Instructions and other input from others, for example.mikenz66 wrote:It's not a philosophical statement, it's a practical statement.binocular wrote:But this is just a step away from solipsism!mikenz66 wrote:I agree with Chownah and Reflection that all we have to work with is our experience
What do you propose to work with (in a Dhamma sense), if not your experiences?
When one's own experience seems unreliable, insufficient or otherwise troublesome, one asks admirable people for input, and trusts them, even if what they say seems to go against one's own experience.
Solipsism is the refuge of madmen.mikenz66 wrote:And I don't think that such philosophical analysis is central to the point of the Buddha's teachings.
I don't think the Buddha was suggesting solipsism.
To think that Buddhism is essentially solipsistic - then what about all that about the importance of admirable friendship and us being dependent on the teachings of the Buddha for our enlightenment??
"Proof" exists only in an interpersonal context, directly or indirectly interpersonal.manas wrote:But every one of us can prove beyond a doubt, the reality of dukkha in our lives, and the solution to that problem is more important and pressing than the former.
Directly, in that we prove something to another person; indirectly in that we prove something on terms agreed upon by a particular community.