's legs is a requirement for deciding to walk.

    :)
  • DhammaDhatuDhammaDhatu Veteran
    edited May 2010
    Faith is different: "suspension of disbelief" - i.e. acceptance of something transitionally, in order to investigate it's voracity, based on confidence/trust that it may be beneficial - and this confidence or trust is based on an encounter with a person or teaching that seems to work or have benefit - and it is a transitional state until you have experienced and proved it's efficacy for yourself through experience.
    Irreverent One

    It follows the quotes above from an enlightened Buddha (rather than from one such as yourself caught up in myriad forms of blind belief) show your view expressed above is inaccurate or "sloppy".

    Nowhere in these quotes is faith regarded as "suspension of disbelief". Faith is not only belief but convinction born of personal experience.

    Often we take our faith in myriad things so much for granted that we are not even aware it is there.

    Best wishes

    :)
  • DhammaDhatuDhammaDhatu Veteran
    edited May 2010
    More faith by Sharon:
    “I have definitely remade my life,” she says. “I’ve re-parented myself with my teachers, and I’ve found a home in the dharma, and have an amazing community of friends. I have practiced. But like any person, I’m not completely free. I do have faith, though, that any of us can be.”

    Sharon Salzberg's Journey on the Path
    Irreverent One

    Now tell us, what kind of "faith" is Sharon referring to above?

    Blind faith or bright faith?

    :confused:
  • More faith by Sharon:

    Irreverent One

    Now tell us, what kind of "faith" is Sharon referring to above?

    Blind faith or bright faith?

    :confused:

    Ask her.

    Your six posts do nothing to change my understanding or deepen it. Maybe if you had condensed them into one it might have helped but I don't know. Mainly they seem to point to exactly the difference I am pointing out between "blind belief" and "faith/confidence" - due to hearing, understanding or experiencing the voracity of the teachings or a teacher.

    In the Dhamma,

    Matthew
  • DhammaDhatuDhammaDhatu Veteran
    edited May 2010
    Your six posts do nothing to change my understanding or deepen it.
    Irreverent One

    I do not see the "deepening" claimed. I do not see understanding of saddha as a path factor.

    Faith is not a transitional state but a spiritual power that is always engaged. The suttas state:
    There are these five powers (bala). Which five? Power of conviction (saddha), power of persistence, power of mindfulness, power of concentration & power of discernment. These are the five powers.

    Just as the River Ganges flows to the east, slopes to the east, inclines to the east, in the same way when a monk develops & pursues the five powers, he flows to Nibbana, slopes to Nibbana, inclines to Nibbana.

    SN 50.1

    The Dhammapada states the following about the arahant:
    97. The man who is without blind faith, who knows the Uncreated, who has severed all links, destroyed all causes and thrown out all desires — he, truly, is the most excellent of men.

    381. Full of joy, full of faith in the Teaching of the Buddha, the monk attains the Peaceful State, the bliss of cessation of conditioned things.

    The Pali states about the mature practitioner:
    Yassa saddhā tathāgate
    Acalā supatiṭṭhitā,
    Sīlañca yassa kalyāṇaṃ
    Ariya-kantaṃ pasaṃsitaṃ

    One whose conviction in the Tathagata
    Is unshakable, well-established,
    Whose virtue is admirable,
    Praised, cherished by the Noble Ones,

    Saṅghe pasādo yassatthi
    Ujubhūtañca dassanaṃ
    Adaḷiddoti taṃ āhu
    Amoghan-tassa jīvitaṃ

    Who has trust in the Sangha, straightforwardness, vision:
    "He is not poor," they say. His life has not been in vain.

    Tasmā saddhañca sīlañca
    Pasādaṃ dhamma-dassanaṃ
    Anuyuñjetha medhāvī
    Saraṃ buddhāna-sāsananti

    So conviction & virtue, faith & dhamma-vision
    Should be cultivated by the wise,
    Remembering the Buddhas' teachings.
    :)
  • Irreverent One

    I do not see the "deepening" claimed. I do not see understanding of saddha as a path factor.

    Dhamma Dhatu,

    There was no deepening claimed. I stated that your six posts did not deepen my understanding but seemed to point at the very distinction I had drawn between blind belief and faith as confidence.

    Warm regards,

    Matthew
  • edited May 2010
    Until we are 100% enlightened everything we say is only opinion. Even the sutras are opinion about what the Buddha either said, or a close buddy of Buudha wrote about what he thought Buddha said. So faith and belief in good part are based on hopes in something that someone else has said.

    Conviction on the other hand, like Irreverent Buddhist has said is based upon what we ourselves have witnessed and/or experienced so far.

    Is conviction Nirvana…of course not.

    Are the Sutras that some quote constantly as proof that they know something actually Nirvana…Nope!

    We are all in the same boat (Aka Mind) traveling on the same Ocean (AKA Awareness) looking for Ultimate Freedom. We will ALL enter Nirvana/Ultimate Freedom empty handed (AKA no hopes/faith/beliefs/or even convictions will pass through "the eye of that needle.")

    Warm Regards,
    S9
  • edited May 2010
    Are the Sutras that some quote constantly as proof that they know something actually Nirvana…Nope!

    Reading the suttas gives us a reliable indication of what the teachings and practices of "Buddhism" are actually about. As we are a Buddhist group, it is very fortunate that we have
    some members with a good knowledge of the suttas.
    We are all in the same boat (Aka Mind) traveling on the same Ocean (AKA Awareness) looking for Ultimate Freedom. We will ALL enter Nirvana/Ultimate Freedom empty handed (AKA no hopes/faith/beliefs/or even convictions will pass through "the eye of that needle.") :rolleyes:


    People posting here are clearly in different stages of understanding, so they are not 'all in the same boat' as each other, some are in speedboats, whilst someone like yourself is sitting in a large washing-up bowl,
    Sub9 dear!:D


    I'm not keen on boats and deep water myself ,nor am I looking for anything, so I'm just relaxing and having a little fun, sitting on a rock and dangling my toes in a cooling sandy pool ....;)




    Love and peace,

    Dazz





    .
  • DhammaDhatuDhammaDhatu Veteran
    edited May 2010
    Until we are 100% enlightened everything we say is only opinion. Even the sutras are opinion about what the Buddha either said, or a close buddy of Buudha wrote about what he thought Buddha said.
    This kind of reasoning is the low point of discussion.

    Whilst it is merely an opinion, it is stated like it is absolute truth.

    It is like claiming one knows better than what is written in the suttas.

    :(
    Conviction on the other hand, like Irreverent Buddhist has said is based upon what we ourselves have witnessed and/or experienced so far.
    This is little to do with conviction in the Buddha-Dhamma.

    As Dhamma-Dhatu quoted, the Buddha advised the condition for the arising of faith is suffering.

    We can have conviction the sky is pink or pigs can fly or there is an Ultimate Self.

    This kind of conviction is completely divorced from Buddha-Dhamma.
    Are the Sutras that some quote constantly as proof that they know something actually Nirvana…Nope!
    Another statement of someone claiming they know what Nirvana is that is contrary to what is described in the suttas.

    Certainly Nibbana is not faith, just as Nibbana is not mind or awareness.

    But for Nibbana to be realised, faith is required until it is finally.

    Even then, faith still functions. Faith is the solidification of all of the insight that has resulted in the mind releasing attachment, defilement & craving.
    We are all in the same boat
    No. We are certainly not.

    :o
    (Aka Mind) traveling on the same Ocean (AKA Awareness) looking for Ultimate Freedom. We will ALL enter Nirvana/Ultimate Freedom empty handed (AKA no hopes/faith/beliefs/or even convictions will pass through "the eye of that needle.")
    Hope is not faith. Nibbana is the absence of hope. The path to Nibbana from the very beginning is the absence of hope.

    Right belief is right view. The Buddha advised the condition for right liberation is right knowledge or right insight.

    Those infatuated with and holding 'Mind', 'Awareness', etc, as 'Ultimate Freedom' are not in the same boat.

    The Buddha taught liberation via wisdom, via knowing, via dispassion.

    Nibbana is not AKA Mind. Nibbana is not AKA Awareness. Nibbana is the end of lust, hatred & delusion.

    :)
  • DhammaDhatuDhammaDhatu Veteran
    edited May 2010
    Until we are 100% enlightened everything we say is only opinion.
    Dear S9

    Without the foundation of right understanding, without a path, how can 100% enlightenment occur?

    Until, until?

    Enlightened words speak from the suttas, as fresh & clear as when they were first spoken.

    Yet you are still waiting "until"....????????

    For Buddha, enlightenment was not-self. For Buddha, 'Ultimate Self' and 'Ultimate Awareness' cannot result in enlightenment.

    Enlightenment comes from not grasping at mind, seeing that mind is the same as anything other phenomena, namely, impermanent, unsatisfactory & not-self.
    Even the sutras are opinion about what the Buddha either said...
    Buddhists hold:

    Yassa saddhā tathāgate Acalā supatiṭṭhitā,Sīlañca yassa kalyāṇaṃ Ariya-kantaṃ pasaṃsitaṃ
    </PRE>

    One whose conviction in the Tathagata
    Is unshakable, well-established,
    Whose virtue is admirable,
    Praised, cherished by the Noble Ones,



    Saṅghe pasādo yassatthi Ujubhūtañca dassanaṃAdaḷiddoti taṃ āhu Amoghan-tassa jīvitaṃ
    </PRE>

    Who has trust in the Sangha, straightforwardness, vision:
    "He is not poor," they say. His life has not been in vain.



    Tasmā saddhañca sīlañca Pasādaṃ dhamma-dassanaṃAnuyuñjetha medhāvī Saraṃ buddhāna-sāsananti
    </PRE>

    So conviction & virtue, trust & dhamma-vision
    Should be cultivated by the wise,
    Remembering the Buddhas' teachings.
    </PRE>

    This is not the same as Hinduism dear friend.
    </PRE>

    :smilec:
    </PRE>


    </PRE>
  • edited May 2010
    Well spoken, DD. :)










    .
  • Dhamma Dhatu,

    I've just realised the main problem is you don't understand English all that well. You don't know what "conviction", "belief" and "faith" mean, for example, and the distinctions between them - in English (not your idea of it). This is not a personal attack, it's simple truth.

    Everything you have said in this thread appears to be due to a misunderstanding as to the meaning of "conviction". You even contradict yourself about the subject.
    Conviction on the other hand, like Irreverent Buddhist has said is based upon what we ourselves have witnessed and/or experienced so far.

    This is little to do with conviction in the Buddha-Dhamma.
    Now the type of faith above must come from experiencing.

    Make you mind up.

    Just to make life easy .. what you call "blind faith" in English means blind belief or just "belief". What you call bright faith means "confidence" or "trust" or "faith" (in the Buddhist context but NOT in other religions).

    One, the first, is based on nothing, except ignorance and imagination or fear. The other, the second, is based on some experience(s) that give(s) reason for confidence, trust or faith.

    In the Dhamma,

    Matthew
  • edited May 2010
    DD,

    DD: It is like claiming one knows better than what is written in the suttas.

    S9: Reading the sutras, and parroting them on a thread, does not prove that you fully understand where the sutras are pointing.

    Until you use the sutras more like a map, than a doctrine to be memorized and preached, I believe that you have missed the whole point of the sutras.

    We must follow Buddha’s excellent example, and seek a personal experience of what can only be indicated through his words.

    Warm Regards,
    S9
  • edited May 2010
    DD,

    DD: It is like claiming one knows better than what is written in the suttas.

    S9: Reading the sutras, and parroting them on a thread, does not prove that you fully understand where the sutras are pointing.

    Until you use the sutras more like a map, than a doctrine to be memorized and preached, I believe that you have missed the whole point of the sutras.

    We must follow Buddha’s excellent example, and seek a personal experience of what can only be indicated through his words.

    Warm Regards,
    S9 "



    I am truly amazed that you feel able to make such criticisms of Dhamma Dhatu's knowledge and understanding of the suttas, Sub9.

    Can you demonstrate that you have full knowledge of the suttas yourself to make these remarks ? Indeed do you have a good understanding of even one sutta from the Pali Canon which you can demonstrate?

    Yet more judgemental comments about DD do you no favors at all I'm afraid. Acquire some of his experience first ....and then try having an intelligent debate for the first time, is my advice. :)

    Kind regards,

    Dazzle







    .
  • DhammaDhatuDhammaDhatu Veteran
    edited May 2010
    I've just realised the main problem is you don't understand English all that well.
    I thought you were going to say you realised enlightenment!

    :)
    You don't know what "conviction", "belief" and "faith" mean, for example, and the distinctions between them - in English (not your idea of it). This is not a personal attack, it's simple truth.
    Buddhism is based in the Pali language. It is not based in the oft vaguaries of English.
    Everything you have said in this thread appears to be due to a misunderstanding as to the meaning of "conviction".
    "Conviction" is a word used by one Pali translator.

    When the Buddha discussed dhamma, he used terms such as wrong view (miccha ditti) & right view (samma ditti). He used the term saddha (faith) & its various types such as blind, reasoned, unshakeable, etc.

    Every dhamma can fall within the distinctions of right (samma) & wrong (miccha). (Right & wrong that accord with Nibbana.)

    If I am asked the question: "Do you believe there is rebirth?", I reply "no" because my "belief" is all conditioned things are impermanent.

    That the term "belief" is used here is due to the questioner, who speaks in English. The questionnaire is not speaking from Pali. The questioner is asking a question in a generalised manner in a language not based in spirituality and my answer about my "beliefs" is based in my "views".

    Matthew. How would you respond if the questioner asked: "What is your view about rebirth?"

    For example, my answer to this question about my "view" could be based in my mind's realisation. In Buddhism, "view" can be enlightened view.

    Would you think the term "view" here has a different meaning to that of "belief"?

    :)
  • DhammaDhatuDhammaDhatu Veteran
    edited May 2010
    Reading the sutras, and parroting them on a thread, does not prove that you fully understand where the sutras are pointing.
    Thinking suttas "point" simply proves they are not discerned. The Buddha taught his teachings are straightforward & unconvoluted. They do not "point".
    46. "Monks, in this Teaching that is so well proclaimed by me and is plain, open, explicit and free of patchwork

    Ariyapariyesana Sutta

    oj44yc.jpg
    Until you use the sutras more like a map, than a doctrine to be memorized and preached, I believe that you have missed the whole point of the sutras.
    The suttas do not point let alone speak of notions such as "Ultimate Self", "Ultimate Mind", etc.

    To the Buddha, all forms of mind were like chicken shit. He was disenchanted with every form of mind. This disenchantment formed the basis of his mind's liberation.
    "Any consciousness whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near: every consciousness is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as: 'This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.'

    "Seeing thus, the instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with consciousness. Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is fully released.

    Ariyapariyesana Sutta
    So your point is unrelated to the suttas.

    Your point & our disagreement is based in two matters, namely, your infatuation & enchantment with mind & the suttas disenchantment with mind.

    This is not a matter of theory but a matter of mental state & experience.

    What you regard as enlightenment from your experience is not what is described clearly & plainly in the suttas.

    Each of us can at least be humble enough to accept sometimes our experience does not accord with what is described in the suttas.

    Who do we think we are? Fully enlightened Buddhas?

    oj44yc.jpg
    We must follow Buddha’s excellent example, and seek a personal experience of what can only be indicated through his words.
    Hindu notions such as Ultimate Self, Ultimate Presence & Ultimate Mind are not the Buddha’s excellent example. The Buddha spoke of impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, not-self & dispassion.

    As I suggested, the suttas do not "indicate". To hold such views is called "slandering the Tathagatha".

    :)
    Monks, these two slander the Tathagata. Which two? He who explains a discourse whose meaning needs to be inferred as one whose meaning has already been fully drawn out. And he who explains a discourse whose meaning has already been fully drawn out as one whose meaning needs to be inferred. These are two who slander the Tathagata.

    Neyyatha Sutta
    Of all the paths the Eightfold Path is the best; of all the truths the Four Noble Truths are the best; of all things passionlessness is the best:

    Dhammapada
Sign In or Register to comment.