Beyond Dogma: Reevaluating the Utility of Belief in Buddhist Practice

In the latest issue of Tricycle: The Buddhist Review, author and teacher Nagapriya offers a timely reflection on the nature of belief, challenging the modern tendency to view spiritual perspectives as static sets of philosophical truths. In his brief teaching, featured in the Fall 2026 edition of the magazine, Nagapriya argues that the true value of any given worldview—whether secular, religious, or personal—should not be measured by its intellectual sophistication or its capacity to win a debate, but by its practical impact on the human condition.

The core of Nagapriya’s argument lies in the pragmatic application of the Dharma. He suggests that the utility of a view is tethered directly to its ability to alleviate the fundamental sources of human suffering: craving, confusion, and attachment. When a perspective functions as a tool for clarity, freedom, and peace, it serves the practitioner well. However, when a worldview becomes a source of dogmatic friction—fostering pride, fueling conflict, or reinforcing the very attachments one seeks to transcend—it ceases to be a helpful guide and instead becomes an obstacle to genuine awakening.

This perspective, drawn from his recent book, The Possibility of Amazement: Awakening the Five Spiritual Faculties, provides a lens through which contemporary readers might examine their own mental frameworks. By prioritizing the transformative power of a view over its theoretical correctness, Nagapriya encourages a more fluid and less defensive relationship with the ideas we hold.

The historical precedent for this approach is found in the life of the Buddha himself. As Nagapriya notes, the historical Buddha was frequently approached by contemporaries seeking definitive answers to speculative or metaphysical questions—inquiries about the nature of the cosmos, the existence of a creator, or the ultimate state of the universe after death. In many of these instances, the Buddha famously remained silent. This silence was not an admission of ignorance or a lack of intellectual depth; rather, it was a deliberate pedagogical choice. The Buddha recognized that such speculative inquiries often diverted the mind from the immediate, pressing work of practice. They were, in his view, "not useful" because they failed to address the root causes of suffering.

By declining to engage in purely intellectual sparring, the Buddha reinforced the idea that the Dharma is not a system of philosophy to be mastered, but a path to be walked. This distinction is crucial for modern practitioners who may find themselves entangled in the complexities of contemporary intellectual discourse. In an era where information is abundant and debate is often polarized, the temptation to use Buddhist teachings as a platform for moral superiority or intellectual validation is significant. Nagapriya’s teaching serves as a reminder that the ultimate goal of the practice is the reduction of suffering, not the accumulation of sophisticated viewpoints.

The implications of this approach are profound. If we accept that a view’s value is contingent upon its ability to reduce suffering, then our relationship to our own beliefs must become one of constant, compassionate inquiry. We are invited to ask: Does this thought, this opinion, or this belief system bring me closer to clarity, or does it deepen my sense of separation? Does it promote peace, or does it harden my ego? By shifting the metric of success from "being right" to "being free," the practitioner can begin to let go of views that no longer serve the path of awakening.

This requires a degree of honesty that can be uncomfortable. It necessitates admitting that even ideas we hold to be "spiritual" or "Buddhist" can become burdens if they are used to cling to an identity or to judge others. The attachment to being a "correct" Buddhist is, in itself, a form of attachment that can obscure the very peace the practice promises. Nagapriya’s work suggests that the path to true wisdom involves a willingness to abandon even the most cherished views if they ultimately lead to more conflict or pride.

The context of this teaching, as presented in The Possibility of Amazement, highlights the importance of the five spiritual faculties—faith, energy, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom. These faculties are traditionally viewed as the pillars of the path, and Nagapriya’s focus on the utility of views suggests that wisdom is not merely an intellectual understanding, but an active, discernment-based practice. It is the wisdom to know when a thought is a helpful raft for crossing the river and when it is a heavy stone that only serves to weigh the traveler down.

As society continues to navigate an increasingly complex landscape of digital discourse and ideological divide, the Buddhist emphasis on the pragmatic utility of views offers a stabilizing influence. It provides a way to engage with the world without becoming trapped in the friction of competing narratives. It allows for a form of intellectual humility—a recognition that while our worldviews are necessary for navigating the world, they are ultimately provisional.

This teaching also underscores the role of the teacher in guiding students toward this discernment. By highlighting the Buddha’s own reluctance to engage in speculative debate, Nagapriya reinforces a tradition of teaching that prioritizes the experiential over the abstract. It is a call to return to the basics: to focus on what actually works to calm the mind, what truly helps us let go of the grasping that characterizes our ordinary experience, and what fosters the kind of clarity that leads to genuine, lasting peace.

For those reading Nagapriya’s work, the challenge is to move beyond the comfort of intellectual abstraction. The "possibility of amazement," as the title of his book suggests, may well reside in our ability to release the rigid structures of thought that keep us from experiencing the reality of the present moment as it is. When we stop using our views as defensive armor, we open ourselves up to a deeper, more immediate encounter with the world—one that is characterized by the very freedom and clarity that the Buddha pointed toward.

The publication of this teaching in the Fall 2026 issue of Tricycle comes at a time when many practitioners are seeking to reconcile the ancient wisdom of the Dharma with the demands of a high-pressure, information-heavy world. By grounding his insights in the core tenets of the Four Noble Truths and the historical behavior of the Buddha, Nagapriya provides a bridge between traditional practice and contemporary life. He reminds us that the Dharma is not a fossilized relic, but a living, breathing set of tools designed to be used in the service of human liberation.

Ultimately, the lesson is one of liberation—not just from the world, but from the limitations of our own minds. If we can learn to view our ideas as instruments rather than identities, we may find that the path to peace is much simpler than we once imagined. It is a path that requires the courage to be silent when silence is more helpful than speech, the wisdom to let go of our most persuasive arguments when they lead to suffering, and the clarity to recognize that the most valuable view is the one that allows us to be fully, peacefully present.

As the Buddhist tradition continues to evolve in the West, teachings such as these remain essential. They serve as a corrective to the tendency to over-intellectualize the path, bringing the focus back to the direct, lived experience of the practitioner. Whether one is a seasoned meditator or someone just beginning to explore the teachings, the invitation remains the same: to evaluate the utility of our views, to embrace the freedom of letting go, and to walk the path with a mind that is both clear and deeply at peace.