It has become accepted in modern circles of Buddhism, particularly in the West, that the doctrines and teachings of the Buddha shouldn't be accepted just on the basis of belief; rather one should follow one’s own personal knowledge when deciding which doctrines are to be accepted and which ones are to be rejected.
All this sounds great. But is it? Not to mince words, and cutting to the chase, it is a flawed methodology that decides which doctrines and teachings of the Buddha should be observed and which should be rejected based on one’s personal knowledge.
If we were to judge the worth of the various sciences based on our personal knowledge, there would be, most likely, no physical or biological sciences.
In fact, the huge majority of people that populate this planet live most of their lives without accepting or rejecting things or ideas based on any degree of personal knowledge. First of all, most people are in what Dr. Charles Tart calls a “consensus trance” which means that most people are programmed to do what they normally do—although they would deny it. As regards their huge store of personal knowledge, they have very little. Their shelves are almost bare. And much of it is wrong knowledge.
When those new to Buddhism take up the study and practice of Buddhism they need to be very careful about rejecting any part of it. Indeed, as I learned many years ago, there is far more to Buddhism than anyone can imagine. A word of caution: all the rejecting should be done before an individual decides to follow the Buddha’s path—not after. Putting this aside, the pertinent question we need now ask is how should we deal with doctrines and teachings of the Buddha we are unsure of or which seem confusing and difficult to grasp? The following may help in answering this question.
“The [beginner] merely adheres to the profound texts which his intelligence cannot fathom; he tells himself those are truths within reach of the Buddha and not within reach of our intelligence, and he refrains from rejecting them. In this way, he is protected from any fault” (Bodhisattvabhumi 108 [Donald Lopez, Buddhist Hermeneutics, P. 13]).
The gist of this is when in doubt, don’t straightaway reject what you don’t understand or lack personal knowledge of. In the future—and hopefully more mature—you might find that your intelligence has grown by leaps and bounds; and what seemed difficult to wrap your brain around is now fairly straightforward and clear. Above all, don't assume that your personal knowledge is adequate to judge Buddhism—it ain't.
Comments