I read in Wikipedia and also in the suttas that refuge in Dhamma is "verified", as follows:

Svakkhato Bhagavata dhammo sanditthiko akaliko ehipassiko opanayiko paccattam vedittabbo vinnuhiti.

"Svakkhato" The Dhamma taught by the Blessed One is Excellent in the beginning, Excellent in the middle and Excellent in the end - all of Buddha's Discourses are consistent and teach the same truth. "Sanditthika" Dhamma is self-evident and can be understood in this life itself. "Akaliko" Dhamma, Noble Truths, can not be changed nor can they be altered over time. "Ehipassiko" "come and see"; Buddha's Dhamma is to be investigated. "Opanayika" Dhamma can only be understood by oneself. "Paccattam vedittabbo vinnuhiti" Dhamma is for the wise to understand and realize.

The teaching is well explained by the Buddha—visible in this very life, immediately effective, inviting inspection, relevant, so that sensible people can know it for themselves.

svākkhāto bhagavatā dhammo sandiṭṭhiko akāliko ehipassiko opaneyyiko paccattaṃ veditabbo viññūhīti.

Can I believe in things I have not verified for myself but still be a Buddhist?

Do the words "veditabbo viññūhīti" refer to direct experience? Or can it be merely fluency in theories?


1 Answer 1


One can be a Buddhist:

  • one believes in what is consistent with the teaching
    • verified by oneself
    • unverified but believed due to the confidence in the teaching

If one believes what is consistent even it is unverified there is no harm.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .