Direct experience vs belief

[Chriliman]

Most people make the mistake of practicing religion from the third-person perspective. They start from the right place -- what do I need to do -- but then they try to create the whole picture to answer that question. They come up with their conceptualization of God, deduce what God wants based on those characteristics, then answer the original question of what to do. In short, they try to take shortcuts, the path of least resistance.

Religion should be practiced entirely from the first-person perspective. It should rely completely on direct experience and never on beliefs.

If you believe that what you just said is true, then you've directly contradicted what you've just said because you just said we should not rely on our beliefs.

It's impossible to rationally function without believing our experiences are true and real. We need to believe in order to discover what is true, but the truth does not necessarily depend on our beliefs. It's our human nature to believe things because things are true and we desire truth(most of us). The challenge is deciphering the truth from a lie.

 

[TreasureHunter12]

If you believe that what you just said is true, then you've directly contradicted what you've just said because you just said we should not rely on our beliefs.

You're saying what I'm sharing is a belief? If so, I disagree. What I'm sharing is based on experience and realization.

There is a big difference between taking a step into the darkness then looking back, and adopting beliefs about what is beyond the darkness before ever taking a step.

 

[Chriliman]

You're saying what I'm sharing is a belief? If so, I disagree. What I'm sharing is based on experience and realization.

So what you're sharing is the Truth and not just what you've come to accept as the truth?

I hope you'll agree that what you're sharing is what you've come to accept(believe) is the truth.

 

[Chris B]

It should rely completely on direct experience and never on beliefs.

It's something rather Ouroborosian or paradoxical,
but my personal experience has taught me to never completely trust personal experience.
It, or at least any meaning or interpretation I put upon it is as much up for examination and evaluation as my beliefs at any given time.

This is not done all the time, as it slows activity down to a glacial crawl.
But if it is not tackled occasionally, overdone confidence can start to look and feel like certain knowledge.
Whatever the source.

 

[TreasureHunter12]

It's something rather Ouroborosian or paradoxical,
but my personal experience has taught me to never completely trust personal experience.
It, or at least any meaning or interpretation I put upon it is as much up for examination and evaluation as my beliefs at any given time.

This is not done all the time, as it slows activity down to a glacial crawl.
But if it is not tackled occasionally, overdone confidence can start to look and feel like certain knowledge.
Whatever the source.

I agree with you. Don't trust any answers whether based on personal experience or belief. Still, rely on personal experience. Does that make sense? I'm saying to rely on personal experience to guide you but don't trust any answers along the way.

Personal experience helps us realize the problem of suffering is the fundamental problem, the starting point. Beliefs will try to take us to ideas about God. I'm saying to reject that direction.

 

[TreasureHunter12]

So what you're sharing is the Truth and not just what you've come to accept as the truth?

I hope you'll agree that what you're sharing is what you've come to accept(believe) is the truth.

Reject all answers always. Eventually, there are insights that remain even after being rejected over and over because truth cannot be lost. Still, the only way to get to that point is by not trusting yourself and rejecting all answers.

 

[Chriliman]

Reject all answers always. Eventually, there are insights that remain even after being rejected over and over because truth cannot be lost. Still, the only way to get to that point is by not trusting yourself and rejecting all answers.

Sorry, this seems irrational to me. If I actually reject all answers, then logically, I'll never accept the true answer.

I would say reject all answers that have no evidence of truth and logic behind them.

 

[TreasureHunter12]

Sorry, this seems irrational to me. If I actually reject all answers, then logically, I'll never accept the true answer.

I would say reject all answers that have no evidence of truth and logic behind them.

I'm repeating myself, but religion is unique and has its own unique process, outside of logic and reason. Faith is a huge part of it and the intellect leaves no room for faith.

Again, faith allows us to step into the darkness with uncertainty. The intellect can only point us in the direction of what is known, away from the darkness.

I'll make a post following this one about how the process plays out. Just give me a moment..

 

[TreasureHunter12]

I mentioned that the problem of suffering is the starting point. There are countless answers that address this problem, or how to be "happy". We live life and try several different ideas throughout to address this problem, but the issue continues to pop up. At some point, we may decide to stop putting band aids on the problem and to try to solve it. I consider this to be the first objective of religion.

We step back and survey the landscape, not just for an easy answer, but for the solution. There are so many resources for answers in some capacity: religion/spirituality, philosophy, medicine, psychology, self-help, peer advice, etc. When there are so many answers that means there is no clear solution. This calls for the problem to be solved individually.

Now, some would say their particular religion has solved the problem but the payoff isn't until another time in the afterlife. This isn't good enough. We have to decide that the problem can be solved in the here and now.

These are the three conditions that get us to the starting point: we have to decide the problem of suffering can be solved, we have to decide that the solution is available in the here and now, and we have to rely completely on ourselves to solve it. When we commit to those three conditions, we are undertaking a huge burden, which is why it's called the narrow path.

Here is how it played out for me. I would struggle for a solution and then come up with something that I fully believed was the solution, only to eventually have it fail. Then, I would repeat this again and again. This is where faith really comes in. I have this problem that I've decided can be solved and is within my reach somehow, but I'm unable to figure it out. Further, I have to reject all solutions I come up with since I can't be trusted.

This is when we have to change our focus from solving the original problem of suffering to solving the problem that is preventing us from being able to solve the original problem. There is some underlying issue that is distorting our perception. This leads to the painstaking journey of introspection I've been talking about.

This process is the most difficult thing anyone will ever try to do. Logic and reason will never get us there. In fact, it resists the entire way. The entire thing is fueled by faith. Faith allows us to decide the problem of suffering can be solved in the here and now, and faith allows us to persist even against what the intellect says is sane, rational, and logical.

It is a lack of faith when someone doesn't accept the three conditions I've mentioned and it is a lack of faith when someone doesn't persist beyond perceived failure.

 

[ScottA]

When we put our hand on a hot stove, pain tells us to remove it. When we haven't eaten in awhile, our hunger pain signals for us to go get food. Pain calls for us to act or make a change. It doesn't say to continue course or remain complacent. Can you see this?

Now, when are the times when we are the most open minded about our belief system? It's almost always during times when we experience pain right? The deeper that we are hurting, the more likely we are to contemplate the big questions (Is this really all there is to life, why are things the way they are, is there a God). Even if you aren't a religious person and don't think much about, enough suffering will make you start asking those questions.

Christianity teaches the way to properly exercise faith is to continue to believe when faced with doubt. When times are tough, that is when you should double-down and dive deeper into your Christian beliefs. Other religions have similar teachings.

However, this ignores the idea that pain calls for action and change. If all that was required of us was to stay the course in the face of doubt, then doubt could come at any time. It could come when we are thriving, but this isn't how it works. Doubt and pain come at us together. There are two messages: one message calls for change and the other message indicates what to change.

Which should we listen to? Should we trust a belief system or should we trust our direct experiences? Is faith about staying with what is known and comfortable? Or is it about going into uncertainty and darkness, trusting that you'll find your way?

The dilemma about matters of God, is not as you describe. Why would you seek or trust physical experiences to find spiritual truth? That's just wrong.

Example: If a thousand people were born into a large room and no one in the room had ever been or seen outside the room...who then in the room would know anything factual about what was outside? Your proposal is much like that. But if you really want to know what is outside...then NOTHING and NO ONE in the room (or in this physical world) is going to have the answer...unless...you or they, hear it from the outside. Unfortunately, although there are a host of people down throughout all of history that have heard from the outside....skeptics just declared them insane. Their loss.

 

[TreasureHunter12]

I mentioned that the problem of suffering is the starting point. There are countless answers that address this problem, or how to be "happy". We live life and try several different ideas throughout to address this problem, but the issue continues to pop up. At some point, we may decide to stop putting band aids on the problem and to try to solve it. I consider this to be the first objective of religion.

We step back and survey the landscape, not just for an easy answer, but for the solution. There are so many resources for answers in some capacity: religion/spirituality, philosophy, medicine, psychology, self-help, peer advice, etc. When there are so many answers that means there is no clear solution. This calls for the problem to be solved individually.

Now, some would say their particular religion has solved the problem but the payoff isn't until another time in the afterlife. This isn't good enough. We have to decide that the problem can be solved in the here and now.

These are the three conditions that get us to the starting point: we have to decide the problem of suffering can be solved, we have to decide that the solution is available in the here and now, and we have to rely completely on ourselves to solve it. When we commit to those three conditions, we are undertaking a huge burden, which is why it's called the narrow path.

Here is how it played out for me. I would struggle for a solution and then come up with something that I fully believed was the solution, only to eventually have it fail. Then, I would repeat this again and again. This is where faith really comes in. I have this problem that I've decided can be solved and is within my reach somehow, but I'm unable to figure it out. Further, I have to reject all solutions I come up with since I can't be trusted.

This is when we have to change our focus from solving the original problem of suffering to solving the problem that is preventing us from being able to solve the original problem. There is some underlying issue that is distorting our perception. This leads to the painstaking journey of introspection I've been talking about.

This process is the most difficult thing anyone will ever try to do. Logic and reason will never get us there. In fact, it resists the entire way. The entire thing is fueled by faith. Faith allows us to decide the problem of suffering can be solved in the here and now, and faith allows us to persist even against what the intellect says is sane, rational, and logical.

It is a lack of faith when someone doesn't accept the three conditions I've mentioned and it is a lack of faith when someone doesn't persist beyond perceived failure.

.