Reading VS direct experience--which is better?

Question

This can be applied to spiritual and religious beliefs as well as to the rest of life...

Comments?

Answer 1

To answer this question, I translate the meaning of the question through the form of music. Either way, I think the answer is the same.Therefore, the question for me is "Listening to music VS playing in a band--which is better?"

I can say that reading/listening can really be inspirational in a way that it turns me onto a karma/alchemy that I would not have experienced through my own life. It's a safe window. The entertainment comes easy because theres no risk of my own at stake.

Experience/playing is about playing a part in what's happening. regarding music, playing in a band is really great fun. Freedom to participate is key. When you participate in something fully you loose yourself and discover yourself at the same time. there is no guarantee that the experience will be pleasurable or beneficial. There is risk involved. the karma of my actions affect my life.

So, I would say that both are great. Reading/listening is safe. Experience/playing is risky. It's all good.

Answer 2

Both are needed...

An example from Bhikkhu Samahita is as follows:

"Well done is what leads to future pleasure & advantage, friends!

Seriousness is an essential quality neccessary for succes in
every human activity. The serious Buddhist therefore engage
in two endeavours: Dhamma Study & Meditation producing the
quite precious: Calm & Insight.

No-one of them can be neglected.
If one does not study right, one does
not know how to meditate right.

If one does not meditate & only studies
it is like one who is obsessed with reading
cook-books, though he never actually cooks &
therefore never tastes the divine for himself!

Then what to study ?
The words of the Buddha himself
are absolutely quite indispensable"

- Atmadeepo Bhava -

Answer 3

I'm a firm believer in both whenever possible.
When it's possible to do I like to cross-check my experience with that of others.

Failing the being able to do both, I then go by direct experience when it's doable, some things are not.

Answer 4

People are different in how they learn. I learn from doing better than reading. But I read, also. In my book the question is not which mode is better but how do get people to live what the good books teaches, without harming ourselves or another?

One good book answers the question How much do I give Beggers with "You give according to the Need." Not you give scrapes, or until it hurts you, but you give according to the NEED of the beggars.

Americans do not do this. This could also be the solution to end poverty. To Give 100% of the Need to 100% of the People in need. It can be that simple.

Answer 5

It depends on the subject. If I were interested in David Hume's critique of theism, I better read it. If I were interested in Vermeer's painting at the Met Museum, direct experience is better.

Answer 6

Direct experience, all the way. You can READ about what you must DO to be saved, but unless you take the actual first step of faith, your life doesn't change because it remains "head knowledge" only.

Answer 7

I read that you should not work around the battery of a vehicle without disconecting it and or covering it... my neighbor did not... he learned by experience...he will have a marked face for life... I study God's Word for the same reason

Answer 8

Direct experience. Most Christians disregard this and bash non-believers because they do not grasp Christian concepts.Why should anyone believe something that has no evidence and meaning to them?

Answer 9

there is obviously no substitute for direct experience, however through reading you can come to understand (in lieu of actually experiencing) things,places and ideas that you may otherwise never be subjected to.
Bottom line...it is good to read and expand your mind.

Answer 10

direct experience