One can trust whatever one wants. In fact where there is no direct knowledge faith is an inescapable factor in experience:
The ordinary man is affected by ignorance, and he cannot dispense with simple faith, though in good faith he may grossly misplace it, or dissipate it, and be said to have no faith (asaddhÄ).
But if he places it honestly and reasonably, he is called faithful (saddhÄ).
In the Buddhaâs words, âA bhikkhu who possesses understanding founds his faith in accordance with that understandingâ (SN 48:45), to which words may be added also those of the venerable SÄriputta: âThere are two conditions for the arising of right view: anotherâs speech and reasoned attentionâ (MN 43). From this it emerges that an ordinary man has need of a germ of âmother witâ in order to know where to place his faith and a germ of unsquandered faith in order to believe he can develop his understanding. That is the starting position.
Faith thus begins to appear as a fusion of two elements: confidence (pasÄda), and what the confidence is placed in. Faith as confidence is elsewhere described as a clearing of the mind, like water cleared of suspended mud by a water-clearing nut, or as a launching out (pakkhandana), like a boatâs launching out from the near bank to cross a flood to the further bank, or as a hand that resolutely grasps. (A grain of âmother witâ is needed to recognize the nut, to avoid launching out into a flood that has no other shore, to refrain from grasping a red-hot poker as a stick to lean on). Just as âSeeing is the meaning of the understanding as a faculty,â so also âDecision [adhimokkha] is the meaning of faith as a faculty.â(PaáčisambhidÄ ĂÄáčakatha). When faith is aided by concentration, âThe mind launches out [to its object] and acquires confidence, steadiness and decisionâ (MN 122).
Choice of a bad object will debauch faith by the disappointment and frustration it entails. Craving and desire can corrupt it into bad faith by the self-deception that it is not necessary to investigate and test the object, and then, as well as error, there is disregard of truth. In one of his great discourses on faith the Buddha says, âBhÄradvÄja, there are five ideas which ripen in two ways [expectedly and unexpectedly] here and now. What are the five? They are faith, preference, hearsay, learning, weighing evidence, and choice of a view after pondering it [compare the KÄlÄma Sutta quoted above]. Now [in the case of faith] something may have faith well placed in it [susadahita] and yet it may be hollow, empty and false; and again, something may have no faith placed in it, and yet it may be factual, true and no other than it seems. In such circumstances it is not yet proper for a wise man to make the conclusion without reserve âOnly this is true, anything else is wrong.â ⊠If a man has faith, then in such circumstances as these he preserves truth when he says, âMy faith is thusâ; but then too he still does not, on that account alone, make the conclusion without reserve, âOnly this is true, anything else is wrong.â He preserves truth in that way tooâ (MN 95). The other four cases are similarly treated, after which it is shown how âpreserving of truthâ can be developed successively into âdiscovery of truthâ (path of Stream-entry) and âarrival at truthâ (fruit of the path of Stream-entry). The element of confidence has then become absolute because its object has been sufficiently tested by actual experience for the principal claims to be found justified.
Does SaddhÄ Mean Faith?
Nanamoli Thera
Our present situation is different, even we would be ready to follow advice:
Bhikkhus, for a faithful disciple who is intent on fathoming the Teacherâs Dispensation, it is natural that he conduct himself thus: âThe Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple; the Blessed One knows, I do not know.â MN 69
we donât have the living Buddha, so translated in our present situation the advise is as follows:
Suttas are right, I am wrong. In other words, in the existential situation when one is ignorant, and not only ignorant, but also ignorant about ones own ignorance which makes ignorance protected by kind of catch 22 one really needs some informations which while obviously will contradict ones ideas, still should be trusted more than ones own ideas which as far as right view goes are shaped by ignorance.
This âsacrifice of the intellectâ, which Saint Ignatius Loyola says is âso pleasing unto Godâ, is required also, incidentally, of the quantum physicist: he has to subscribe to the proposition that there are numbers that are not quantities. It is not, however, required of the follower of the Buddha, whose saddhÄâtrust or confidenceâis something like that of the patient in his doctor. The patient accepts on trust that the doctor knows more about his complaint than he himself does, and he submits himself to the doctorâs treatment. So far, indeed, from saying to his disciples âYou must accept on trust from me that black is whiteâ, the Buddha actually says, in effect, âWhat you must accept on trust from me is that you yourselves are unwittingly assuming that black is white, and that this is the reason for your sufferingâ.
Nanavira Thera
So coming back to your question both Ven Nanamoli and Nanavira Theras regarded Suttas as wholly trustworthy. Unlike EBT Suttas werenât for them the object of study, but rather veneration, since in absence of living Buddha they represent Dhamma and are able to help us to liberate ourselves from ignorance.
These books of the Pali Canon correctly represent the Buddhaâs Teaching, and can be regarded as trustworthy throughout. (Vinayapitaka:) Suttavibhanga, MahÄvagga, CĆ«lavagga; (Suttapitaka:) DÄ«ghanikÄya, MajjhimanikÄya, SamyuttanikÄya, AnguttaranikÄya, SuttanipÄta, Dhammapada, UdÄna, Itivuttaka, TheratherÄ«gÄthÄ. (The JÄtaka verses may be authentic, but they do not come within the scope of these Notes.) No other Pali books whatsoever should be taken as authoritative; and ignorance of them (and particularly of the traditional Commentaries) may be counted a positive advantage, as leaving less to be unlearned.
Unfortunately the acceptance of Suttas as trustworthy is only the first step, but if you have faith in Dhamma that you samsaric enslavement has no visible beginning you must admit that your own ideas about things as they are arenât very trustworthy, it is due to them you are still in samsara, so perhaps idea: Suttas are right, I am wrong is quite reasonable optionđ
He is my Teacher and if he says something, I take it for granted that things are exactly the way as He describes them.