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.
What are the Benefits of Studying Buddhism at an Intellectual Level?
Lotus21
Indiana Explorer
Currently I am studying Buddhism, not just reading as if I am going to take a final exam soon. 
Although I enjoy doing it I would like to hear from this community, especially those of us who have done so in the past. What were the actual benefits from such experiences?
Although I enjoy doing it I would like to hear from this community, especially those of us who have done so in the past. What were the actual benefits from such experiences?
0
Comments
So now you're attracted towards the intellectual aspect of buddhism, but maybe that will take you further into practice and the path itself. If not, maybe the next life.
Jeepers, I even have a book on Wittgenstein and Buddha (In truth, I couldn't finish that one!).
In terms of less-dukka-more-sukka I really don't think there is much benefit (It took me years to get to this acknowledgement)
As an philosophical/intellectual exercise it's interesting.
Dharma is really pretty simple and I would wager most ten year olds could understand it faster than most professors!
Ultimately, whether taking it from a teacher, getting their yourself or reading your way, you come to the point where you know that:
a) It is indupitable.
b) Much more about the practice than the pondering:)
That's my thoughts!:)
Its all good!
/Victor
With metta,
Sabre
The Dharma is very vast and has many chapters, starting from the simple to advanced levels of philosophical thought (Abhidarma).
Think its just like going to school, we have to start from the beginning and advance up to a level which somehow comes quite simply. Some will progress up to Phd level and others drop out as they encounter difficulties in absorbing the lessons.
Of course along the way other reasons crop up.
Coming back, we should progress naturally. If you feel comfortable and hunger for more, then proceed. If you feel stumped and have trouble grasping the concepts, then slow down.
Forging ahead will only plant wrong ideas in your head and maybe even put you off Buddhism. Reading and comprehending the written word are not the same as truly understanding the concepts. The essence of the teachings must be grasped.
The buddha often explained according to the students mental faculties, sad these things rarely occur today. Most teachers are only too eager to show off and dive into the deep end. Haizz
Have fun.
“If one just depends on the sayings of the Buddha and does not infer for himself, his realization will be no more than a matter of baseless faith. If one just holds on to direct perception, taking what he perceives for himself to be authoritative without comparing it to the sayings of the Buddha, then how can he know whether it is true or false”
I thought I should mention this. There are two right views. One is the right view of puthujjanas (worldly people) that is with cankers, etc., and the other is ariyan right view.
"And what, monks is the right view that is ariyan, cankerless, supermundane, a component of the Way? Whatever, monks, is wisdom, the cardinal faculty of wisdom, the power of wisdom, the component of enlightenment that is the investigation into things, the right view that is a component of the Way in one who, by developing the ariyan Way, is of ariyan thought, cankerless thought, conversant with the ariyan Way—this, monks, is a right view that is ariyan cankerless, supermundane, a component of the Way” (M.iii.72).
By the way, the Buddha was very much of a spiritual elitist. The Pali canon is prevalent with distinctions made between puthujjanas and ariyans.
Many people, specially in the West tend to consider Buddhism as merely a philosophy, people think they can guide themselves by the sole words of Buddha. But I believe that when you take things rationally and intellectually only, you wont be able to perceive the true love and compassion, moreover you might fall into some kind of complete nihilism.
Study nagarjuna and when you're done with that one will realize that all view points are invalid.
But again an intellectual might have a better bridge using meditation as a mode of contemplation and close up analysis.
Either way any interesting in the dharma is good.
I find it difficult to keep mindful of the practice as I don't have any friends, family or colleagues who follow the path.......
Thank you.
It can make me look clever (maybe) on interweb Buddhist forums, should I have a mind to start throwing in stuff like the Chittamatrins (Mind Only) view of what's real and what's not in a conventional and ultimate sense, but I'm guessing that those who see deeper would know what I'm up to.
But I do love Buddhist philosophy, I think it's worth the effort.
Thoughts anyone?
A lot of people are very smart and know a lot and feel the need to share this, but don't really know what they are talking about. Other people respond to it intellectually also, resulting in debates of which other people think one of the two must be right, while they are both often wrong. This is not anything personal toward anyone, this is just as I see it; too much emphasis on books and intellect while the depth of possible meditation experienced often gets highly undervaluated.
To me it's also generally a sign of a good teacher if they can explain things with simple words, instead of making the topic wider and more confusing. In fact all there is to know are the 4 noble truths. Knowing those four should be enough to get one enlightened.
Now I don't say it's wrong to think about dhamma at all, but it has limited uses.
This is what the Buddha had to say about it: People quote the Kalama sutta often with the idea of "everybody should think for themselves". However, if you really read it, you see thinking is not to be trusted! Of course also that is not to be trusted just because the Buddha said it.
Also it is worth noting that the Canki Sutta says: “even although something be thoroughly believed in, it may be empty, void, false; on the other hand, something not thoroughly believed in may be fact, truth, not otherwise” (M. ii. 170).
I post here a link so everybody can read: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.095x.than.html
It also says: