Belief & Overbelief

[Eko Care]

What is the definition of "Belief" and what is the definition of "Over-belief".

What is the definition of "Faith" and what is the definition of "Reasoned-faith".

How much of reason are needed for a faith to be a reasoned-faith?

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/overbelief
overbelief
noun
: belief that is not verifiable or warranted by the evidence
the overbeliefs required by the nature … of human knowledge
—H. J. Muller

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overbelief
Overbelief (also written as over-belief) is a philosophical term for a belief adopted that requires more evidence than one presently has. It is also described as a kind of metaphysical belief ascribed with the status of speculative view that exceeds available evidence or evidencing reason. Generally, acts of overbelief are justified on emotional need or faith, and a need to make sense of spiritual experience, rather than on empirical evidence. This idea originates from the works of William James in The Varieties of Religious Experience and refers to the conceptual framework that individuals have.

Here are some posts from the thread Overbelief to understand the context.

In The Varieties of Religious Experience, William James introduces the concept of an overbelief, which is a belief which exceeds the evidence of the experience giving rise to it. A person holding such a belief has read off from the experience more than it formally warrants. Examples would be a theist who prays for a sick person to recover, and then takes their recovery to be proof of God's existence; and a person who dreams of angels claiming on that basis that angels are real, and visit him/her in sleep.

"Maverick philosopher" Bill Vallicella returns to an old theme of his by applying the concept to Sam Harris's reasoning. And by extension, to some Theravadan ideas. (Note that neither he nor James claim that there is anything wrong with overbeliefs in general. Vallicella is a meditator, and broadly sympathetic to Buddhism.)

Sam Harris, you may remember, holds that the nonexistence of the self is something that one can learn from meditation. But he too, I should think, is involved in overbelief. One cannot observe the nonexistence of the self. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Harris' belief goes well beyond anything that meditation discloses. The self does not turn up among the objects of experience as a separate object. That must be granted. It doesn't follow, however, that there is no self. To get to that conclusion overbelief is necessary, along the lines of: Only that which can be singled out as an object of experience exists or is real. How justify that principle on the basis of a close inspection of experience? It is sometimes called the Principle of Acquaintance. Are we acquainted with it?

The irony shouldn't be missed. Harris, the febrile religion-basher, embraces a religious overbelief in his Buddhist rejection of the self. Buddhism is a religion.

https://williamfvallicella.substack.com ... ems?sd=pf
Is anatta, for those of us who are yet to attain enlightenment, necessarily an overbelief? Is this more of a problem for those who make the more secular claim that Buddhism is akin to science (like Harris), than it is for those who a happy with their religiosity?

I wouldn’t say so. All we can know is our experience, which is necessarily dependent. People can speculate on a self outside of that experience but that’s all it is.

In The Varieties of Religious Experience, William James introduces the concept of an overbelief, which is a belief which exceeds the evidence of the experience giving rise to it.

Isn't that what belief is? Believing in something that one doesn't have full evidence of? If one has all the evidence, then it is not a belief anymore.

[cappuccino]

Over belief is an atheist invention

[robertk]

From the Cariyaapi.taka A.t.thakathaa, A Treatise on the Paaramiis (this is in Bh. Bodhi’s Brahmajaala Sutta and its Commentaries, p. 271), regarding the perfection of patience:

The footnote by Bodhi:

“Dhammanijjhaanakkhanti. The word khanti, ordinarily used to mean patience in the sense of forbearance of the wrongs of others and the endurance of hardships, is sometimes also used to signify the intellectual acceptance of doctrines which are not yet completely clear to understanding. Patience thus becomes a virtue not only of the will but of the intellect as well. It is a ‘suspension of disbelief’ born of trust, a willingness to acquiesce in propositions baffling or even scandalous to the rational understanding in the confidence that the growth of wisdom will transform this acquiescence into clear and certain knowledge. The compound dhammanijjhaanakhanti seems to indicate an intermediate stage in the process of transformation, where the understanding can accept by way of reflection the article initially assented to in faith, without fully
grasping it by immediate insight.”

From the Sammohavinodanii:
2075.
…

Anulomika.m khanti.m (‘conformable acceptance’) and so on are all synonyms for understanding. For that is in conformity since it conforms by showing non-opposition to the five reasons for the aforesaid sphere of work and so on. Likewise, it is in conformity since it conforms with behaviour beneficial to beings, it conforms to the Truth of the Path and it conforms owing to conforming to the highest meaning, nibbaana. And it accepts (khamati), bears, is able to see all these reasons, thus it is acceptance (khanti). ‘It sees’ is di.t.thi (‘view’). ‘It chooses’ is ruci (‘choice’). ‘It perceives with the senses’ is muti (‘sensing’). ‘It observes’ is pekkho (‘observance’). And all these things (dhamma) called the five aggregates on being studied (nijjhaayamaanaa) again and again in accordance with impermanence, suffering and no-self, accept (khamanti) that study (nijjhaana); thus it is dhammanijjhaanakkhanti (‘acceptance of study things’).

[robertk]

“First it has to be seen by inference acording to the texts. Afterwards it gradually becomes to be known by personal experience when the knowledge of development gets stronger” Pm Vis. xx n.20)

[Bundokji]

A belief is an abstract form of feeling. If this premise is accepted, then overbelief and underbelief are a function of time, whereas belief itself is a function of knowledge - hence functions as a benchmark:

"Now, lady, how many kinds of feeling are there?"

"These three kinds of feeling: pleasant feeling, painful feeling, & neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling."

"What is pleasant feeling? What is painful feeling? What is neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling?"

"Whatever is experienced physically or mentally as pleasant & gratifying is pleasant feeling. Whatever is experienced physically or mentally as painful & hurting is painful feeling. Whatever is experienced physically or mentally as neither gratifying nor hurting is neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling."

"In what way is pleasant feeling pleasant, lady, and in what way painful?"

"Pleasant feeling is pleasant in remaining, & painful in changing, friend Visakha. Painful feeling is painful in remaining & pleasant in changing. Neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling is pleasant in occurring together with knowledge, and painful in occurring without knowledge."

"What obsession gets obsessed with pleasant feeling? What obsession gets obsessed with painful feeling? What obsession gets obsessed with neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling?"

"Passion-obsession gets obsessed with pleasant feeling. Resistance-obsession gets obsessed with painful feeling. Ignorance-obsession gets obsessed with neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling."

Having belief (or neither pleasant nor painful feeling) as a benchmark, and for it to endure the test of time (accusations of overbelief and underbelief) belief is obsessed with justifications and truth to become "justified true belief". Faith is a future oriented belief that the currently held believes will endure the test of time, hence faith functions as an antidote to the anxiety and dread towards the unknown/ignorance.

[Eko Care]

ACCOMPLISHMENTS

There are three siddhas (accomplishments or realizations) which are worthy to note. They are:

paccakkha siddha - accomplishment through personal experience or evidence;

anumanasiddha - accomplishment through by inference;

okappana siddha - accomplishment by faith (saddha).

Accomplishment through Personal Experience or Evidence
(Paccakkha Siddha)
An example is seeing where the four elements, namely visual element, visible object, light and attention (advertence) are involved. The simultaneous occurrence of these four elements causes seeing or eye consciousness. This is how things are apprehended by direct experiencing without any need for relevant opinion. Other examples are nama-rupa, cause-effect, anicca-dukkhaand overcoming kilesa.

Accomplishment by Inference
(Anumana Siddha)
Anumana Siddha which follows paccakkha siddha is the process of arriving at some conclusion which possesses some degree of probability relative to the premises or evidence. An example is the presumption of fire when one sees the smoke. This is a deduction based on self -evidence, not quite logical thinking, since the latter sounds theoretical. Thus, when one accomplishes by direct experiencepaccakkha siddha of the Dhamma practice, one deduces Anumana Siddha the existence and truth of the Buddha who expounded the method. Another example is the cause-effect relations. Once you realize this knowledge, you you will deduce that it also occurs in the others, that it occurred in the past and it will occur in the future as well.

Accomplishment by Faith
okappana siddha
An example is the understanding of the existence of the other worlds (paraloka), such as the apayaworld, Nibbana and others possibilities through one's own faith in the Buddha and the Sasana, although they are beyond one's reach. Such a faith is also called saddheyya siddha (trustworthy accomplishment), which is different from blind faith. Blind faith is unreasoned faith. There are many things whose existence is possible which are beyond the realm of science. These seemingly impossible things are understood as possible through faith only and not by knowledge (nana). Application of knowledge in this case would cause complication. Okappana siddha is based on paccakkha and anumana siddhas. Without paccakkha siddha, no anumana siddha will arise, hence no okappana siddha.

http://www.myanmarnet.net/nibbana/pandit11.htm

“First it has to be seen by inference acording to the texts. Afterwards it gradually becomes to be known by personal experience when the knowledge of development gets stronger” Pm Vis. xx n.20)

It is true, but it demands the belief of the text beforehand. I mean how could we validate a given belief? what kind of evidences are needed for a belief to be a reasoned-belief?
Eg: What are the Evidences and Inferences for the belief of Rebirth/Discrete-mind-moments ...etc? Are the reasoning given by many sufficient? Do we need to keep such reasons always with us?

[robertk]

It is true, but it demands the belief of the text beforehand. I mean how could we validate a given belief? what kind of evidences are needed for a belief to be a reasoned-belief?
Eg: What are the Evidences and Inferences for the belief of Rebirth/Discrete-mind-moments ...etc? Are the reasoning given by many sufficient? Do we need to keep such reasons always with us?

A great point:

na sīlabbatamattena, bāhusaccena vā pana |
atha vā samādhilābhena, vivittasayanena vā ||

phusāmi nekkhammasukhaṃ, aputhujjanasevitaṃ |
bhikkhu vissāsamāpādi, appatto āsavakkhayaṃ ||

Not merely by virtuous conduct and vows, nor, again, by much learning, nor by the attainment of samādhi, nor by sleeping in seclusion, do I attain the happiness of absence of desire, not attained by worldlings. Nor has a bhikkhu obtained assurance, as long as he has not attained the destruction of the āsavas.
(Dhp. 271-2)

Notice even bahusutta ( much learning) is included in the "not merely by.."
So no guarantee that learning will transpose into direct experience..

Yet at the same time the considering is needed:

The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya.
Book [V: 95-6] section 46: The Links. 38: Unhindered.
..
When, Bhikkhus, a Noble Disciple listens carefully to the Dhamma,
alert with keen ears,
attending to it as a matter of crucial concern, as something of vital
importance, directing
his entire mind to it, in that very moment the Five Mental Hindrances
are absent in him.
On that occasion the Seven Links to Awakening develop towards
complete fulfilment…>

So how does this confidence develop ..
I wrote to Sam Vara a while back :

This Dhamma is not easily realized
by those overcome
with aversion & passion.
What is abstruse, subtle,
deep,
hard to see,
going against the flow —
those delighting in passion,
cloaked in the mass of darkness,
won't see.

That pretty much describes me (delighting in passion, cloaked in the mass of darkness), so I have no issue with seeing the path as being rather narrow and only clear to those with sufficient parami.

On the possibility of barking up the wrong tree: a perennial problem for all spiritual adventurers, I think.

Venerable Sunnakhata was the Buddha's attendant before Ananda. He listened to Dhamma and attained
Jhana, even to the degree of having special powers of hearing.
But he eventually left the Buddha, spoke badly of the Dhamma, and followed ascetics who used to live a life of severe ascetism, copying dogs(dog-duty ascetics). Why, when he had all this going for him? The commentary says that this man had lived many consecutive past lives as an ascetic and had these tendencies. Even the Buddha's teaching couldn't overcome them.
And so we see how dependent past factors are in conditioning behaviour. Of course Sunnakhata made choices, he had conventional volitional control over what he did but what he couldn't see was that ditthi (wrong view)and lobha were underlying all his choices.

My fairly surface level reasons for confidence in the teaching of the Elders are 1: it all makes perfect sense to how the world appears to me;
2. it seems to all come from an incredible wisdom, much more sublime and detailed than all the other paths I have heard of.
Are there deeper reasons - like accumulations from past lives that make one lean towards say Abhidhamma rather than Tibetan Tulkus. Yes that fits in with the teaching and makes sense to me too, although I have no way of really knowing that(but it does explain a lot).

Yet I think it can't be stressed enough how subtle the path is. Wrong view masquerades as right view and it comes with attachment that can be mistaken for the confidence that is associated with right view.

Now, 2023, is not so long after the Buddha's parinibbana but wrong ideas and practices keep increasing..

Regarding the comment about "Rebirth/Discrete-mind-moments ...etc? Are the reasoning given by many sufficient? Do we need to keep such reasons always with us".
We read, listen, consider, discuss, and critically, see - as much as conditions allow - how this is happening in daily life.

Seeing - does it arise and pass away. Is sound different from seeing? Can pleasant feeling arise at the same moment as unpleasant feeling?
We start to understand that the Abhidhamma is not just theory - it really focusses the mind on the very nature of the world- and so there begin to be glimpses into the world that underlies the conceptual world we are used to.

There can be growing understanding that realities must arise with the right conditions, and so the idea that upon death everything ceases despite one being full of ignorance and craving - the view of the materialists- is dismissed easily.

On the other hand trying hard to have confidence and understanding doesn't work, that is subtle attachment wanting some result that can be held up as proof.

[Eko Care]

Requoting what caught my attention more.

nor by the attainment of samādhi, nor by sleeping in seclusion, ..
(Dhp. 271-2)

When, Bhikkhus, a Noble Disciple listens carefully to the Dhamma, .., in that very moment the Five Mental Hindrances
are absent in him.On that occasion the Seven Links to Awakening develop towards complete fulfilment…>

So how does this confidence develop ..

This Dhamma is not easily realized by those overcome with aversion & passion.

Venerable Sunnakhata .. had lived many consecutive past lives as an ascetic and had these tendencies. Even the Buddha's teaching couldn't overcome them. And so we see how dependent past factors are in conditioning behaviour. Of course Sunnakhata made choices, he had conventional volitional control over what he did but what he couldn't see was that ditthi (wrong view)and lobha were underlying all his choices.

My fairly surface level reasons for confidence in the teaching of the Elders are
1: it all makes perfect sense to how the world appears to me;
2. it seems to all come from an incredible wisdom, much more sublime and detailed than all the other paths I have heard of.

Are there deeper reasons - like accumulations from past lives that make one lean towards say Abhidhamma rather than Tibetan Tulkus. Yes that fits in with the teaching and makes sense to me too, although I have no way of really knowing that (but it does explain a lot).

Yet I think it can't be stressed enough how subtle the path is. Wrong view masquerades as right view and it comes with attachment that can be mistaken for the confidence that is associated with right view.

We read, listen, consider, discuss, and critically, see - as much as conditions allow - how this is happening in daily life.

We start to understand that the Abhidhamma is not just theory - it really focusses the mind on the very nature of the world- and so there begin to be glimpses into the world that underlies the conceptual world we are used to.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There can be growing understanding that realities must arise with the right conditions, and so the idea that upon death everything ceases despite one being full of ignorance and craving - the view of the materialists- is dismissed easily.

On the other hand trying hard to have confidence and understanding doesn't work, that is subtle attachment wanting some result that can be held up as proof.

We can understand that realities must arise with conditions, but how do we be sure about one of the condition being Kamma?
How do we see "conditions for these realities are definitely Kamma/Avijja/Tanha"?
What are the reasons to believe it?

[robertk]

We can understand that realities must arise with conditions, but how do we be sure about one of the condition being Kamma?
How do we see "conditions for these realities are definitely Kamma/Avijja/Tanha"?
What are the reasons to believe it?

For example by learning the details of the Abhidhamma it becomes clearer what the jatis (akusala, kusala, vipāka, kiriyā) are as they arise in daily life.
Cakkhu vinnana - seeing consciousness - is vipaka jati. It can be known , to some degree , how this appears and that it is different from the akusala and kusala moments that follow.
The vipaka is the result of kamma (so the Dhamma says) and it appears, if there is attention to it, passive compared to the other jatis. Yet there must be a reason for it to arise ..
So pure chance or some overlord making things arise looks more and more unlikely.

Only wisdom in conjunction with sati can truly understand these matters and that takes time to develop. Yet when there is reflection on these matters it is quite possible that this is associated with wisdom (at least some of the time). And that is wearing away, just a little, the wrong view. Khanti is the highest tapas.
see the quote earlier:

“Dhammanijjhaanakkhanti. The word khanti, ordinarily used to mean patience in the sense of forbearance of the wrongs of others and the endurance of hardships, is sometimes also used to signify the intellectual acceptance of doctrines which are not yet completely clear to understanding. Patience thus becomes a virtue not only of the will but of the intellect as well. It is a ‘suspension of disbelief’ born of trust, a willingness to acquiesce in propositions baffling or even scandalous to the rational understanding in the confidence that the growth of wisdom will transform this acquiescence into clear and certain knowledge. The compound dhammanijjhaanakhanti seems to indicate an intermediate stage in the process of transformation, where the understanding can accept by way of reflection the article initially assented to in faith, without fully
grasping it by immediate insight.

[Eko Care]

For example by learning the details of the Abhidhamma it becomes clearer what the jatis (akusala, kusala, vipāka, kiriyā) are as they arise in daily life.
Cakkhu vinnana - seeing consciousness - is vipaka jati. It can be known , to some degree , how this appears and that it is different from the akusala and kusala moments that follow.
The vipaka is the result of kamma (so the Dhamma says) and it appears, if there is attention to it, passive compared to the other jatis. Yet there must be a reason for it to arise ..
So pure chance or some overlord making things arise looks more and more unlikely.

I have heard even Venerable Maggavihari teaches that,
if one passed Ditthi-vidusshi and began analysing causes of Khandas recommended for Khankavitarana-visuddhi,
then there will be a time where the meditator understands "definitely there are past and future lives"
(not by faith but by inferential-wisdom).
And he says it will be the Khankavitarana-visuddhi and the meditator becomes Culla-sotapanna.