heretic888
Senior Master
Hey there, heretic. Point taken - it is true that the Fathers and Mothers of the Church, saints, and so forth, did have direct experiences. (I'm speaking from an Eastern Orthodox point of view.) My generalization should be applied, perhaps, to the remainder of believers - those who believe because of someone else's experience.
Yes, this is one of the general understandings in Buddhism, as well --- that the student is to have faith in the teachings and experiences of his or her predecessors and teachers. Of course, one is to balance this with a healthy dose of skepticism (something I see all-to-lacking in most, but not all, of the Judeo-Christian religious strands). There seems to be an understanding of balancing between what you might call "blind faith" (in which you unquestioningly accept whatever you are told) and "blind cynicism" (in which you unquestioningly reject or deny whatever you are told). The Middle Way, I suppose.
Come to think of it, that kind of attitude seems to have many parallels in martial arts study as well, neh?? :asian:
Of course, as I pointed out above, there are ways to somewhat "scientifically" confirm the experiences and insights of one's predecessors --- namely, through communal checking and so forth (of those that have completed the actual injunctions, not just anybody that feels like passing judgment). But ultimately, when this is bereft of personal experience and observation, then it all comes down to faith (to a degree) --- as all good science does.
But, as before, faith isn't always blind.
But each person DOES have a personal experience with their faith.
I think each person has experiences of some variety, that they then use to justify or validate their beliefs --- and this is not just limited to religion. I'm not so sure that all, or even most, of these experiences are anything even vaguely similar to the accounts of the saintly exemplars I listed above.
I think, perhaps, a leap of faith (along with my own personal experiences) must be taken for someone like myself - who tries to live in both worlds (which is really one world), of Religion and Science.
Well, when we are lacking direct personal observation or experience of a phenomena, then there is always an element of "faith" involved. This goes for science, as well. This isn't a bad thing, its just part of the limitations of human knowledge.
This is why, namely, there is such an emphasis on communal checking, fallibilism, and so forth within the scientific method --- so that personal observations can be put to the test of those that have also completed the proper injunctions or exemplars (i.e., if you want to know microbiology, you have to look through the microscope --- if you want to know the Divine, you have to meditate). That is also why there is an emphasis on communal validation within the contemplative traditions, as well.
Both blind faith and blind cynicism are unhealthy options that we wish to avoid.
Laterz.