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.
Doubt is not "done away with" by faith. Doubt is "done away with" by developing the four frames of reference. The duality of doubt and faith is illusory. Faith in ones own faculties for discerning and developing the frames of reference is the skillful faith.
When I signed up for psychotherapy I was told not to expect to see changes to my situation until as much as 6 months after the therapy ended. I could not doubt this because
You seem to be really attached to this "new" idea you have discovered. You mean to tell me trial and error works? OMG! All I am saying is Doubt is not a factor of the path leading to awakening as prescribed by the Buddha. It is stated as a hinderance.
Your "doubt everything until proven self-evident" theory is superfluous. The Buddha does not say to "doubt everything." He says to test theories with personal examination and based on criteria, INCLUDING the declaration of the wise, before accepting them as truth. There is a difference.
When I signed up for psychotherapy I was told not to expect to see changes to my situation until as much as 6 months after the therapy ended. I could not doubt this because
Continued- I had nothing to go on. I could not believe it either for the same reason. All I knew was that I was suffering and I wanted it to end. So I just went thru the motions. For whatever reason it turned out the doctor was right and the suffering eased up. For me doubt/faith are different sides of the same coin.
Doubt may be a hindrance, but the Buddha may be referring to a doubt that lingers. Indeed the four frames of reference is the key, and what is required of the four frames of reference? Personal experience. In any case, it's ok to doubt, and it's ok to have faith that's not damaging. It's just wrong to believe without experience. Doubt may be a hindrance, but let's not automatically replace it with faith just because we want to do away with it.
regards
Very interesting post. I like it, particularly your last line.
Since being a member of this forum I find that my doubts about Buddhism have actually increased. I began self-identifying myself as a Buddhist, or as some combination of Buddhist/Christian, back in 1987 after several trips to Thailand. I struggled for a while with the Thai's mix of Buddhism and animism. But I got beyond that.
Then I was doing pretty well until I began about 1.5 years ago interacting with other Buddhists on web forums. To be honest, it has led to times (including last night) when I have strongly considered "giving up" Buddhism.
Some of the attitudes you'll find on this forum include (paraphrased and simplified, of course):
1. I believe the words in the Dhamma are the exact words of Buddha and are gospel (I used that last word intentionally).
2. I have a healthy doubt about Buddhist principles until I have seen for myself.
3. Buddhism is a religion.
4. Buddhism is a philosophy.
5. Buddhism is a scientific religion.
5. I have FAITH that Buddhism is the most SCIENTIFIC religion. (That's a favorite attitude here).
6. You have freedom to accept or reject various aspects of Buddhism...there is no punishment if there are aspects of it you cannot accept...you may accept more as you grow.
7. It's all or nothing...believe it or not...take it or leave it.
But the kicker for me is that in 25 years I have had a total of one Christian criticize me for considering myself Buddhist...and that was a Bible thumper that stopped me to preach. All of my other Christian friends and acquaintances accept that I have these beliefs, have never criticized me, have politely asked me questions (with a few even asking me to take them to a Buddhist temple), or have asked me if there are common principles between the two religions...and several of those people who take the enlightened attitude have been Born Again Christians. THE ONLY PLACE I HAVE BEEN CRITICIZED FOR MY VIEW OF BUDDHISM IS ON THIS AND ONE OTHER BUDDHIST FORUM.
And, you know what it all comes down to -- DOUBT and FAITH.
Where does experience fit in with emptiness and form? How can we lose doubt in experience if our experience is subject to our own perception of reality. For example, I look at this table and say it has white specks, but upon closer inspection, it is yellow specks. And without light, there is no color at all to the table. Unless I look at the table, the table has no color in my reality. It could've been blazing orange for all I know. Yet as soon as I look, I create an experience.
Kinda like schrodinger's cat, but not really. I may taste something and say "it's sweet". then you taste something and say "It's not sweet". We define our experiences differently, and no two experiences are the same. How do we bridge this gap in difference in experiences and realities? What(if there is) is the ultimate reality? Is it important? Is the reality: 'everything is as it is'? So if I gave you a cup of tea and said "here is a cup of tea". You could say that "the tea is tea" and then I tell you that it is actually just colored water, then you say "the colored water is water". But then I tell you that it is indeed tea. You get fed up and just take a drink. You find that it has no taste and proclaim "Aha! It is just water." and I say no... it is only weak tea. what is the ultimate reality here? Only the person who prepared this cup of fluid would know. Is there no way we can know as an observer? Is it even important to know?
I can relate and understand where you are coming from. You have to realize though that there are a lot of people here with a very strong faith in Buddhism, and there are plenty of people who will not hesitate to express their opinion about any given issue. I understand that some people take things rather seriously, we just have to always keep that in mind.
I believe that no matter where you go, no matter what you do, we will find individuals that will disagree with us. We can see this is true in places where we have worked. There is always one individual that does not like to associate with us. This is because you can't have everyone think the same way. But that doesn't mean that we should quit our job. We just have to accept them, have metta for them and in turn they'll have metta for us one day. Let's enjoy the benefits of anything that our present time offers, and let's just try our best to be open minded and accept them. They will come around to see that light soon enough.
I can relate and understand where you are coming from. You have to realize though that there are a lot of people here with a very strong faith in Buddhism, and there are plenty of people who will not hesitate to express their opinion about any given issue. I understand that some people take things rather seriously, we just have to always keep that in mind.
I believe that no matter where you go, no matter what you do, we will find individuals that will disagree with us. We can see this is true in places where we have worked. There is always one individual that does not like to associate with us. This is because you can't have everyone think the same way. But that doesn't mean that we should quit our job. We just have to accept them, have metta for them and in turn they'll have metta for us one day. Let's enjoy the benefits of anything that our present time offers, and let's just try our best to be open minded and accept them. They will come around to see that light soon enough.
with metta
But here's the difference between me and some. Some here who do not believe in God will say to me, "You're dead wrong." I will say to them, "Well, I believe there is a God, but you may be right." The difference is that I can usually respect a viewpoint that is opposite or somewhat different than mine.
I once said to someone, "I know what I KNOW. I know what I THINK I KNOW. I know what I DON'T KNOW. That's an open mind.
Within the last hour I received a private message from another member of the forum, the gist of which is that the person said they are giving up exploring Buddhism due to the fundamentalism they encountered here. Again, the theme of that feeling is the degree of doubt and how others react to it.
Do we want Buddhist fundamentalism to scare people away from exploring Buddhism?
(Please note, this is not a criticism of what you posted...it just got me thinking...more. Oh my, I'm pondering. I guess I'll go mad!).
One of the things I don't understand is how someone gets offended when they come to a public place to express an opinion. What are we seeking, validation? understanding? Anytime I open my mouth or type something, I typically have an understanding that I may be out on a limb all by my lonesome with the tree trying to snap its own limb off. Luckily, trees don't move, and my opinions are still mine. However, I'm subject to change, and so is everybody else. I left Christianity, but I wouldn't hesitate to go back and be a Christian of my own sorts if I happened to go back. I may not follow the mainstream, but it's my belief system and no one else's. I don't need validation for this life or the next. I just need my own beliefs. If someone is happy worshiping a dust-bunny they found in the closet, that's all right. Reflecting on my own post up there a ways^^^ I realize that the only thing we have is our own reality. It can be as isolated or entangled as we want it to be. In fact, life is a lot like this too. We have so many choices, and often times, I wonder why people make the choices they do. Doubt or no doubt. It isn't important. I go by what resonates within me, what makes sense, what has potential to make sense, what has worth in exploring. Only I can determine these things too.
If you want to be a Buddhist who believes in a dust-bunny God, I'd like to hear your story I may end up worshiping dust-bunnies too.
So many fundamentalists in all religions. Why does it matter what others believe other than to expand what you are willing to believe? Uncertainty in everything, countless truths. No two people walk the same path, no matter the religion. We're all just trying to be happy, whether it be by living in the present, respecting the past, respecting nature, or preparing for the after-life.
I don't know who you refer to, perhaps me, perhaps one of the other commentors, probably all of us;)
I haven't been offended at all, I don't actually think any of us have been. At worst we have got a bit of ego on our faces; that's very common here - though I haven't been in the situation for over a year here.
I agree, when there are personal jibes its lame, but there haven't really been any of those in this thread either.
I think we have all been frustrated by the communication and I have been irked (unskillfully, I admit) by some of the failings of others to try to understand.
But it isn't bad, after all, its a discussion forum. Lighten up. I will try extra hard to from now on too.
One thing your right on is it really doesn't matter what any of us believe. Its easy to forget that, especially about subjects we are interested in.
IN reply to your reply, Talisman beat me to it - doubt is considered a hindrance to enlightenment, and that's what bugs me about your "doubt everything, be your own light" mantra. When something has been explicitly described as a hindrance, as something that is the opposite to a factor of enlightenment, then it can hardly be considered a tenet of practice, as you seem to be saying.
Doubt is the problem - not the solution.
The Kalamas came to Buddha with doubt - and left without it.
Doubt is considered a hindrance to enlightenment...
It is said in scrioptures, perhaps, but when I apply the kalama principles to it I can only conclude that the scriptures must be wrong. Doubt, when dealth with as the Buddha may have described, is not a hinderance.
It would only be a hinderance if not deaslth with:)
and that's what bugs me about your "doubt everything, be your own light" mantra.
It isnt my mantra. Its a very common saying, front many t-shirts and helpd by many to be the last words of the buddha.
When something has been explicitly described as a hindrance, as something that is the opposite to a factor of enlightenment, then it can hardly be considered a tenet of practice, as you seem to be saying.
There is nothing explcitly stated by the Buddha, that way leads to Dogma:) If that's for you fine, it isnt for me.
Doubt is the problem - not the solution.
The Kalamas came to Buddha with doubt - and left without it.
Would you be happy with the principle:
Start of doubting everything and do not doubt that which you can see is benefit, leads to happiness....
Firstly the Kalama tribe was confused and its doubt wasn't cleanly on "middle path". So, the Kalama sutra is specially answering to this context of dharma acquirer.
“Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing (for Buddha teachings, this process may lost its essence through repeated hearing); nor upon tradition (tradition is based on time and space of a particular setting); nor upon rumor (rumor does not represent experience); nor upon what is in a scripture (scripture merely is the finger showing you the moon); nor upon surmise (surmise work best in alaya consciousness);......lastly 'The monk is our teacher (your self pure pristine condition of non-dualism).'
Firstly the Kalama tribe was confused and its doubt wasn't cleanly on "middle path". So, the Kalama sutra is specially answering to this context of dharma acquirer.
I disagree. Have a think about the criteria of rejection, they are about all sources of understanding, not just Dharma.
There is no shared understanding between those who see the Kalama Principles as about universal doubt and those who see this some watered down version.
The Kalama Suttra is an epic text, unlike anything that came before, and unlike anything until the Meditations (Descares) and "On Certainty" (Wittgenstein).
I simply dont get the belliteling of this monumental little treaties.
I simply dont get the belliteling of this monumental little treaties.
I wonder if you can see how doubt is a cause of suffering?
How doubt demands/indicates a strong self-view?
If you sit with the notion of how doubt arises, what does it relate to in terms of clinging/rejecting words?
Who is doubting?
What happens when there is no doubt in a mind that doubts?
I don't think the others have been belittling, only saying that the dharma there was context specific to the kalama tribe who had been inundated with seers, monks, gurus and astrologers... not a universal backing of the notion of doubt. Which I also agree with.
Doubt may well be the beginning. This is the beginner forum. Faith may also be the extreme view of a beginner. For a more experienced practitioner, the middle way is the path. The view of no-view. Going through the motions. No need to doubt or believe. No big deal. Why pick one of 80,000 teachings and build a world view around it?
and that's what bugs me about your "doubt everything, be your own light" mantra.
It isnt my mantra. Its a very common saying, front many t-shirts and helpd by many to be the last words of the buddha.
According to the translation by Thanissaro Bhikkhu:
"On one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Kusinara in Upavattana, the Sal Tree Grove of the Mallans, on the occasion of his total Unbinding. Then the Blessed One addressed the monks, "I exhort you, monks: All fabrications are subject to decay. Bring about completion by being heedful." Those were the Tathagata's last words." -SN 6.15
The dying words of the Buddha express the primary (first) mark of existence, Impermanence, and entreat his disciples to be diligent in their practice.
According to the translation by Thanissaro Bhikkhu:
If you want to base your dharma on what someone may have said about something that may have happened millennia ago... and then someone translated from a language that nobody spoke when what may have been said may have been said, that's your path.
I am not going to accept anything until it has been self-illumnated.
I was just making a statement. You are basing your assumptions off of sources of even lesser valdiity than a monk and scholar who has dedicated his life to studying the teachings and words of the Buddha ... but whatever. I don't "base my dharma" off of anything. I dedicate many hours of every day to study, reflection, introspection, and practice. There's no need to be condescending just because I quoted a respectable source.
You are basing your assumptions offf sources of even lesser valdiity than a monk and scholar who has dedicated his life to studying the teachings and words of the Buddha ... but whatever.
To me, it doesn't matter who said what. There is simply no authority, no authentic text, nada.
There is only that which I cannot doubt "makes more happy," such as, being kind, mindful, honest, meditative, contemplative. I have tried to doubt these things, i cannot.
I don't "base my dharma" off of anything.
OK, sorry, I misread the motives of your post. It is a common practice to paste a bit of text like its some Trump card in a game of Bridge:)
There's no need to be condescending just because I quoted a respected source.
I wasn't being condescending at all, very matter of fact, sure. As said, I give no weight to any statement, belief, tradition, doctrine etc etc unless it is shown right: as descibed in the Kalama Suttra.
I forgot the purpose of this conversation entirely, if there ever was one. Peace be with you.
It's purpose started off with an attempt to outline the Kalama Principles in this beginners forum, for reasons I still cannot fathom the responce has been as if I said something outlandish like, "Maybe the Buddha was anti-rebirth".
Vinylyn, thats a shame your friend got turned off to buddhism. That makes me sad. I think that part of the 'game' of a forum is to disagree about stuff. I should say 'this' forum. It is unfortunate that there is negativity. Is that what you are saying? Sounds like when someone says you are not a buddhist that could really hurt.
I think that part of the 'game' of a forum is to disagree about stuff. I should say 'this' forum. It is unfortunate that there is negativity.
I agree Jeffrey - this is a discussion forum, not a temple. I think we do pretty well here. I watch a skeptic forum where the seething hate between the posters is close to remarkable.
Sure we all get ego time to time and there is forum tanha and forum dukka but I think we do pretty well. After all, I'm guessing none of us here are fully buddharised!
I tried to doubt that I am the most brilliant and handsome genius. But I just found that I couldn't doubt that. So it must be true.
Ha!:)
I see what your saying, but the mistake is that you can doubt that that belief leads to benifit and happiness. That's the crux. That's what people are missing which makes them miss the essence of the kalama principles, imo.
Some seem to get hung up on the word "doubt" and so cant see that in fact, if you apply the kalama principles you end up with ZERO-doubt about dharma. And not because of faith or accepting doctrine, but because if self-illumination.
Vinylyn, thats a shame your friend got turned off to buddhism. That makes me sad. I think that part of the 'game' of a forum is to disagree about stuff. I should say 'this' forum. It is unfortunate that there is negativity. Is that what you are saying? Sounds like when someone says you are not a buddhist that could really hurt.
I don't come here to play games. I take these conversations relatively seriously.
We can learn a lot from the emotions we have on these forums. On the spot practice with strong emotions.
I do think you are wise to take things seriously vinylyn. It has a certain meaning and integrity. I am just pointing out that its part of 'the game'. People get caught up in. You might be uncommonly perceptive and sensitive, but I think the tendancy is to just say something clever and you forget that you are talking to someone. All we see is text.
I think there is room to be sincere and serious while letting go and laughing at others immature behaviour.
Your stubbornness and attachment to this issue is quite extraordinary.
You reject a legitimate translation of buddha by a renowned scholar in favour of a t shirt quote, simply because the t shirt matches your preconceptions.
You persist in your view, despite being repeatedly shown that buddha explicitly stated that doubt was a hindrance, not a virtue.
You dismiss these legitimate counter examples as 'dogma' whilst clinging dogmatically to your own view.
Do you also not perceive the irony and paradox of the extreme doctrine you are advocating? Namely, that if you take your logic to its natural end point, you must doubt doubt ! And yet, you are so certain about doubt !
Namely, that if you take your logic to its natural end point, you must doubt doubt..
Exactly! Doubt, sure... but also doubt your doubts! The other side of this is faith based upon logic and reason, and experiential faith, not blind faith. Doubting is something one does in the beginning of the path, of course the whole thing about beginners mind is true, but still, as one's experience deepens and one sees how it's matched by the great masters of ones tradition, you start to have a liberating faith in the teaching and confidence in your own ability to fully realize the inner meaning of the Dharma! YAY!
This is when realization takes over ones doubting, and restless stirrings.
Your stubbornness and attachment to this issue is quite extraordinary.
I know! If we were talking about issues like "Buddha said believe in X" then "slap-the-cuffs-on", I would be guilty of a massive case of deluded dogma.
But let us be clear, the singular principle I am being stubborn about is:
"Buddha said do not believe in X until you cannot not not believe that X leads to benefit, happiness..."
You reject a legitimate translation of buddha by a renowned scholar
Absolutely. And moreover even if the translation were perfect I would reject the authority and authenticity of the Pali text from whence it came.
in favour of a t shirt quote, simply because the t shirt matches your preconceptions.
I probably have preconceptions, probably caused by being blown away by the method of Cartesian Doubt when I understood it, as a nipper.
Probably caused by the fact that its the big nobrainer of reason.
And definitely caused by the fact that the kalama principles extend on this in a way that was the main factor that converted me to dharma.
You persist in your view, despite being repeatedly shown that buddha explicitly stated that doubt was a hindrance, not a virtue.
Unresolved Doubt is a big fetter.
Asking "Why should I believe in Dharma" is not.
You dismiss these legitimate counter examples as 'dogma' whilst clinging dogmatically to your own view.
The view I cling dogmatically to is the view of anti-dogma.
Frankly, I think the buddhist establishment over the millenia has distorted and subdued the importance of the kalama principles.
True Dharma can stand up to anything anyone can throw at it, I am not so sure about precepts involving comfy seating, rebirth, vegetarianism and so on....
Do you also not perceive the irony and paradox of the extreme doctrine you are advocating? Namely, that if you take your logic to its natural end point, you must doubt doubt ! And yet, you are so certain about doubt.
Of course you should doubt your doubts, you should doubt everything and then see which doiubts you cannot doubnt.
There is no paradox. Ironies abound.
I don't know what else to say ...
There are two types of Buddists, those who believe the buddha was a skeptic and those who do not. I am what I am, you are what you are.
Of course. Nothing is excluded from doubts. The kalama principles are all encompasing, hence their awesome power to provide certainty and clarity.
The other side of this is faith based upon logic and reason, and experiential faith, not blind faith.
I don't like the term "faith", to me faith means something that is believed in isolation, without being the product of a process of reason and experience. To me there is no faith in dharma.
But again, I see what you are saying and why you use the term. I prefer the term "clarity" or perhaps the cumbersome "indupitability"
Doubting is something one does in the beginning of the path
Yes, exactly. One starts doubting all things. A world of no certainity in anything. Then, by practice and understanding doubts get resolved.
I cannot doubt that all things are impermanent....
I cannot doubt that all things are without essence....
....
I cannot doubt that tanha causes dukka...
and confidence in your own ability to fully realize the inner meaning of the Dharma! YAY!
This is when realization takes over ones doubting, and restless stirrings.
Yes, exactly.
The kalama principles are being gems, not hinderances, a crucial part of the path, not fetters.
I don't like the term "faith", to me faith means something that is believed in isolation, without being the product of a process of reason and experience. To me there is no faith in dharma.
But again, I see what you are saying and why you use the term. I prefer the term "clarity" or perhaps the cumbersome "indupitability"
Yes, maybe the translation of the pali word "saddha" into "faith" is bad for a predominantly Judeo-Christian West where that word has been too deeply abused. But, I don't have the same idea of it. For me, to "clarify" the term with the context of, "experiential" is good enough.
I get everything else you've stated by the way, and agree! Thanks for clarifying.
Yes, maybe the translation of the pali word "saddha" into "faith" is bad for a predominantly Judeo-Christian West where that word has been too deeply abused.
I think this might the the reason, yes. We have an entrenched mind-war going on here between doubt and faith.
No, I was born and raised in the USA, but raised a Hindu since birth in the Shaiva Sampradaya of Tantricism; i.e. shaktipat, chakras, kundalini and all that jazz my whole life growing up in a predominantly Mexican area. So mostly Christians all around me while my Mom did yoga and meditation, studying sanskrit scriptures and repeating sanskrit mantras, etc. My single mother is from South Africa where there are lots of Indians and became interested in Hinduism there. My mother has her PHD in women's arts and spirituality, all Indian spirituality. I became Vajrayana Buddhist (in this life) just about 7 years ago. But studied it pryer to my conversion.
p.s. No worries, I am often accused of being Indian. I grew up with a genuinely Indian spiritual tradition.
No, I was born and raised in the USA, but raised a Hindu since birth in the Shaiva Sampradaya of Tantricism; i.e. shaktipat, chakras, kundalini and all that jazz my whole life growing up in a predominantly Mexican area. So mostly Christians all around me while my Mom did yoga and meditation, studying sanskrit scriptures and repeating sanskrit mantras, etc. My single mother is from South Africa where there are lots of Indians and became interested in Hinduism there. My mother has her PHD in women's arts and spirituality, all Indian spirituality. I became Vajrayana Buddhist (in this life) just about 7 years ago. But studied it pryer to my conversion.
p.s. No worries, I am often accused of being Indian. I grew up with a genuinely Indian spiritual tradition.
You certainly seem to have the knowledge of somone very well immersed in Indian culture/philosophy:)
It is what it is. I lived in an Shaivite Ashram for 5 years in my early to mid twenties, which I wouldn't trade for the world, the level of dedication to yoga and meditation I experienced there is epic! But, I definitely studied all the worlds traditions with fervor. I just find Buddhism, in all it's flavors is far more nuanced than all of them. Though, I cannot speak for secret lineages that may still be alive in certain areas of the world that I'm not privy to.
Buddha gave teachings on faith, called sradda. I think it is called the five wholesome mental factors. Sradda means taking something which you aprehend, such as impermanence. Or even just some insight in a real world situation. Say you realize why you are attached or angry or whatever.
Sradda is taking that realization as an embodiment. Its like you learn a move in soccer. And then you internalize it so it isn't a move anymore. It is just part of you.
Another example of sradda is how you function socially. You come to one group of friends and you act one way. Then in another group (or your family) you act another. You sensitively respond to the climate you are in. Same on this forum. Its like being in tune and harmony. Prajna is the counterpoint which is like messages you get from that dynamic. A piece of intelligence or wisdom from that sphere. A book might be one sphere and you perceive the message of the book, prajna. Then you are transformed by the book, sradda.
My Doubt in Dharma is now long gone, Eroded, resolved, extinguished. Faithless peace, Doubtless clarity, Magnificent certainty in the Three And the Four, The Eight, But nothing more. For what ever it is not worth, I still doubt rebirth, And precepts against high seats, And midnight feasts, And the dogmas of the Man.
Comments
Since being a member of this forum I find that my doubts about Buddhism have actually increased. I began self-identifying myself as a Buddhist, or as some combination of Buddhist/Christian, back in 1987 after several trips to Thailand. I struggled for a while with the Thai's mix of Buddhism and animism. But I got beyond that.
Then I was doing pretty well until I began about 1.5 years ago interacting with other Buddhists on web forums. To be honest, it has led to times (including last night) when I have strongly considered "giving up" Buddhism.
Some of the attitudes you'll find on this forum include (paraphrased and simplified, of course):
1. I believe the words in the Dhamma are the exact words of Buddha and are gospel (I used that last word intentionally).
2. I have a healthy doubt about Buddhist principles until I have seen for myself.
3. Buddhism is a religion.
4. Buddhism is a philosophy.
5. Buddhism is a scientific religion.
5. I have FAITH that Buddhism is the most SCIENTIFIC religion. (That's a favorite attitude here).
6. You have freedom to accept or reject various aspects of Buddhism...there is no punishment if there are aspects of it you cannot accept...you may accept more as you grow.
7. It's all or nothing...believe it or not...take it or leave it.
But the kicker for me is that in 25 years I have had a total of one Christian criticize me for considering myself Buddhist...and that was a Bible thumper that stopped me to preach. All of my other Christian friends and acquaintances accept that I have these beliefs, have never criticized me, have politely asked me questions (with a few even asking me to take them to a Buddhist temple), or have asked me if there are common principles between the two religions...and several of those people who take the enlightened attitude have been Born Again Christians. THE ONLY PLACE I HAVE BEEN CRITICIZED FOR MY VIEW OF BUDDHISM IS ON THIS AND ONE OTHER BUDDHIST FORUM.
And, you know what it all comes down to -- DOUBT and FAITH.
Kinda like schrodinger's cat, but not really. I may taste something and say "it's sweet". then you taste something and say "It's not sweet". We define our experiences differently, and no two experiences are the same. How do we bridge this gap in difference in experiences and realities? What(if there is) is the ultimate reality? Is it important? Is the reality: 'everything is as it is'? So if I gave you a cup of tea and said "here is a cup of tea". You could say that "the tea is tea" and then I tell you that it is actually just colored water, then you say "the colored water is water". But then I tell you that it is indeed tea. You get fed up and just take a drink. You find that it has no taste and proclaim "Aha! It is just water." and I say no... it is only weak tea. what is the ultimate reality here? Only the person who prepared this cup of fluid would know. Is there no way we can know as an observer? Is it even important to know?
This may be pointless pondering... I'm aware.
I can relate and understand where you are coming from. You have to realize though that there are a lot of people here with a very strong faith in Buddhism, and there are plenty of people who will not hesitate to express their opinion about any given issue. I understand that some people take things rather seriously, we just have to always keep that in mind.
I believe that no matter where you go, no matter what you do, we will find individuals that will disagree with us. We can see this is true in places where we have worked. There is always one individual that does not like to associate with us. This is because you can't have everyone think the same way. But that doesn't mean that we should quit our job. We just have to accept them, have metta for them and in turn they'll have metta for us one day. Let's enjoy the benefits of anything that our present time offers, and let's just try our best to be open minded and accept them. They will come around to see that light soon enough.
with metta
I once said to someone, "I know what I KNOW. I know what I THINK I KNOW. I know what I DON'T KNOW. That's an open mind.
Within the last hour I received a private message from another member of the forum, the gist of which is that the person said they are giving up exploring Buddhism due to the fundamentalism they encountered here. Again, the theme of that feeling is the degree of doubt and how others react to it.
Do we want Buddhist fundamentalism to scare people away from exploring Buddhism?
(Please note, this is not a criticism of what you posted...it just got me thinking...more. Oh my, I'm pondering. I guess I'll go mad!).
:eek2:
One of the things I don't understand is how someone gets offended when they come to a public place to express an opinion. What are we seeking, validation? understanding? Anytime I open my mouth or type something, I typically have an understanding that I may be out on a limb all by my lonesome with the tree trying to snap its own limb off. Luckily, trees don't move, and my opinions are still mine. However, I'm subject to change, and so is everybody else. I left Christianity, but I wouldn't hesitate to go back and be a Christian of my own sorts if I happened to go back. I may not follow the mainstream, but it's my belief system and no one else's. I don't need validation for this life or the next. I just need my own beliefs. If someone is happy worshiping a dust-bunny they found in the closet, that's all right. Reflecting on my own post up there a ways^^^ I realize that the only thing we have is our own reality. It can be as isolated or entangled as we want it to be. In fact, life is a lot like this too. We have so many choices, and often times, I wonder why people make the choices they do. Doubt or no doubt. It isn't important. I go by what resonates within me, what makes sense, what has potential to make sense, what has worth in exploring. Only I can determine these things too.
If you want to be a Buddhist who believes in a dust-bunny God, I'd like to hear your story
So many fundamentalists in all religions. Why does it matter what others believe other than to expand what you are willing to believe? Uncertainty in everything, countless truths. No two people walk the same path, no matter the religion. We're all just trying to be happy, whether it be by living in the present, respecting the past, respecting nature, or preparing for the after-life.
I don't know who you refer to, perhaps me, perhaps one of the other commentors, probably all of us;)
I haven't been offended at all, I don't actually think any of us have been. At worst we have got a bit of ego on our faces; that's very common here - though I haven't been in the situation for over a year here.
I agree, when there are personal jibes its lame, but there haven't really been any of those in this thread either.
I think we have all been frustrated by the communication and I have been irked (unskillfully, I admit) by some of the failings of others to try to understand.
But it isn't bad, after all, its a discussion forum. Lighten up. I will try extra hard to from now on too.
One thing your right on is it really doesn't matter what any of us believe. Its easy to forget that, especially about subjects we are interested in.
namaste
Glad you enjoyed my last post.
IN reply to your reply, Talisman beat me to it - doubt is considered a hindrance to enlightenment, and that's what bugs me about your "doubt everything, be your own light" mantra. When something has been explicitly described as a hindrance, as something that is the opposite to a factor of enlightenment, then it can hardly be considered a tenet of practice, as you seem to be saying.
Doubt is the problem - not the solution.
The Kalamas came to Buddha with doubt - and left without it.
It would only be a hinderance if not deaslth with:) It isnt my mantra. Its a very common saying, front many t-shirts and helpd by many to be the last words of the buddha.
There is nothing explcitly stated by the Buddha, that way leads to Dogma:) If that's for you fine, it isnt for me.
Would you be happy with the principle:
Start of doubting everything and do not doubt that which you can see is benefit, leads to happiness....
?
namaste
“Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing (for Buddha teachings, this process may lost its essence through repeated hearing); nor upon tradition (tradition is based on time and space of a particular setting); nor upon rumor (rumor does not represent experience); nor upon what is in a scripture (scripture merely is the finger showing you the moon); nor upon surmise (surmise work best in alaya consciousness);......lastly 'The monk is our teacher (your self pure pristine condition of non-dualism).'
There is no shared understanding between those who see the Kalama Principles as about universal doubt and those who see this some watered down version.
The Kalama Suttra is an epic text, unlike anything that came before, and unlike anything until the Meditations (Descares) and "On Certainty" (Wittgenstein).
I simply dont get the belliteling of this monumental little treaties.
How doubt demands/indicates a strong self-view?
If you sit with the notion of how doubt arises, what does it relate to in terms of clinging/rejecting words?
Who is doubting?
What happens when there is no doubt in a mind that doubts?
I don't think the others have been belittling, only saying that the dharma there was context specific to the kalama tribe who had been inundated with seers, monks, gurus and astrologers... not a universal backing of the notion of doubt. Which I also agree with.
No, explain it. I do not understand how doubt has any connection. We do not share the same understanding of the kalama Principles.
In my understanding, Doubt does not arise, it is the starting point.
Doubt is extinguised, not cultivated.
Doubt everything<<< this is the beggining
Be your own light<<< this is the path.
"On one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Kusinara in Upavattana, the Sal Tree Grove of the Mallans, on the occasion of his total Unbinding. Then the Blessed One addressed the monks, "I exhort you, monks: All fabrications are subject to decay. Bring about completion by being heedful." Those were the Tathagata's last words." -SN 6.15
The dying words of the Buddha express the primary (first) mark of existence, Impermanence, and entreat his disciples to be diligent in their practice.
I am not going to accept anything until it has been self-illumnated.
There is only that which I cannot doubt "makes more happy," such as, being kind, mindful, honest, meditative, contemplative. I have tried to doubt these things, i cannot. OK, sorry, I misread the motives of your post. It is a common practice to paste a bit of text like its some Trump card in a game of Bridge:)
I wasn't being condescending at all, very matter of fact, sure. As said, I give no weight to any statement, belief, tradition, doctrine etc etc unless it is shown right: as descibed in the Kalama Suttra.
Anyways, I agree we are done here!:) Peace-out.
Now that's a topic for discussion.
Sure we all get ego time to time and there is forum tanha and forum dukka but I think we do pretty well. After all, I'm guessing none of us here are fully buddharised!
namaste
I see what your saying, but the mistake is that you can doubt that that belief leads to benifit and happiness. That's the crux. That's what people are missing which makes them miss the essence of the kalama principles, imo.
Some seem to get hung up on the word "doubt" and so cant see that in fact, if you apply the kalama principles you end up with ZERO-doubt about dharma. And not because of faith or accepting doctrine, but because if self-illumination.
xx
I do think you are wise to take things seriously vinylyn. It has a certain meaning and integrity. I am just pointing out that its part of 'the game'. People get caught up in. You might be uncommonly perceptive and sensitive, but I think the tendancy is to just say something clever and you forget that you are talking to someone. All we see is text.
I think there is room to be sincere and serious while letting go and laughing at others immature behaviour.
Your stubbornness and attachment to this issue is quite extraordinary.
You reject a legitimate translation of buddha by a renowned scholar in favour of a t shirt quote, simply because the t shirt matches your preconceptions.
You persist in your view, despite being repeatedly shown that buddha explicitly stated that doubt was a hindrance, not a virtue.
You dismiss these legitimate counter examples as 'dogma' whilst clinging dogmatically to your own view.
Do you also not perceive the irony and paradox of the extreme doctrine you are advocating? Namely, that if you take your logic to its natural end point, you must doubt doubt ! And yet, you are so certain about doubt !
I don't know what else to say ...
Namaste
This is when realization takes over ones doubting, and restless stirrings.
But let us be clear, the singular principle I am being stubborn about is:
"Buddha said do not believe in X until you cannot not not believe that X leads to benefit, happiness..." Absolutely. And moreover even if the translation were perfect I would reject the authority and authenticity of the Pali text from whence it came. I probably have preconceptions, probably caused by being blown away by the method of Cartesian Doubt when I understood it, as a nipper.
Probably caused by the fact that its the big nobrainer of reason.
And definitely caused by the fact that the kalama principles extend on this in a way that was the main factor that converted me to dharma. Unresolved Doubt is a big fetter.
Asking "Why should I believe in Dharma" is not.
The view I cling dogmatically to is the view of anti-dogma.
Frankly, I think the buddhist establishment over the millenia has distorted and subdued the importance of the kalama principles.
True Dharma can stand up to anything anyone can throw at it, I am not so sure about precepts involving comfy seating, rebirth, vegetarianism and so on....
Of course you should doubt your doubts, you should doubt everything and then see which doiubts you cannot doubnt.
There is no paradox. Ironies abound.
There are two types of Buddists, those who believe the buddha was a skeptic and those who do not. I am what I am, you are what you are.
Unto each their own.
I don't like the term "faith", to me faith means something that is believed in isolation, without being the product of a process of reason and experience. To me there is no faith in dharma.
But again, I see what you are saying and why you use the term. I prefer the term "clarity" or perhaps the cumbersome "indupitability"
Yes, exactly. One starts doubting all things. A world of no certainity in anything. Then, by practice and understanding doubts get resolved.
I cannot doubt that all things are impermanent....
I cannot doubt that all things are without essence....
....
I cannot doubt that tanha causes dukka...
Yes, exactly.
The kalama principles are being gems, not hinderances, a crucial part of the path, not fetters.
namaste
I get everything else you've stated by the way, and agree! Thanks for clarifying.
You are in India, na?
No, I was born and raised in the USA, but raised a Hindu since birth in the Shaiva Sampradaya of Tantricism; i.e. shaktipat, chakras, kundalini and all that jazz my whole life growing up in a predominantly Mexican area. So mostly Christians all around me while my Mom did yoga and meditation, studying sanskrit scriptures and repeating sanskrit mantras, etc. My single mother is from South Africa where there are lots of Indians and became interested in Hinduism there. My mother has her PHD in women's arts and spirituality, all Indian spirituality. I became Vajrayana Buddhist (in this life) just about 7 years ago. But studied it pryer to my conversion.
p.s. No worries, I am often accused of being Indian. I grew up with a genuinely Indian spiritual tradition.
With Metta
Sradda is taking that realization as an embodiment. Its like you learn a move in soccer. And then you internalize it so it isn't a move anymore. It is just part of you.
Another example of sradda is how you function socially. You come to one group of friends and you act one way. Then in another group (or your family) you act another. You sensitively respond to the climate you are in. Same on this forum. Its like being in tune and harmony. Prajna is the counterpoint which is like messages you get from that dynamic. A piece of intelligence or wisdom from that sphere. A book might be one sphere and you perceive the message of the book, prajna. Then you are transformed by the book, sradda.
I wish you the best
On your doubtful quest
May your heart find peace
And your feet, some rest
"Doubt is an insidious enemy.
Doubt in the Buddha, Dhamma
and Sangha, in my own ability,
in the instructions. All of these
doubts make it impossible to
meditate. Not just difficult to
meditate but impossible to
meditate. Because the mind is
busy with extraneous matter. If
you want to meditate, you
have to drop all that." Ayya
Khema.
My Doubt in Dharma is now long gone,
Eroded, resolved, extinguished.
Faithless peace,
Doubtless clarity,
Magnificent certainty in the Three
And the Four,
The Eight,
But nothing more.
For what ever it is not worth,
I still doubt rebirth,
And precepts against high seats,
And midnight feasts,
And the dogmas of the Man.
(Your poem made me smile, thank you)
xxx