[Buddha-l] Re: Where does authority for "true" Buddhism come from?

[Joy Vriens]

Jim Peavler wrote:

> Follow the path, follow the precepts, to reduce dukkha. Belief, not  
> possible for many of us to maintain, does not have anything to do  with 
> it.

I was just popping in to pick up something I left on a table, while I 
overheard your conversation.

"Not anything" is perhaps a bit strong. Why would one follow *a path* 
and precepts to reduce dukkha if one doesn't believe in it? The shortest 
way or path to reduce dukkha would be to simply reduce dukkha, mainly 
through developping detachment. But it seems to me that the path and 
precepts that one is to follow contain many elements that don't seem 
directly or obviously connected to achieve just that. I believe that 
everything we do or intent to do is motivated by beliefs. As far as I 
can see it's all about suggestion and autosuggestion and some need 
apparently more roundabout ways to convince themselves of whatever they 
want themselves to convince of then others.

> That which must be believed with no evidence other than a  written 
> authority, no matter how old or how authoritative, cannot be  part of 
> the equation for people like me.

What is evidence for some is belief for others. I suppose it depends on 
where one's priorities lie. Much of the "evidence" that makes the world 
go round these days is called statistics. Figures have never done much 
for me.

> You on the other hand, have the ability and the need to believe in  the 
> literal texts that you consider authoritative. There is no way we  can 
> meet halfway.

It depends on what effect the "absence of beliefs" of the anti-belief 
faction and the literal interpretation of selectively picked texts of 
the authority junkies have on them and how they act on it.

Joy