Vishontar-jyu, Karmarana-jee has partly explained what I am going to say. My point of making distinctions of training/learning and search/research was actually to illustrate a very critical differences in our approaches/understanding. I admit that I probably was not simple enough. However, I am sure once we get to the missing answer (2 additional essential things besides "rationality"), it will be clear. Since it is really important, I would like to explain what I meant by training/learning and search/research. Training = Copying, imitating or following exactly what "Guru" says. Learning = Training + scrutiny with pupil's own rationality. Search = unscrutinized finding Research = scrutinized finding Now it should be clear that why I am emphasizing the distinction. I am after learning/research, not after training/search. You probably are already realizing that what I am trying to do right at the beginning is to dismiss the Guru as the AUTHORITY of knowledge. It's not the Guru but the RATIONALITY is what should be the authority of knowledge. That is one. Next but also related to the above, I was refusing to offer you a blank and rationality-free mind (is that what Buddhists call ego-free mind ?). Now, it should be clear why I said RATIONALITY is all one needs to learn things. A training offered by a Guru of faith to a neutralized pupil is not a learning. It's simply what it is- a training. I probably have answered the question. This roundabout way was necessary to make my point. I apologize for that.