January 17, 2010
Trusting Faith, Pure Faith, and Clear Faith
As I discussed previously, there are three levels of faith. Note we are talking three levels; not the kinds. Each has its own goal of overcoming a far opposite; but each also has a near enemy.
The first level is trust. It serves the function of overcoming uncertainty; the natural hesitancy or reluctance driven by cynicism, mistrust, and suspicious doubts. The near enemy of trust is gullibility. The antidote for gullibility is to maintain a clear seeking mind; which includes intellectual curiosity and healthy skepticism. If someone asks us to surrender those qualities; then suspicion or even distrust are justified. Also, all too often, trust can morph into intellectual laziness. Finally, our object of trust should be Dharma; the Buddha Wisdom, not a person.
The second level is pure faith. This comes about because we begin to see results; our lives start to become unbound from cycles of grief; we begin to feel spiritually purified. At that point, it is only natural to develop a sense of loyalty. This is good, in that it helps one persist when obstacles inevitably arise. However, there is danger lurking. The near enemies of of pure faith are fanaticism and bigotry. These emotions can motivate actions that are unwholesome and counter to the purpose of Buddhism.
Finally, the third level is Faith with Clarity; or Clear Faith. This is the complete resolution of doubt. In the beginning, we are are advised to substitute trust for discernment. However, to reach faith with clarity, critical thinking is needed. For that to work, we must cultivate non-attachment and discernment. Even here, there dwells a near enemy -- that of arrogance, or thinking we have attained what we have not. Resolving doubt does not always mean 100% certainty. Clear Faith can mean reserving judgment and living with some level of brutally honest ambiguous agnosticism. In other words; to know what we do not and, perhaps, can not, know, at least for now.
Posted by rbeck at July 31, 2009 06:04 AM
Updated
I seek faith both through intellectually understanding and actual proof. I do not think they are mutually exclusive.
Posted by: robin at August 13, 2009 12:54 AMFaith is simple to undertand to me. If you go to work for payment you are experiencing Faith with that employer. Faith starts simply and gets as complex as we make it as individuals. Faith is simple, it starts with belief and ends with actual proof.
For example, as an emnployee you start out believing your boss will pay you for work perfomed in a satisfactory manner. After time you have faith in your boss and the company that they will continue to pay you as they have in the past, for acceptable performance That is continuing faith. If you retire from the company perhaps that is called faith without doubt.
Faith applied outside of reality is difficult for me to comprehend. I see faith in reality and not intellectually; not stating others seek faith through intelect, just I seek faith through actual proof.
From Nichiren's persepctive, faith and evantually doubt-free faith evolves from actual proof in the power of the Lotus Sutra, the most important of the three proofs; theoretical, documentary, and actual proof.
Patrick
Posted by: Patrick at August 11, 2009 01:25 PMChris,
If you read the earlier post, there are three words translated as faith. The onyumi reading of the Chinese words are shin, shinjin, and shinge. The original terms are shraddha, prasada, and adhimukti. While all three have been translated as faith; none mean faith in the sense commonly used. They mean faith in the sense of acting in good faith and or/certainty
Shraddha means trust. Prasada means different things in different contexts. The Chinese translations mean pure faith and heart felt faith. The Chinese for Adhimukti literally means faith and unraveling / understanding. Mukti means emancipation or liberation. Adhi means the origin or source. I like 'clear faith' or 'faith with clarity.'
Mialo-lo, iirc, said that Adhimukti is to resolve doubt.
more in the entry July 22, 2009
Three levels of Faith
Posted by: robin at August 4, 2009 07:31 PM
Three levels of faith? There was a dialogue between Menander and I forget his name, many moons ago in which faith was discussed. The Buddhist teacher arguing with Menander asked him "Have you ever seen the Ganges?"
Menander: "No".
"Do you believe it is there?"
Menander: "Yes."
"Why?"
Menander:[paraphrase] "because I've seen a map."
"That is faith."
What you seem to be describing are degrees of confidence. Once one's seen the Ganges one no longer has doubts that there is one. Especially if one has considered bathing in its sewer waters.
It's not really faith anymore. But then faith in that case is to think that bathing in those sewer waters will heal one...well maybe at one time.
You also are getting close to the "Stages of faith and Practice" that Nichiren discusses in a Gosho.
The stage we want to attain is that of "Never regressing."
Posted by: Chris at August 4, 2009 03:35 PMGood follow up comment. I think the beauty of the Lotus Sutra is that the supportive "wish granting" Bodhisattva and Buddhas are all there to help -- everyone needs that kind of support at times -- but in the end the reason they help is to aid us in supporting the Lotus Sutra itself. It is not obscure or some finer point of esoteric doctrine that they are not ends in of themselves. If we develop ourselves in the Lotus Sutra, we will perceive these protective forces in our lives, and usually they will take a form that lets us know they've been there all along, e.g., a friend, a loved one, or recognition of an opportunity.
Posted by: Lotuslaw at August 4, 2009 07:38 AMMaybe another way to look at faith would be in terms of three kinds of practices; devotional, cultivative, and contemplative. Loyalty and devotion are valued in human culture; but I think they are doubled edged swords.
I think, ideally, devotional practice ought to be about cultivation. For example, Kannon is the Bodhisattva of Compassion. So, devotional practices centered on her should be about cultivating compassion. In reality, it us usually about praying to her and begging her to grant favors.
In Nichiren's time, the people of Japan had, in practice, lost faith in Shakyamuni Buddha, because all he offered were difficult teachings and practices that required people to improve themselves. Meanwhile, Dainichi could make you rich and powerful, Medicine Buddha could heal your sickness, Kannon could grant you healthy children, Benzaiten could launder your money, and Amida could make your afterlife blissful.
At the same time, there was wide acceptance of the Mappo theory, that people would lack the discernment to do contemplative practices; so that faith and devotion should be substituted. I think Nichiren was trying to steer devotional practice back to Shakyamuni and cultivation.
Does that work now in western culture? Maybe we should be stressing the next step; that of converting trust into discernment? Just some thoughts.
Posted by: robin at August 1, 2009 12:21 PMRobin,
Looks like a well balanced faith leads to a well balanced individual. But that takes effort and responsibility on the individuals part, which has been the opposite of the definition of any deity based faith and even some that are not. Perhaps my skepticism about faith has turned to cynicism but most of my experiences with people of "faith" have been your pejorative results of faith. I do have many friends who I consider people "with" faith as opposed to "of" and they are exceptional individuals. But that is the exception, not the norm in my experience.