"Suppose Malunkyaputta, a man were wounded by an arrow thickly smeared with poison, and his friends and companions brought a surgeon to treat him. The man would say, 'I will not let the surgeon pull out the arrow until I know the name and clan of the man who wounded me; whether the bow that wounded me was a long bow or a cross bow; whether the arrow that wounded me was hoof-tipped or curved or barbed.' All this would still not be known to that man, and meanwhile he would die. So too, Malunkyaputta, if anyone should say, 'I will not lead the noble life under the Buddha until the Buddha declares to me whether the world is eternal or not eternal; finite or infinite; whether the soul is the same as or different from the body; whether or not an awakened one continues or ceases to exist after death,' that would still remain undeclared by the Buddha, and meanwhile that person would die."
in other words, we could wait until we had full information before we making a decision on how to lead our lives - but that would mean we probably have died long before obtaining full information.
realistically there's simply no way for me to figure "all this out" with whatever time left i have (in this lifetime, at least). suppose even if i had some good conjectures, i still probably would not have enough time to go through all the counter-arguments and be fully convinced of them.
so, it seems to me there is a good bit of research and reflection that needs to be done, and at some point, a bit of faith still needs to be involved? or extreme logic can nonetheless lead to a noble life?
