Study the Dhamma in a small group, testing claims by reasoning

Meet with two to five people, read one short passage, and test its claims against evidence and experience, marking what cannot yet be settled as open.

Why it works

Suna (2025) reports Ambedkar’s vision as one of rationalising and humanising religion. A group that tests each claim against evidence and experience, rather than accepting it on authority, puts that framing into practice rather than only describing it. Naming what the group cannot settle keeps the inquiry honest about the historical disputes that surround the texts.

How to do it

  1. Gather two to five people and agree on one short passage, from The Buddha and His Dhamma or from the vows.
  2. Each person states, in one sentence, what the passage claims.
  3. Test it together: what evidence would show it true or false, and where does it match your experience and where does it not?
  4. Mark any claim the group cannot test as open, not settled.
  5. Close by naming one question to bring to the next session.

Evidence

Suna (2025) reports Ambedkar’s vision as rationalising and humanising religion. No study has tested a group inquiry of this kind, so the practice itself is untested. (anecdotal)

Testing claims by reasoning does not settle questions of historical fact that scholars still dispute. Mark those as open.

Sources

Common mistake

Treating the group as a debate to win, rather than a shared inquiry in which a claim may be revised.

Practice this with IX Coach

Start with IX Coach

More practices for Navayana Buddhism: Ambedkar’s Path, the 1956 Nagpur Conversion and Its Practices

Related concepts

Free to reuse under CC BY 4.0: cite or embed this practice · more practices graded Practitioner experience