Wisdom Eccentrics

by Ngakpa Chögyam

The Buddhism I’ve studied and practised doesn’t require beliefs – it requires openness. The alternative to belief does not have to be active disbelief. In terms of Buddhism – you either know or you don’t know. If you’ve practised enough, you will know what holds true in your own experience – and will therefore have no need of belief or disbelief. Knowing what holds true – you can then view the realm of what you don’t know as a good working hypothesis. That’s been my approach all along – and it’s worked well for me. I’ve therefore not vacillated in my relationship to Dharma. Show me a yeti and I’ll believe in yetis. If you can’t show me a yeti, I won’t know either way – but I won’t actively disbelieve in them. Active disbelief involves the same degree of faith as belief. It’s merely the flip side of the same coin. I see no purpose in disbelieving anything – simply because it lies outside my experience. That doesn’t mean I’m not sceptical or that I’m devoid of cynicism. I actively disbelieve in a whole range of absurdities – but in terms of Buddhism I am content to be agnostic where I have no gnosis.