Faith-based against evidence-based

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
Post Reply
Matteo1972
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2013 2:06 am

Re: Faith-based against evidence-based

Post by Matteo1972 »

equilibrium wrote: Point is not about deceive, it is about whether one understand or not.
As you have already pointed out, you will not believe at face value, then, why would one wish to seek for one?
Because not believing at face value does not mean not be willing to listen and learn
equilibrium wrote:So how would you know if there are no enlightened people here in these forums?.....is this another assumption? and is it a fact?.....there is somewhere in the teaching and it noted that we are all located on a mountain range, in that range, we are all positioned in terms of our own delusion. Those at the bottom have the most delusion, middle ones are in-between and those at the higher levels have few. Yet those at the lower levels cannot see those higher, only those at a higher level can see those below. The Buddha is positioned at the very top.....so based on your statement, you must be an enlightened being then?
There are two contradictions in your sentence:
1) if you are not an Enlightened being and you cant look on the top, how can you even assume that the Buddha is the Enlightened? Faith?
2) the sentence itself is a teaching which describes a law of who can see whom
This teaching also is about Enlightenment, how come that you, who are not on top, can appreciate this law?
equilibrium wrote:Why listen to anyone else than the teaching itself?.....is it not better to learn from the person who is positioned at the top of a mountain range who sees ALL?
Where does your faith that a Buddha existed and that he can see all come from?
equilibrium wrote:You must be aware that no matter how many people you hear from, you are not going to get any closer to the truth are you? if you are searching for it, you need to start looking at the right place by "doing" rather than asking for it.....you do "know" the truth cannot be told, it is "realised" in your mind!!??.....IF you are ready for it!
How do you know this?
Have you heard all the teachings?
Also, it is physically impossible to try all the practices s that all masters teach all around the world.
Not even if you live 1000 years.
User avatar
kirk5a
Posts: 1959
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: Faith-based against evidence-based

Post by kirk5a »

Did they teach about "mind" in your Zen practice? Clinging-mind and non-clinging mind?
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Faith-based against evidence-based

Post by chownah »

Matteo1972 wrote:
chownah wrote:
Matteo1972 wrote:
Is there any particular reason I should consider that John Lennon quote more important than others?
I don't know how you should consider the quote......except that your consideration should be based on the quote and not on the author.

So, you tell me; what does the quote mean, "life is what is happening to you, while making plans for the future." I would like you to explain what this means to you.
chownah
Please do.

I fail to see the deep meaning of it.

I have a Zen quote, however.

If you imagine your body moving without "you", how would it behave?
Please do what?

Do you see any meaning in it?

What does your zen quote mean to you?

chownah
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17188
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Faith-based against evidence-based

Post by DNS »

Matteo1972 wrote: Yes, you can get some peace, yes, you can get same good feelings, but you can get peace also by stopping to drink and you can get good feelings by making a family.
What about Enlightenment and what is it about?
Matteo1972 wrote: Also, I dont believe happiness can be measured.
Matteo1972 wrote: It looks that it is not even claimed to be any realistically possible.
So what is the point of even trying?
Matteo1972 wrote: I have faith, but faith in whom since 100 people say 100 different things
Why not faith in Prof. Williams?
Matteo1972 wrote: My point is that I do not believe the Tipitaka more than I believe the bible or the Koran.
Matteo1972 wrote: As from my point of view, Ven. Pesala words and Prof. Williams teachings have the same weight.
Matteo1972 wrote: If Buddhism cant provide a clear way for this, with people actually having reached this goal and this goal being realistically attainable, then the whole point of Buddhism is null, in my opinion.
Matteo1972 wrote: It looks to me that Theravada Buddhism requires the same amount of blind faith that Catholicism requires
Matteo1972 wrote: I do not believe in any "truth", being it Buddhist or not.
This does not mean disagreement, means that it is just words, and I am not interested in words, even if attibuted to Muhammad, Buddha, Visnu, or anybody else
Matteo1972 wrote: How would you know that the teachings are valuable if there is no arhant, and therefore not the smallest shred of evidence that someone got Enlightened ever?
Matteo1972 wrote: In which way is the Dhamma more "evidence" than the Bible or the Koran?
And on which grounds is the Dhamma sublime if you do not even know that it leads to Englithenment (other than blind faith)
Matteo1972 wrote: Well.. unless you are veeery old, I do not think you met the Buddha personally. :)
Infact, I do not think anybody can claim evidence that he actually lived.
Matteo1972 wrote: As for the Dhamma, unless it can be assumed that it can actually bring people to Enlightenment, what would be the use?
Matteo1972 wrote: I do not want to make any proselitism here, but Catholic priests claim the same: if you have in God you can bear your burden better.
I think the same would be true for faith in Allah, or any other God probably
I show the quotes above to show a general theme running through all of your posts. I have them quoted separately, all real quotes from you and they are not pieced together in any way to change any meanings; just to show the general theme in your posts.

Numerous posters have adequately responded to your questions and it is quite obvious that no answer no matter how logical and rational the answer, it will not satisfy you. It is apparent that you have no interest in pursuing Buddhism, in my opinion and you are just here to try and debunk it, no matter how miserably you have failed. You refuse to give it a try; what more needs to be said? You are going in circles making the same claims about how Buddhism is no better than blah, blah, how there is no proof that there are any arahants, that Buddha existed, etc., etc. You never responded to my question / response of giving it a try and see if there is less suffering as you progress. It seems you already have your mind made up.
User avatar
kc2dpt
Posts: 957
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:48 pm

Re: Faith-based against evidence-based

Post by kc2dpt »

David N. Snyder wrote:It is apparent that you have no interest in pursuing Buddhism, in my opinion and you are just here to try and debunk it
Respectfully, I disagree. I'm familiar with the worry of "I don't want to invest time and energy into something if I can't be sure it's going to bear fruit" and I think that's what's going on here. I also think he is so entrenched in his ideas of how to properly engage a spiritual pursuit that he's not even hearing what anyone here is saying. There has sadly been no meaningful dialog in this whole thread, no willingness to listen or engage, despite numerous people willing to give him their time and attention. I'm reminded of the Zen story about the overflowing teacup.
- Peter

Be heedful and you will accomplish your goal.
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17188
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Faith-based against evidence-based

Post by DNS »

kc2dpt wrote:I also think he is so entrenched in his ideas of how to properly engage a spiritual pursuit that he's not even hearing what anyone here is saying. There has sadly been no meaningful dialog in this whole thread, no willingness to listen or engage, despite numerous people willing to give him their time and attention. I'm reminded of the Zen story about the overflowing teacup.
I agree and I suppose there is the possibility that he is not trolling and just doesn't want to take any advice or recommendations. I see all those comments about no proof of arahants, no proof of Buddha existing (even when others have repeatedly answered those concerns), that there is just as much blind faith as there is in Catholicism; it just all looks like no real intention to learn anything about Buddhism. But I could be wrong, maybe he is just super-stubborn, super-skeptical.
User avatar
kc2dpt
Posts: 957
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:48 pm

Re: Faith-based against evidence-based

Post by kc2dpt »

I have looked back over this thread - the initial post, Matteo1972's various replies - and have a new answer.

"What proof do we have that the teachings of Buddha actually bring you anywhere important?"

There is no proof, Matteo1972, that you will accept. I'm sorry we don't have what you are looking for.

There are many people in this world who call themselves Buddhists.

Some do not practice anything, but call themselves Buddhists out of habit or family obligation.
Some practice things sincerely, but those practices no way resemble the Buddha's teachings.

Some practice in accordance with the Buddha's teachings and see no result.
Some practice in accordance with the Buddha's teachings and see enough result to fill them with confidence in those teachings.
Some practice in accordance with the Buddha's teachings and see enough result to know beyond a doubt those teachings are true.

Some claim to know beyond a doubt, but they delude themselves.
Some claim to know beyond a doubt, but say so for ego gratification or to scam others.

Matteo1972, it seems you want someone to say "Go to this place and ask to see this man. He is enlightened and has led many people to be enlightened as well. Go and learn from him." You will not find this in Theravada Buddhism. Here we will say "The place is the Dhamma and the man is the Buddha. Seek out the Buddha's Dhamma and seek out someone who can explain it to you." That's it. That's what this is. If this isn't what you are looking for, then no hard feelings. :)
- Peter

Be heedful and you will accomplish your goal.
User avatar
anjali
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2011 2:05 am

Re: Faith-based against evidence-based

Post by anjali »

Matteo1972 wrote:
dagon wrote:That is the problem – you are looking for someone else to end your suffering. Where did the Buddha teach that?
Metta
paul
Not exactly.
I would need someone reliable to tell me how I need to do to end my suffering
To end your own suffering, you have to investigate your own suffering. Read the book, An Unentangled Knowing, by Upasika Kee Nanayon. Particularly Part Four, A Good Dose of Dhamma for Meditators When They are Ill. It refers to physical illness, but the notion is applicable to emotional suffering as well. If you don't want to read the book, can read a Good Dose of Dhamma online here. Depending on your background, there are other methods, but they all involve insight practices directly looking at the suffering you are experiencing.

May you be free from suffering and the source of suffering. May you find happiness and the source of happiness.
User avatar
equilibrium
Posts: 522
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2012 11:07 am

Re: Faith-based against evidence-based

Post by equilibrium »

Matteo1972 wrote: Because not believing at face value does not mean not be willing to listen and learn
Then maybe the teaching itself is perfect for your approach?
Matteo1972 wrote:There are two contradictions in your sentence:
1) if you are not an Enlightened being and you cant look on the top, how can you even assume that the Buddha is the Enlightened? Faith?
2) the sentence itself is a teaching which describes a law of who can see whom
This teaching also is about Enlightenment, how come that you, who are not on top, can appreciate this law?
1) The word "see" is not seen with the eyes, it is seen with the mind. (understand/comprehend/know) No one knows the result of the path and enters it.....one who enters does not know.....so faith/believe or whatever you want to call it.
2) For there to be appreciation there must first be understanding. There are different levels of delusion/understanding. One does not need to be on the top as this is impossible nor does one need to be there to see.
Matteo1972 wrote:Where does your faith that a Buddha existed and that he can see all come from?
What is taught in the teaching is only that which is relevant to the escape of samsara and nothing beyond. The Buddha created the teaching and the path.....and everyone else follows it....."beyond" is what we don't know.
Matteo1972 wrote: How do you know this?
Have you heard all the teachings?
Also, it is physically impossible to try all the practices s that all masters teach all around the world.
Not even if you live 1000 years.
They are all available in written text form open to all.....Based on your logic, it would be impossible to learn from all those masters, what is more important is there is not a requirement to do so. There is a saying, when you know one you know them all. They are all the same. They are different so to suit different people as you are well aware, not one size fits all!
Matteo1972
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2013 2:06 am

Re: Faith-based against evidence-based

Post by Matteo1972 »

David N. Snyder wrote: I show the quotes above to show a general theme running through all of your posts. I have them quoted separately, all real quotes from you and they are not pieced together in any way to change any meanings; just to show the general theme in your posts.

Numerous posters have adequately responded to your questions and it is quite obvious that no answer no matter how logical and rational the answer, it will not satisfy you. It is apparent that you have no interest in pursuing Buddhism, in my opinion and you are just here to try and debunk it, no matter how miserably you have failed. You refuse to give it a try; what more needs to be said? You are going in circles making the same claims about how Buddhism is no better than blah, blah, how there is no proof that there are any arahants, that Buddha existed, etc., etc. You never responded to my question / response of giving it a try and see if there is less suffering as you progress. It seems you already have your mind made up.
OK, OK..
I have seen this several times.
When you question people` s beliefs, maybe a little bit too harshly as I maybe did, you get into the following steps:
1. people trying to reply to you
2. people forcefully reply to you
3. people gets irritated at you
4. people accuse you to be trolling
5. you get banned

This has happened to me in various places, such as Christian forums where reaching point 5 is very fast.
Here so far I have been treated respectfully, but I already see people mildly irritated at mild behavior (point 3.) and some veiled accusation of trolling (point 4.).
Since I see no point in being banned, I will end up my conclusion here.

Just let me tell you that I had no intention whatsoever to troll, and no intention of being disrespectful.
I am also a very busy person and I have no time to lose so really I did not mean to troll.
My genuine concern was to find out if there was any solid ground (or, I would say, any ground at all) to believe in Buddhism Theravada.
So far, I could not find any.
What I have been told is to work on a series of teachings that have been said to be written in the past and hat according to some ancient belief may lead to something called Enlightenment in my 6th or 7th life.
Not only there is no solid ground to believe that such things called "Enlightenment" is there, but there is also no ground to believe that a Buddha ever existed.
It is true that just this would not satisfy me.
Yes, it may be true that practicing for a few years or decades you may get some "insight" over yourself (as Christians, Muslims, Yogi, Hindus also claim), but I would not consider this as a proof of being freed from suffering, certainly it would not be any proof of being freed from boredom, which would be unbelievably heavy burden had anyone to go to meditate for years.
And boredom is just another form of suffering, is not it? ;)

So so far, I see Christians and Theravada Buddhism on the same level of requiring blind faith.
I still have some hopes on Zen Buddhism, where you can reasonably get at least satori in this life.
But it is just a hope.
I will still try to go to Thai and see if I can get something else than the usual: "Please come here and practice for the rest of your life so that after your 7-th rebirth you may get Nirvana".
Maybe I will be getting some realistic insight.
If not, Theravada Buddhism will also be closed story for me.

This is it.

If someone has some actual evidence to present me, from direct experience or anything else, please feel free to PM me, I will enjoy reading your thougths here in the near evidence
For "evidence", I mean some lasting attainment, not just the usual "I practice Theravada and now I feel better"
Catholics and Muslims also say the same.

Again, sorry for talking too straightforward, you will excuse me.

Matteo
Matteo1972
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2013 2:06 am

Re: Faith-based against evidence-based

Post by Matteo1972 »

kc2dpt wrote:I have looked back over this thread - the initial post, Matteo1972's various replies - and have a new answer.

"What proof do we have that the teachings of Buddha actually bring you anywhere important?"

There is no proof, Matteo1972, that you will accept. I'm sorry we don't have what you are looking for.

There are many people in this world who call themselves Buddhists.

Some do not practice anything, but call themselves Buddhists out of habit or family obligation.
Some practice things sincerely, but those practices no way resemble the Buddha's teachings.

Some practice in accordance with the Buddha's teachings and see no result.
Some practice in accordance with the Buddha's teachings and see enough result to fill them with confidence in those teachings.
Some practice in accordance with the Buddha's teachings and see enough result to know beyond a doubt those teachings are true.

Some claim to know beyond a doubt, but they delude themselves.
Some claim to know beyond a doubt, but say so for ego gratification or to scam others.

Matteo1972, it seems you want someone to say "Go to this place and ask to see this man. He is enlightened and has led many people to be enlightened as well. Go and learn from him." You will not find this in Theravada Buddhism. Here we will say "The place is the Dhamma and the man is the Buddha. Seek out the Buddha's Dhamma and seek out someone who can explain it to you." That's it. That's what this is. If this isn't what you are looking for, then no hard feelings. :)
OK.
This is more or less the reply I was asking for.

Thanks.
User avatar
m0rl0ck
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Faith-based against evidence-based

Post by m0rl0ck »

Im not irritated with you, i have been where you are and i sympathize with your plight. What worked for me was beating my head against the wall until it got soft enough to be permeable to what my practice had to teach me.

The pity of it is that for some people practice is about the only game in town. You sound to me like one of those people. Then again i could be totally full of it. Anyway, good luck :)

And seriously, discuss this with a teacher you can see in person. He or she might be able to at least shorten the self torture.
“The truth knocks on the door and you say, "Go away, I'm looking for the truth," and so it goes away. Puzzling.” ― Robert M. Pirsig
SamKR
Posts: 1037
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:33 pm

Re: Faith-based against evidence-based

Post by SamKR »

Matteo1972 wrote: If someone has some actual evidence to present me, from direct experience or anything else, please feel free to PM me, I will enjoy reading your thougths here in the near evidence
For "evidence", I mean some lasting attainment, not just the usual "I practice Theravada and now I feel better"
Catholics and Muslims also say the same.
Matteo
Hi Matteo,

There are numerous people who claim direct experiences and attainments of different levels of "enlightenment". They are easily available for talk in various forums online.
But even if people tell you sincerely about their direct experiences or enlightenments why would you believe them? What kind of evidence do you expect from them besides the description of their experiences?
User avatar
kc2dpt
Posts: 957
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:48 pm

Re: Faith-based against evidence-based

Post by kc2dpt »

Matteo1972 wrote:For "evidence", I mean some lasting attainment
You keep saying or suggesting nibbana is the only lasting attainment taught in Theravada. This is not so. Theravada teaches four levels of lasting attainment. The highest level is the arahant who has attained nibbana. The lowest level is called sotapanna, commonly translated as stream-entrant or stream-winner, because such a person has "entered the stream which flows inexorably towards nibbana". Such a person has firsthand knowledge of the truth of the teachings and cannot fall back. This would seem to satisfy your criteria of "evidence" and "lasting attainment".
sorry for talking too straightforward, you will excuse me.
It's not the straight-talk which is annoying. It is your ignoring of people's answers to your concerns. I suspect you are not doing this ignoring intentionally, but rather just are talking on a different frequency and missing what is being said to you. Or you're being deliberately obstinate. Who can say. :lol:
- Peter

Be heedful and you will accomplish your goal.
Matteo1972
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2013 2:06 am

Re: Faith-based against evidence-based

Post by Matteo1972 »

SamKR wrote:Hi Matteo,

There are numerous people who claim direct experiences and attainments of different levels of "enlightenment". They are easily available for talk in various forums online.
But even if people tell you sincerely about their direct experiences or enlightenments why would you believe them? What kind of evidence do you expect from them besides the description of their experiences?
Well, since such people look like well hidden, I will do my best to find them in Thailand, even if it will not be easy in just two weeks.
Maybe I would not believe them, but at least I would have someone with first hand experience to talk to.
This would already be something
Anyway, I still find very strange that only few people reach the highest level of Enlightenment while numerous claim to have reach the lowest ones.
Mathematically does not make much sense to me.. :)
Post Reply