Faith-based against evidence-based

[robertk]

Pesala: The Puggalapaññati describes four kinds of individuals:

1.Those who can attain realisation after a brief discourse
2.Those who can attain realisation after a detailed discourse
3.Those who can attain realisation after training
4.Those who cannot attain realisation in this existence, but only in a future existence

the full translation is below:
What sort of person is quick in acquiring (ugghaṭitaññū)?
The person for whom there is penetration of the Dhamma at the very time when it is being taught is called “quick in acquiring.”

What sort of person is one who learns by means of a detailed exposition (vipañcitaññū)?
The person for whom there is penetration of the Dhamma when the meaning of what has been taught in brief is later analysed in detail is called “one who learns by means of a detailed exposition.”

What sort of person is one who may be guided (neyya)?
The person for whom penetration of the Dhamma comes gradually by means of recitation, questioning, proper attention, and by serving, cultivating and waiting upon kalyānamittas is called “one who may be guided.”

What sort of person is one for whom the letter alone is the highest thing (padaparama)?
The person for whom penetration of the Dhamma will not come in this life, however much [of the Teaching] he may hear and speak and bear in mind or recite, is called to be “one for whom the letter alone is the highest thing.”
(Puggalapaññatti 41-2; Designation of Human Types 58)

[Matteo1972]

Disrobing is not the same as converting to another religion or losing faith in the Buddha's teachings. In my experience, most monks who disrobed did so due to sexual desire. Some of them became successful lay meditation teachers.

And why they chose to be married and have a family if they gained insight in the high teachings of Buddha?
This would not make much sense if things were as you said.
One person would definitely go for the teachings of Buddha were he sure he got the right teachings

One must practice the right method to gain insight. Tranquillity meditation on it's own will not be effective. One must practice insight meditation (vipassanā), after developing at least purification of mind (freedom from the five hindrance, of which doubt is a major obstacle).

If you are talking about the purification of the mind, someone above said it takes a few days, a few weeks at best.
So why now is it called a major obstacle.

Most temporary monks in Thailand are just "making merit" — a few may practice meditation, but again, if they do, they must practice the correct method and must be diligent.

I thought you were "making merit" by practicing the correct meditation.
Is there any other way to make merit?
And is there any incorrect method out there? (there must be one since you speak about a correct one)
And how can we understand which is the correct method from the incorrect one?

Again, disrobing after a few months, or a few years, or after many years, is not any indication of having lost faith in the practice. I know a nun who practised for 100 days as a temporary nun, and then disrobed to run her family business. She may well have been a Stream-winner. There are many reasons that monastics disrobe, the most unlikely of which is losing faith in the Dhamma.

Why would someone disrobed after having entered the Stream to run a business is beyond me.
Should not be enlightened the highest goal of every being?

There cannot be many. Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Sikhism,all believe in the soul and Almighty God. I am not sure about what Judaism believes.

Well..
Jainism does not support belief in a creator deity. According to Jain doctrine, the universe and its constituents - soul, matter, space, time, and principles of motion have always existed (a static universe similar to that of Epicureanism and steady state cosmological model). All the constituents and actions are governed by universal natural laws. It is not possible to create matter out of nothing and hence the sum total of matter in the universe remains the same (similar to law of conservation of mass). Similarly, the soul of each living being is unique and uncreated and has existed since beginningless time
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creator_deity

You practised Zen Buddhism for 10 years, and apparently gained no insight. Prof Williams taught about a corrupt form of Buddhism for 20 years, and converted to Catholicism. We don't know what kind of meditation he practised, if any.

On which grounds you claim that his version of Buddhism is corrupt while yours, apparently, is not?

Doubt is a tricky defilement to overcome. One needs a good teacher, but also the student needs to be honest and hard-working. I don't accept your assumption that it is not realistically possible to attain realisation in this very life. It is impossible for some people, difficult for most, and easy for a few. The Puggalapaññati describes four kinds of individuals:

1. Those who can attain realisation after a brief discourse
2. Those who can attain realisation after a detailed discourse
3. Those who can attain realisation after training
4. Those who cannot attain realisation in this existence, but only in a future existence

A widely held belief is that only the latter two kinds are found in the world now. The mentally ill fall into the fourth category, and those who hold pernicious wrong views. I think most of us fall into the third category. So, it's only a matter of learning the right method, and obtaining the right training.

If things were as you say, with 300000 practicing monks in Thailand we would have literally thousands of Enlightened beings.
Still, hardly we come to hear about one or two..
Statistically, this does not make sense.
Dont you believe ?

Pessimism never makes any sense. If you think you're hopeless, then you are.

Realistically, most athletes cannot expect to win an Olympic medal. Many, may not realistically expect to reach the Final, so they would be hopeless of winning any medal, let alone a gold one. Nevertheless, they compete in the hope of gaining some kind of medal in the future. Other lesser athletes compete just for the fun of it, or the benefits of health and well-being that they obtain on a daily basis.

So we are talking about having one Buddha every four years?
Winning the gold at the Olympics is tremendously difficult, so you are more or less telling me that it would be impossible for me and you to win a Gold.
Do you expect that the average 12-year-old will win the Gold at the Olympics, even if he/she trains incredibly hard?
And still, even with one "winner" every four years, we should know that at least there are 10-12 alive by today.
Do you know the name of any of them?

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

And why they chose to be married and have a family if they gained insight in the high teachings of Buddha?

The Buddha's teaching is not only for monks and nuns. Lay people can also attain realisation and liberation from suffering.

If you are talking about the purification of the mind, someone above said it takes a few days, a few weeks at best. So why now is it called a major obstacle.

I was not talking about purification of mind. I said that doubt is a major obstacle.

I thought you were "making merit" by practicing the correct meditation. Is there any other way to make merit?

The traditional belief is that one can "make merit" just by living as a monk. I don't subscribe to this view. By just wearing the robes, but not fulfilling the monks' training, one might well make more demerit than merit.

And is there any incorrect method out there? (there must be one since you speak about a correct one) And how can we understand which is the correct method from the incorrect one?

One can understand the correct method first by studying and questioning learned monks and meditation teachers, then by practising it oneself according to the instructions given.

Why would someone disrobed after having entered the Stream to run a business is beyond me. Should not be enlightened the highest goal of every being?

Arahantship is the highest goal. Stream-winners still have sensual desire, but they are free from sceptical doubt and immorality.

On which grounds you claim that his version of Buddhism is corrupt while yours, apparently, is not?

On the basis of over thirty years of study and practice.

If things were as you say, with 300000 practicing monks in Thailand we would have literally thousands of Enlightened beings.

Many monks are just Buddhist priests performing rites and rituals. You won't hear about most monks who have attained the various stages of the path. It's an offence for a monk to tell a lay person about such attainments. What you do hear about is just hearsay and faith-based opinions — devotees and disciples of monks may be right or wrong about their revered teachers. It is hard to know the mind of others.

So we are talking about having one Buddha every four years?

No. We are talking about confidence based on personal experience (saddhā) being an essential requirement before one can strive to attain insight.

[Matteo1972]

I do not want to look as pedantic, but..

The Buddha's teaching is not only for monks and nuns. Lay people can also attain realisation and liberation from suffering.

I was thinking that reaching Nirvana, if this is what you mean, is already so much difficult for monks and nuns that a person seriously interested should become monk.
Now, if they have achieved some insight and appreciated it, why then they would like to go back as layman?

I was not talking about purification of mind. I said that doubt is a major obstacle.

Oh OK
But if doubt is a major obstacle and it is part of the five hindrance (purification of the mind), is not it like saying that is it difficult of getting purification of the mind?
And then it is not a few days or weeks achievement
Or maybe I am not really understanding

The traditional belief is that one can "make merit" just by living as a monk. I don't subscribe to this view. By just wearing the robes, but not fulfilling the monks' training, one might well make more demerit than merit.

But the traditional belief must be shared by a lot of people in Thailand, including the monks and head monks who host laymen in the temples.
Then how comes that they are wrong?

One can understand the correct method first by studying and questioning learned monks and meditation teachers, then by practising it oneself according to the instructions given.

If you talk about "correct" method, I assume you also think there are incorrect ones.
So how can we find out if the method I receive is correct or not.
How can I know if a monk is learned or not.
How can I know if the instruction I get are good or not

Arahantship is the highest goal. Stream-winners still have sensual desire, but they are free from sceptical doubt and immorality.

Maybe that is the highest goal, but still be a stream winner should be an important milestone
Then why such people who have reached this important milestone decide to get back to a family business?

On the basis of over thirty years of study and practice.

I am not questioning if your 30 years of practice are worth more or less than his 20 years of study
But on which basis should I believe you instead of him?

Many monks are just Buddhist priests performing rites and rituals. You won't hear about most monks who have attained the various stages of the path. It's an offence for a monk to tell a lay person about such attainments. What you do hear about is just hearsay and faith-based opinions — devotees and disciples of monks may be right or wrong about their revered teachers. It is hard to know the mind of others.

Then if it is difficult to know the mind of others, how can we know that they are enlightened at all?
I mean, how can we know that there is someone enlightened at all?
And if such attainments are genuine, why is it an offence to tell anyone?
If we wont hear about monks who have reached stages of the path and if they wont tell you, then how can we know if there is anymonk who has reached any stage of the path at all?

No. We are talking about confidence based on personal experience (saddhā) being an essential requirement before one can strive to attain insight.

Yes, but if there are very very very very few monks who attain the highest grade of Enlightenment and they will not even tell you, what would this "personal experience" based on?
Unless you are close to Nirvana yourself

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

I was thinking that reaching Nirvana, if this is what you mean, is already so much difficult for monks and nuns that a person seriously interested should become monk.
Now, if they have achieved some insight and appreciated it, why then they would like to go back as layman?

They might be the main bread-winner for the family, or just not wishing to chose the vocation of a monk or nun.

But if doubt is a major obstacle and it is part of the five hindrance (purification of the mind), is not it like saying that is it difficult of getting purification of the mind?

No. It's not difficult. Anyone could attain it in a few days or weeks.

Or maybe I am not really understanding

There's a lot to be understood.

But the traditional belief must be shared by a lot of people in Thailand, including the monks and head monks who host laymen in the temples. Then how comes that they are wrong?

Because they don't make a proper inquiry. It's far easier to follow a traditional belief than to attain genuine knowledge and insight. The Bodhisatta also had to abandon the traditional practices (self-mortification) that did not lead to Enlightenment to discover the right path.

So how can we find out if the method I receive is correct or not. How can I know if a monk is learned or not. How can I know if the instruction I get are good or not?

A teacher's reputation and learning can only go so far, one has to test out the instructions for oneself to see if they work. Some may live with an Enlightened teacher for years, but still not understand how to practice what he's teaching. Still, they should be learning something useful at least.

Maybe that is the highest goal, but still be a stream winner should be an important milestone. Then why such people who have reached this important milestone decide to get back to a family business?

Yes. It's an important milestone, but there are many reasons why some might return to lay-life. Even more so for those who have only attained the lower stages of insight. The monastic life is hard to live properly.

I am not questioning if your 30 years of practice are worth more or less than his 20 years of study. But on which basis should I believe you instead of him?

Well, I haven't converted to Catholicism yet

You must do your own research. Don't take anyone's word at face value. Test it through your own study and practice.

Then if it is difficult to know the mind of others, how can we know that they are enlightened at all? I mean, how can we know that there is someone enlightened at all?
And if such attainments are genuine, why is it an offence to tell anyone?

Even if you did know, how would it help you? Your task is to remove your own defilements, not to admire someone else who removed their's.

Yes, but if there are very very very very few monks who attain the highest grade of Enlightenment and they will not even tell you, what would this "personal experience" based on? Unless you are close to Nirvana yourself

Long before nibbāna is reached, one can know for oneself by direct personal experience that when one lets go of craving for something, then suffering ceases. We call that momentary nibbāna (tadaṅgha nibbāna). If one grasps onto something again, one can know from direct personal experience that suffering starts all over again.

Do you need to drink the entire ocean to know that it's salty? I am sure you have lived long enough to know that sensual pleasures give very little satisfaction, and cause much grief, disappointment, and despair. How much longer do you need to pursue pleasure before you realise that renunciation of the pursuit of pleasure is a superior path to follow?

[kc2dpt]

which point do we have that the teachings of Buddha actually bring you anywhere important?

You try something out and see where it leads. That's it. That's what "evidence-based" means. But I suspect you know this already.

Yes, you can get some peace, yes, you can get same good feelings, but you can get peace also by stopping to drink and you can get good feelings by making a family.

If you continue to examine first hand these different types of peace, you might start to see what's different between them. You might even see how one type leads to more peace and the other type leads to more stress. Or you may not. The Buddha's teachings relate to you what the Buddha found and what some of his followers found. You may (or may not) find the same things when you look for yourself.

If in fact you even want to look for yourself. You may not want to try. It's entirely your call.

What about Enlightenment and what is it about?

It is the logical result of ending the causes of stress. If there is stress, and if there is a cause for stress, and if the cause of stress is removed, then stress ends. The Buddha said he conducted this experiment and it held true to the end. You have no way of knowing if this is true other than faith or by conducting it yourself and seeing the evidence.

You can also see evidence in observing other people. If I have a headache and you have a headache and I see you take aspirin and I see you appear to feel better then I will be more inclined to swallow that pill. I found Buddhism an interesting intellectual pursuit for many years. Then one day I happened to meet a monk. I was very impressed by his demeanor and I took it as evidence that maybe there was value in pursuing Buddhism as more than just intellectual fun. That meeting is what started me on becoming a actual follower of the Buddha's teachings. I have since met other people who have provided more evidence. Their headache seems to be much less than mine and so I am willing to swallow the pill.

Though it seems to me there's always a little bit of faith and a little bit of evidence in any observation. I have faith the other person is not deceiving me. I have faith his physiology works similar to my own. I have faith we were both handed the same pill. Etc. I find it helpful in these discussions of "faith" and "evidence" to recognize the faith which is present in eery decision we make.

Anyway, I hope this is helpful.

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

I think I said enough already. I am going to let go of this thread now, and leave you to do your own research. Follow the links in my signature to learn about insight meditation, and how to attain liberation In This Very Life if that's what you sincerely desire.

[Matteo1972]

They might be the main bread-winner for the family, or just not wishing to chose the vocation of a monk or nun.

Why they would not chose to become a munk/nun if they have appreciated the first steps of enlightenment?

No. It's not difficult. Anyone could attain it in a few days or weeks.

Do you have any good temples to go to in Thai?
I am planning to ahve a two-week visit there soon and I am looking for temples for English speakers.

Because they don't make a proper inquiry. It's far easier to follow a traditional belief than to attain genuine knowledge and insight. The Bodhisatta also had to abandon the traditional practices (self-mortification) that did not lead to Enlightenment to discover the right path.

So you mean that a good part of the followers of Buddhism in Thailand are on the wrong path?
Or that they are not genuinely interested in Buddhism?

Quite a bold claim

Yes. It's an important milestone, but there are many reasons why some might return to lay-life. Even more so for those who have only attained the lower stages of insight. The monastic life is hard to live properly.

I would cut both my legs and my arms if I were sure that I could get the stream enter
Strange that people decide to go back to daily life just as monastic life is "hard".

Well, I haven't converted to Catholicism yet

Well, I cant blame him if he has chosen this path.
But on which ground is his path "wrong" and yours "right"?
What point have you reached after 30 years of study and practice that makes you believe you are on the right track
If I can ask

You must do your own research. Don't take anyone's word at face value. Test it through your own study and practice.

This is what I am trying to do.
I came here to listen

Even if you did know, how would it help you? Your task is to remove your own defilements, not to admire someone else who removed their's.

I was not speaking about whom to admire, but since you have told me that many people are not on the right path, or genuinely looking for the truth, at least I would know to whom I have to listen

Long before nibbāna is reached, one can know for oneself by direct personal experience that when one lets go of craving for something, then suffering ceases.

In my experience, many times suffering ceased when I hold on, not when I let go.

We call that momentary nibbāna (tadaṅgha nibbāna). If one grasps onto something again, one can know from direct personal experience that suffering starts all over again.

Do you need to drink the entire ocean to know that it's salty? I am sure you have lived long enough to know that sensual pleasures give very little satisfaction, and cause much grief, disappointment, and despair.

I would say that the *lack of* sensual pleasures many times gives cause of despair

How much longer do you need to pursue pleasure before you realise that renunciation of the pursuit of pleasure is a superior path to follow?

[/quote][/quote]

I do not agree with you.
I am old enough to know that it works both ways.
Sometimes renunciation is good, sometimes is bad.
I have heard many people, and Catholics also say the same: "renunciation of the pursuit of pleasure is a superior path to follow?"
Why should anyone believe you instead of them?

[Matteo1972]

I think I said enough already. I am going to let go of this thread now, and leave you to do your own research. Follow the links in my signature to learn about insight meditation, and how to attain liberation In This Very Life if that's what you sincerely desire.

OK will certainly do that.

Thanks

[kc2dpt]

I am not questioning if your 30 years of practice are worth more or less than his 20 years of study
But on which basis should I believe you instead of him?

There is a discourse in which the Buddha says one can observe a person, see whether what they say and do seems to come from greed, hatred, or delusion or seems to come from an absence of greed, hatred, and delusion. Then one may develop conviction in that other person and listen to what they have to teach. Then they may put what they have learned into practice and see for themselves where it leads. That's the best we get. No guarantees.

You say you've heard about a man who studied for a time and rejected Buddhism and now you've heard of a man who practiced for a time and rejects the claims of the first man. And you are confused. That's because you haven't actually looked into anything. If you looked into what both these men teach, and looked into other teachers with good reputation as well, then you might be in a better place to form an opinion. There's no easy way to conviction.

If we wont hear about monks who have reached stages of the path and if they wont tell you, then how can we know if there is anymonk who has reached any stage of the path at all?

I think you already know the foolishness of this question. If someone came up to you and said he was enlightened then wouldn't your reply be "Why should I have faith that what you say is true? Where's the evidence?" In the same post you ask why you should believe something Ven. Pesala says and then ask why monks don't come out and say they are enlightened. C'mon, you see the humor in that, right?

[santa100]

Matteo1972 wrote:

Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:In Buddhism, faith (saddhā) is better translated as "Confidence based on knowledge."

If anyone who is neither devious nor mentally ill, really practices insight meditation sincerely and diligently for a few days or a few weeks they should be able to attain the stage of Purification by Overcoming Doubt

I do not think this is the case.
There are many monks who practiced for years and then disrobed.
How come they did not get to even this early stage?

But first you'll need to present any real evidence that those monks who "practiced for years" and then disrobed did in fact: "REALLY practices insight meditation sincerely and diligently for a few days or a few weeks". By the way, Ven. Pesala did not just make this stuff up. It's right from the Buddha's teaching in MN 10 ( http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html ):

Now, if anyone would develop these four frames of reference in this way for seven years, one of two fruits can be expected for him: either gnosis right here & now, or — if there be any remnant of clinging/sustenance — non-return.

"Let alone seven years. If anyone would develop these four frames of reference in this way for six years... five... four... three... two years... one year... seven months... six months... five... four... three... two months... one month... half a month, one of two fruits can be expected for him: either gnosis right here & now, or — if there be any remnant of clinging/sustenance — non-return.

"Let alone half a month. If anyone would develop these four frames of reference in this way for seven days, one of two fruits can be expected for him: either gnosis right here & now, or — if there be any remnant of clinging/sustenance — non-return

Matteo1972 wrote:Why would someone disrobed after having entered the Stream to run a business is beyond me.

You might want to get Bhikkhu Bodhi's "In the Buddha's Words" to get the exact definition of the Four Fruits. Real brief, a Stream Enterer (the first of the Four Fruits) only destroyed the first 3 lower fetters (IdentityView, Doubt, and Wrong Grasp of rules/observances). S/he has NOT destroyed Sensual Lust nor Ill Will, thus it's perfectly legit for a Stream Enter to still get involved with lay stuff like businesses and married life..

[Matteo1972]

You try something out and see where it leads. That's it. That's what "evidence-based" means. But I suspect you know this already.

Tried Catholicism, Zen so far.
I am already half way from birth to death
I wont have time to try all the different flavours of Buddhism for long time

If you continue to examine first hand these different types of peace, you might start to see what's different between them. You might even see how one type leads to more peace and the other type leads to more stress. Or you may not. The Buddha's teachings relate to you what the Buddha found and what some of his followers found. You may (or may not) find the same things when you look for yourself.

Mm..

If in fact you even want to look for yourself. You may not want to try. It's entirely your call.

OK..

It is the logical result of ending the causes of stress. If there is stress, and if there is a cause for stress, and if the cause of stress is removed, then stress ends. The Buddha said he conducted this experiment and it held true to the end. You have no way of knowing if this is true other than faith or by conducting it yourself and seeing the evidence.

Yes, save for the fact that according to many only few few people will be able to see any strong evidence at all
Strong evidence = Nirvana or close to it

You can also see evidence in observing other people. If I have a headache and you have a headache and I see you take aspirin and I see you appear to feel better then I will be more inclined to swallow that pill. I found Buddhism an interesting intellectual pursuit for many years. Then one day I happened to meet a monk. I was very impressed by his demeanor and I took it as evidence that maybe there was value in pursuing Buddhism as more than just intellectual fun. That meeting is what started me on becoming a actual follower of the Buddha's teachings. I have since met other people who have provided more evidence. Their headache seems to be much less than mine and so I am willing to swallow the pill.

I also observed a few monks and I noted anything special
Then someone told me that the layman can not guess if a monk is enlightened or not.

Though it seems to me there's always a little bit of faith and a little bit of evidence in any observation. I have faith the other person is not deceiving me. I have faith his physiology works similar to my own. I have faith we were both handed the same pill. Etc. I find it helpful in these discussions of "faith" and "evidence" to recognize the faith which is present in eery decision we make.

Anyway, I hope this is helpful.

I have faith, but faith in whom since 100 people say 100 different things
Why not faith in Prof. Williams?

[kc2dpt]

according to many only few few people will be able to see any strong evidence at all
Strong evidence = Nirvana or close to it

Well then it seems you've backed yourself into a corner. You won't do the work without evidence, the only evidence you'll accept is "Nirvana or close to it", it is highly unlikely you'll experience "Nirvana or close to it" in yourself without doing the work, and it is highly unlikely you'll be able to know if anyone else has experienced "Nirvana or close to it" since they won't tell you and you can't read minds.

There is evidence long before "Nibbana or close to it". This has already been said to you in this thread by others but you don't seem interested in discussing what this means. again

faith in whom since 100 people say 100 different things
Why not faith in Prof. Williams?

Any answer I give you will be met with the same response you gave Ven. Pesala - why believe what I say? You should realize that since you do not have conviction in any teacher then you cannot simply ask a teacher for an answer. You need to do the work yourself. Read what Prof. Williams has written, read what Ven. Pesala has written, read what 100 people have written and get a better sense of what is what. It took me a long time of reading before I got a sense of what the Buddha taught. And of course I may have it all wrong!


Some people do not ever get the opportunity to hear the Buddha's teachings.
Some people hear the teachings but do not develop conviction in those teachings.
Some people hear the teachings, develop conviction in those teachings, but their practice does not bear fruit.
Some people hear the teachings, develop conviction in those teachings, and their practice bears fruit.

That's just the way life is.

[dude_different]

To me you seem to be religious. I have never understood this human type. I have never been religious, yet here i am on a theravada forum. That should tell you something. To be honest there are tons of texts in the Theravada Canon of which i find no resonance. There are also texts of which i find to make no sense - infact, i suspect they are forgeries. I'm not the only one. There are also texts which i think contradict other texts... But still, i have stuck to the Canon and not dug into the hundreds of contemporary texts on Buddhism that claims that buddhism is this or that. Why have i shunned these texts/books? Because how am i supposed to know that what the author talks about is really Buddhism as told by the Buddha? There is no way... Like another in this thread for me Buddhism and the Tipitaka were only an intellectual interest for many years. However, it was when i started doing sati that i got direct experience of the truth the Buddha talks about. His notions of no-self, impermanence etc etc. These insights have direct effects on my life right now. The world to me now, is much brighter and real than it has ever been so i know that what i have experienced is real.

Now, the Buddha said 2600 years ago that the path was hard... Well, it's even harder now. Sorry for being so blunt, but atleast then, they had the Buddha and the over 500 arahants to expound the teachings... Now what we have is basically this: Faux Buddhism in most of the world... All these different lineages, Mahayana, etc etc that are very far removed from the original teachings and "our" language/culture. As if this wasn't enough, the original texts are hard to understand immediately. The translators use made-up words and strange new ones to explain pali terms that have no equivalent in english(or as is the case i suspect in most cases: the translator cannot find the right ones...). So what are you to do? Well you have to be a scholar, a thinker, a freethinker... And one who regularly observes the world(you included in "world") and how things arise... Just do it now.. Just try to remember how this moment came to be the exact way it is now.. If you do this enough times you will build up knowledge about how the world is after a while, and you won't be separate from it. Infact, youll see there can be no "you" in the first place... No independent self. No controlling self. No doing self...

But you will never find this, because you are religious... You are not interested in the truth, you are only interested in having a crutch.

[m0rl0ck]

Hi matteo,

I beleive in less now than when i started sitting about 20 years ago. I dont know a thing about what enlightenment really is or what it means.
If you have experience with prayer and meditation you already know whats important. When you practice dont sit there as if were waiting for a bus, dont look either forward or back, dont wait for satori thats a sure way to avoid it.
Find a teacher, zen if thats what you started with and you are comfortable with it and let him know your disappointments and ask for a next step. If you continue to practice without expectation i think your questions may become less urgent.
So dont beleive in anything if thats what you like, but continue to practice, you will suffer less and those around you will be happier too.