What is Buddhist Faith?

Ejou

Hello, I'm new but I'm interested in getting an idea from a diverse group of Buddhists about faith in Buddhism. How does this faith differ from Christian faith (for those familiar)? What is the relation between faith and doubt? Is your choice of a specific Buddhist path informed by your faith or doubts?

I recently came back from a retreat, and at the closing meeting one of the Shonin said that I was a person of "great faith", I consider myself to be a person of continual doubt. No sooner do I resolve one thing in my mind, then I find another thing drawn into questions... I keep feeling that "faith" keeps slipping through my fingers. I'm not feeling doubt in the Christian sense that I want to quit, but in the sense that I don't want to accept things at face value. I also find that Even after leaving the Church 10 years ago and being a Buddhist since April, I still think about things and approach religion with many of the same patterns as a Christian.

I've been nothing but encouraged by my teacher to ask questions, and to learn what I can about my sect and the ideas of other Buddhists. I guess the Christian in me still sees faith as buying 100% the ideas of my sect and rejecting the thoughts that don't fit and the thoughts others outside my sect... even if I personally don't see things this way (one of the reasons I left Christianity).

Thank you for reading! I'm very interested to see what I get for responses!
Gassho

federica

Broadly, generally, widely speaking: (with room for argument, as usual )

Christian Faith = Hope in the promises of an unseen.
Buddhist faith = Confidence after examination.

vinlyn

Rather than express it the way that Federica has (although I see where she's coming from...but I still think it indicates that all Buddhists think alike and that all Christians think alike), I would rather say:

There is "blind faith" and "practical faith".

I look at things in both Christianity and Buddhism that we cannot confirm, and when a person believes in those things, that is "blind faith". However, I don't think that there's anything wrong with "blind faith" IF a person realizes that's what it is.

"Practical faith" -- I think this is where I'd use the phrase Federica does -- "confidence after examination".

Sile

It's really hard to find examples of truly blind faith.

If my dad says "Run!!" and I run without asking why, some would call that blind faith. But if I have a good dad, whose given me good advice before, then my faith in "Run!" is actually reasoned faith, not blind faith.

If a complete stranger says "Run!" and I run, it may be because in general I have experienced people to be more good than bad, and I know that many people are alive today for having heeded the warning cry of a stranger (and of course some people are dead as a result of being tricked by a bad guy).

But it's extremely difficult to find genuine blind faith. In fact, I think "blind" faith is almost not an issue of trusting in something/someone with little investigation, but rather being specifically encouraged never to investigate. In other words, "blinded faith" might be a better term.

Songhill

Ejou: As odd as it sounds Buddhism is consistent with "faith alone without works is dead" (James 2:17). Modern Christian faith is faith in blind belief.

“What do you think about this, Prince? A man might come along here, and think: ‘Prince Bodhi knows how to ride elephants and the art of handling the goad. I will train myself in elephant-riding and the art of handling the goad under him.’ But had he no faith he could not attain whatever is to be won by faith” (M. ii. 94).

caz

Through testing and applying the Dharma to our mind and problems we develop confidence in its ability to do as it says, In this we generate faith so when new Dharma instructions are given we can apply them without hesitation and reap their benefit.

Patr

Broadly speaking, Christian faith would mean believing fully in the bible and that there is an omnipresent creator God. Whether that can be elaborated upon and investigated depends on the individuals' insistence on knowing and understanding further.

Buddhist faith is also to believe in the teachings (Dharma) which, comparably is in much more detail and covers a broader spectrum.

We also have a teacher, the Buddha, who asks us to investigate and think about all his teachings, find the truth / essence and then only to accept, certainly not blind faith in this sense.

As we all have different levels of understanding and spiritual knowledge, those that are unable to comprehend the teachings should at the least have faith. Especially for beginners, this forum is a good place to learn and share your thoughts.

For those who actually comprehend the higher teachings, they will accept it as the ultimate truth and develop unflinching faith in Buddhism.

Dakini

Faith in Buddhism is about believing that if you follow the 8-Fold Path, understand the 4 Noble Truths, practice the precepts and behave mindfully, and seek insight through meditation, that all this will benefit your life, and will result in less suffering and greater fulfillment and happiness for you.

It's about having faith that the teachings and methods work, that they will, indeed, have a positive effect on your life, and on those whom your life touches.

Ejou

Thank you for the replies, I keep testing Buddhists but I never get let down! lol. I see the wisdom in "confidence after examination", though another issue that I come across is (inevitably?) the fact that so many people come up with their own conclusions. After examination does one need to have a solid back up for why they choose to believe a certain way?

It does not bother be that there are so many different schools, I say to each their own. What bothers me is that I cannot specifically justify my choice though reason, and there are quotes from my schools doctrine that one can use to argue that we are intolerant to some of the beliefs and practices of other schools.

If you were to ask me, "Why are you a Nichiren-Shu Buddhist specifically..." I would feel more like I would have to justify this than I would when I was a Christian. Maybe it is because I am actually examining the doctrine of the different schools and refusing to simply take things on “blind faith”? Does anyone else have similar issues with their school?

federica

Took me nearly 20 years to 'opt' for one specific tradition, but I incorporate aspects and practises of other schools, as I feel appropriate. Unlike a Protestant going to Catholic Mass, (oooh, I don't think so....!) in Buddhism it doesn't really much matter if you meld, providing you're mellow....

Dakini

@Ejou You don't have to pick a school. For some, it's much simpler to follow the basics (8-Fold Path, 4 Nobles, non-attachment, precepts, mindfullness, meditation/insight), and read for inspiration, than to choose a school. That's a perfectly valid option. Just do what works for you, and don't worry about justifying your choice. It's really no one's business, anyway. It's your personal practice, your private choice. The main thing is that the path you choose helps you, moves you forward on the path. Ultimately, that's the only criterion that counts, isn't it? Carry on with your practice.

genkaku

People are sometimes keen to make Buddhism into a human emotion. Love, joy, bliss ... yum, yum, yum. Altruists dance and sing. How nice to be nice!

But in the tradition I prefer, I will defer to the words of the Zen teacher Ta Hui who once observed, "I have always taken a great vow that I would rather burn in hell for all eternity than to portray Zen as a human emotion."

Belief and hope can be a wonderful inspiration to action. But experience teaches what belief and hope haven't got a snowball's chance in hell of assuring. This is why we practice -- to nourish fact where fantasy once ruled the roost.

I_AM_THAT

Faith in Buddhism is about having faith in yourself, for only you can make the change within that will set you free.

FoibleFull

Faith and knowledge are two different things.
And, often, faith is a form of an attachment. An attachment to the comforting thought that we "know" how things "are", the truth of all matters. But our faith has no impact on the actual truth (whatever THAT is).

In the Tibetan language, there are 2 words that mean "I know".
The first word means "I know because I heard it, someone told me, I read it ... etc". This is not actually knowledge, but is the stuff of faith.
The second word means "I know because I have experienced it firsthand for myself" .. and THIS is what knowledge is.

Buddhists do not cling to faith. They seek, instead, knowledge and wisdom.

Jason

Ejou said:

Hello, I'm new but I'm interested in getting an idea from a diverse group of Buddhists about faith in Buddhism. How does this faith differ from Christian faith (for those familiar)? What is the relation between faith and doubt? Is your choice of a specific Buddhist path informed by your faith or doubts?

I recently came back from a retreat, and at the closing meeting one of the Shonin said that I was a person of "great faith", I consider myself to be a person of continual doubt. No sooner do I resolve one thing in my mind, then I find another thing drawn into questions... I keep feeling that "faith" keeps slipping through my fingers. I'm not feeling doubt in the Christian sense that I want to quit, but in the sense that I don't want to accept things at face value. I also find that Even after leaving the Church 10 years ago and being a Buddhist since April, I still think about things and approach religion with many of the same patterns as a Christian.

I've been nothing but encouraged by my teacher to ask questions, and to learn what I can about my sect and the ideas of other Buddhists. I guess the Christian in me still sees faith as buying 100% the ideas of my sect and rejecting the thoughts that don't fit and the thoughts others outside my sect... even if I personally don't see things this way (one of the reasons I left Christianity).

Thank you for reading! I'm very interested to see what I get for responses!
Gassho

My response from a previous discussion that's somewhat relevant, I think:

As rational as aspects of Buddhism may be, there's still a role for faith, in my opinion. In the Pali Canon, the word saddha can be translated as 'confidence,' 'conviction,' or 'faith.' More specifically, it's a type of confidence, conviction, or faith that's rooted in understanding as well as what we'd conventionally refer to as faith in the West (i.e., confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing).

Personally, I don't think there's anything wrong with faith in and of itself; and I think having a certain amount of conviction in the Buddha's teachings is needed from a purely pragmatic point of view. For one thing, without at least a modicum of confidence in the Buddha as a teacher, there's no motivation to put his teachings into practice (and the same with the teachings and the advice of those who dedicate themselves to practicing them/passing them down). As Thanissaro Bhikkhu writes in his essay "Faith in Awakening":

The Buddha never placed unconditional demands on anyone's faith... We read his famous instructions to the Kalamas, in which he advises testing things for oneself, and we see it as an invitation to believe, or not, whatever we like. Some people go so far as to say that faith has no place in the Buddhist tradition, that the proper Buddhist attitude is one of skepticism. But even though the Buddha recommends tolerance and a healthy skepticism toward matters of faith, he also makes a conditional request about faith: If you sincerely want to put an end to suffering — that's the condition — you should take certain things on faith, as working hypotheses, and then test them through following his path of practice.

Without faith that the Buddha had at least some insight into the nature of suffering, there's little reason to take anything he said as a working hypothesis to test. Therefore, while faith by itself isn't a sufficient condition for arriving at the highest fruits of the Dhamma, there are elements of faith that are important to the practice, which is illustrated in places like MN 70:

Monks, I do not say that the attainment of gnosis is all at once. Rather, the attainment of gnosis is after gradual training, gradual action, gradual practice. And how is there the attainment of gnosis after gradual training, gradual action, gradual practice? There is the case where, when conviction has arisen, one visits [a teacher]. Having visited, one grows close. Having grown close, one lends ear. Having lent ear, one hears the Dhamma. Having heard the Dhamma, one remembers it. Remembering, one penetrates the meaning of the teachings. Penetrating the meaning, one comes to an agreement through pondering the teachings. There being an agreement through pondering the teachings, desire arises. When desire has arisen, one is willing. When one is willing, one contemplates. Having contemplated, one makes an exertion. Having made an exertion, one realizes with the body the ultimate truth and, having penetrated it with discernment, sees it.

In essence, faith in Buddhism is a stepping stone to gnosis, much as it is in Christianity. And while some find theistic spiritual traditions like Christianity a source of comfort, guidance, and happiness, I've found Buddhism to be the same. I don't know if nibbana — the extinction of craving; the extinguishing of greed, hatred and delusion; the complete end of suffering — is attainable, but I certainly like where the path has taken me thus far, and I have confidence that it's worth my continued effort. And I imagine that others feel the same about their respective spiritual journeys, whatever the context, which is something I can appreciate.