Three Types of Faith

[causticus]

Yes, another list. Here goes:

1. Groundless Faith
2. Qualified Faith
3. Direct Faith

1. Groundless Faith -- We could call this weak or insincere faith. This is the type of faith that comes about from factors like: (a) fear, coercion, or other psychological manipulation tactics, (b) credulity and wishful-thinking, and (c) faith that is "bad faith" which is the kind of faith adopted for cynical and pragmatic reasons like social opportunism, i.e. status and power-seeking, or simply an easy means to fit into a group, regardless of the person's true views or beliefs on the religion in question. And of course, Groundless Faith may come about as any combination of the above factors.

2. Qualified Faith -- This is the type of faith that is arrived it by means of rational thought processes. A simple term for this type of faith might be something like "Faith of Trust." For example, almost everyone who has ever peered at a world map has faith that Antarctica does indeed exist, despite having never personally visited Antarctica. When someone witnesses a number of people they trust practicing a specific religion and perceiving that good deeds/conduct and happiness results from the practice of this religion, then they might be inclined on rational grounds to start practicing that religion as well.

3. Direct Faith -- When a person has a direct experience of a particular concept or phenomenon, they cultivate True Faith in that particular thing, having grasped its inner essence in a way far beyond what mundane language can describe. The Greeks would have termed this process as "Gnosis." When True Faith is accrued or cultivated, the person might develop an unshakable degree of certitude in the veracity of the thing in question. This is most clearly the strongest type of faith.

Comments

[methylethyl]

I like it!

List love

[everythingwill]

Getting more acquainted with Mahayana Buddhism, I'm having to develop my affinity for lists.

I must say, though, I find them helpful. Their ability to facilitate retention of spiritual material stands on its own merit.

It's a concession, of course, to the human cognitive affectation for discrete ordered information - and it probably won't go away anytime soon.

I really think this is a good one you've made here as well. The issue of faith deserves a critical look, and I can recall how vaguely I felt it was addressed in non-denominational Protestant services, for example. "Faith is just faith"; but the distinctions are lost.

I know you've been reading this too, but I think Harold Stewart similarly endeavored to clarify some of the aspects of faith in his writings (specifically, What is Faith?):

"As for 'belief', it is surrounded by such a strong verbal aura of mental and emotional attachment to tenet and institution that it is hardly fit to express serene detachment. So it is important to differentiate between faith and belief, as well as to determine their opposition to doubt. Belief is 'what one would lie', that is, would rather choose by personal preference or, in psychological jargon, 'wishful thinking'; whereas 'faith', from the Latin fides, still retains a trace of its original meaning of 'trust'. Periods of belief tend to alternate with relapses into doubt; for just as belief conduces to a static absolutism, so doubt misleads into the aberration of nihilism. Neither of these extremes, whose falsity was exposed by the Buddha, keeps to the Middle Way that transcends all such opposites."