But then, isn't faith the power we have when our "beliefs" are challenged or appear faulty?
I take this example:
we have faith in the law of gravity, right?
If we were to see an object floating in the air, our mind would search for the causes that makes this object float, I mean, our mind wouldn't suddenly loose faith in the law of gravity, right?
So we have faith, that is we still are sure that the law of gravity exists despite a phenomena that appears to contradict it.
Our faith in the law of gravity is grounded.
And here comes the definition of faith from Geshe Kelsang Gyatso again:
"a naturally virtuous mind that functions mainly to oppose the perception of faults in its observed object."
That is: even though we see a phenomena that we perceive as a contradiction to the law of gravity, our faith in the law of gravity wins.
Though Geshe Kelsang Gyatso refers to more important aspects than the gross law of gravity, as we are talking about a "virtuous mind".
(the mind that has faith in the law of gravity would refer more to a scientific mind)
So what is the faith of a "virtuous mind"?
And why this adjective "naturally"?
I would be interested to know what the people in this forum think about this.
Let's imagine we would see our Guru drunk, would we have the "naturally virtuous mind" to still see him as a Guru?
It is easier to have faith in the Guru when He is in monk's robes and on a throne and gives a Dharma speech, how strong is our faith when we perceive a "fault" in our Guru?
That is a true test to our "naturally virtuous mind" really, and perhaps if our Guru does not put us through such tests it may be that we still need to nurture our faith some more, or maybe also because the faith is already there, naturally virtuous, and there is no need for these "games".
Chogyam Trungpa sometimes delivered Dharma talks while being visibly drunk and actually drank sake every day. His students did not loose faith (most of them), maybe some even may have found this "attractive" and "cool", and it may have had the effect of strengthening their faith...
I know of buddhists that would not have enough faith to understand and accept this.
How come some would run away and some would find it attractive?
I mean to say this: the faith does not come from the object we observe as "being" how we conceive it to be, faith comes from our mind only, not from the "object" observed.
If we think it comes from the object, it is denying us perceiving it, it is thinking that we are somehow observing things around us kind of independently when, in fact, we are only perceiving what our mind is able to conceptualize as a perceiver. And then, out of habituation, we go on believing that the "object" we perceive IS how we perceive it.
We see what and how we can (and with a very limited degree of control for most of us).
We are depending on our aggregates for this, and they are limited to what they are.
Maybe when I see my boss, my stress level goes up and I see him as a pain, but when his mother sees him she rejoices and is happy. So it is not the "object" (my boss), it is how we perceive it (some would even say, how we project it so as to emphasize that the perception comes from us, not from the "object").
When the "object" appears to be or behave differently than how we have conceived it, perhaps we should wisen up and challenge our conceptions, rather than the object (because there is no "object" in the way we think there is).
This is particularly true when it comes to our Guru.
With grounded faith in a Guru, we give Him the leverage to propel us faster into our spiritual path.
I really like to think as faith not as a belief, but as a mind that is naturally virtuous, my gratitude to Geshe Kelsang Gyatso for this definition. It means the world to me.
