Our world is rent apart by views. Conflict is everywhere. The Buddha teaches us about the dangers of grasping Views - any Views. It is everywhere in the suttas.
In this thread I invite participants to share sutta quotes about the unwholesome effects of grasping and taking a stand on Views, about Papancha and about the Ditthasava, and the underlying tendency of Views.
The Asava of Views - leads to a very fruitful avenue of contemplation This is often not very popular, but the suttas are full of just how unskillful and harmful Views and Proliferation is. Unless it is abandoned one remains tethered to samsara. Nibbana is Nipapancha. Working towards the elimination of Ditthasava is an important part of practice.
It is very deep and profound. It has always been a difficult, challenging and ‘unpopular’ thing. Just take MN1 at the end of which … “the monks were not happy” !!!
It is not an easy thing, but well worth the effort. Restraint in proliferation is part of the training and transcendence of Views brings great fruit.
I look forward to any other contributions of sutta quotes on this topic
Here are a couple suttas to start with.
AN8.30 Annuruddha and the Great Thoughts (extract from the end)
…‘This teaching is for those who don’t enjoy proliferating and don’t like to proliferate, not for those who enjoy proliferating and like to proliferate.’ That’s what I said, but why did I say it? It’s for a mendicant whose mind is secure, confident, settled, and decided regarding the cessation of proliferation. ‘This teaching is for those who don’t enjoy proliferating and don’t like to proliferate, not for those who enjoy proliferating and like to proliferate.’ That’s what I said, and this is why I said it.”
Then Anuruddha stayed the next rainy season residence right there in the land of the Cetīs in the Eastern Bamboo Park. And Anuruddha, living alone, withdrawn, diligent, keen, and resolute, soon realized the supreme culmination of the spiritual path in this very life. He lived having achieved with his own insight the goal for which gentlemen rightly go forth from the lay life to homelessness.
He understood: “Rebirth is ended; the spiritual journey has been completed; what had to be done has been done; there is no return to any state of existence.” And Venerable Anuruddha became one of the perfected. And on the occasion of attaining perfection he recited these verses:
“Knowing my thoughts, the supreme Teacher in the world came to me in a mind-made body, using his psychic power.
He taught me more than I had thought of. The Buddha who loves non-proliferation taught me non-proliferation.
Understanding that teaching, I happily did his bidding. I’ve attained the three knowledges, and have fulfilled the Buddha’s instructions.”
If you’d like another lovely sutta on this (there are SO many)
iti55
This was said by the Lord…
“Bhikkhus, there are these three kinds of search…”
Sensual search, the search for being,
The search for a holy life of one
Who takes his stand upon a view
And holds it tightly as the truth—
These are heapings of defilements.
For a bhikkhu wholly dispassionate
And freed by the destruction of craving,
Searches have been relinquished
And uprooted the standpoint of views.
With the destruction of searches a bhikkhu
Is free from desire and doubt.
Great topic I find it heart breaking when views invite to harsh and negative speech - the total opposite of what Lord Buddha teaches. Contemplation and reminding oneself again and again that every one has the right to have her/his own view, regardless if one likes this view or not. Hard work but always rewarding when another blind corner in the mind gets more, healthy light
The Buddha didn’t grant people partial views about how kamma works, but explained it in full. That means the Buddha, having seen the right way kamma works still have the right view, just are not attached to it.
There’s another sutta which I cannot seem to find now of a person who declared that his view that all views are to be abandoned, discarded etc. Buddha asked him, so his current view that all views are to be discarded is also to be discarded? He couldn’t answer properly. This also indicates the subtle difference between clinging to views vs not having views. Anyone remembers the sutta?
“Each maintaining their own view,
the experts disagree, arguing:
‘Whoever sees it this way
understands the teaching;
Here, as often in the Aṭṭhakavagga, jānāti implies different ways of knowing, which may be right or wrong (to degrees). We can “see” things differently, but we can’t “know” them differently.
those who reject this are inadequate.’
So arguing, they quarrel,
saying, ‘The other is a fool, an amateur!’
Which one of these speaks true,
for they all claim to be an expert?”
“If not accepting another’s teaching
makes you a useless fool lacking wisdom, Preferring omako over mago (“beast”), which seems harsh.
then they’re all fools lacking wisdom,
for they all maintain their own view.
"And how is there the yoke of views? There is the case where a certain person does not discern, as it actually is present, the origination, the passing away, the allure, the drawbacks, & the escape from views. When he does not discern, as it actually is present, the origination, the passing away, the allure, the drawbacks, & the escape from views, then — with regard to views — he is obsessed with view-passion, view-delight, view-attraction, view-infatuation, view-thirst, view-fever, view-fascination, view-craving. This is the yoke of sensuality, the yoke of becoming, & the yoke of views. Yoga Sutta: Yokes
"Of course you’re befuddled, Vaccha. Of course you’re confused. Deep, Vaccha, is this phenomenon, hard to see, hard to realize, tranquil, refined, beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise. For those with other views, other practices, other satisfactions, other aims, other teachers, it is difficult to know. Aggi-Vacchagotta Sutta: To Vacchagotta on Fire
(44) Others will misapprehend according to their individual views, hold on to them tenaciously and not easily discard them;[18] we shall not misapprehend according to individual views nor hold on to them tenaciously, but shall discard them with ease — thus effacement can be done.
(44) The thought should be produced: ‘Others will misapprehend according to their individual views, hold on to them tenaciously and not easily discard them; we shall not misapprehend according to individual views nor hold on to them tenaciously, but shall discard them with ease.’
(44) A person given to misapprehending according to his individual views, to holding on to them tenaciously and not discarding them easily, has non-misapprehension of individual views, non-holding on tenaciously and ease in discarding by which to avoid it.
(44) A person given to misapprehending according to his individual views, to holding on to them tenaciously and not discarding them easily, has non-misapprehension of individual views, non-holding on tenaciously and ease in discarding to lead him upward.
(44) A person given to misapprehending according to his individual views, to holding on to them tenaciously and not discarding them easily, has non-misapprehension of individual views, non-holding on tenaciously and ease in discarding by which to attain the quenching [of them]. Sallekha Sutta: The Discourse on Effacement
"And which are the 18 craving-verbalizations dependent on what is internal? There being ‘I am,’ there comes to be ‘I am here,’ there comes to be ‘I am like this’ … ‘I am otherwise’ … ‘I am bad’ … ‘I am good’ … ‘I might be’ … ‘I might be here’ … ‘I might be like this’ … ‘I might be otherwise’ … ‘May I be’ … ‘May I be here’ … ‘May I be like this’ … ‘May I be otherwise’ … ‘I will be’ … ‘I will be here’ … ‘I will be like this’ … ‘I will be otherwise.’ These are the 18 craving-verbalizations dependent on what is internal.
"And which are the 18 craving-verbalizations dependent on what is external? There being ‘I am because of this (or: by means of this),’ there comes to be ‘I am here because of this,’ there comes to be ‘I am like this because of this’ … ‘I am otherwise because of this’ … ‘I am bad because of this’ … ‘I am good because of this’ … ‘I might be because of this’ … ‘I might be here because of this’ … ‘I might be like this because of this’ … ‘I might be otherwise because of this’ … ‘May I be because of this’ … ‘May I be here because of this’ … ‘May I be like this because of this’ … ‘May I be otherwise because of this’ … ‘I will be because of this’ … ‘I will be here because of this’ … ‘I will be like this because of this’ … ‘I will be otherwise because of this.’ These are the 18 craving-verbalizations dependent on what is external.
"Thus there are 18 craving-verbalizations dependent on what is internal and 18 craving-verbalizations dependent on what is external. These are called the 36 craving-verbalizations. Thus, with 36 craving-verbalizations of this sort in the past, 36 in the future, and 36 in the present, there are 108 craving-verbalizations. Tanha Sutta: Craving
What i see is that the EBT teaches that there is view that has liberating power, supra mundane, connected to dispassion, pure. And there is view that is meritorious, not pure, mundane, connected to bright kamma leading to wholesome kamma vipaka. But not leading to the end of suffering, not leading to the end of kamma and rebirth (MN117)
Those mundane wholesome views are: there is rebirth, there is an afterlife, there is father and mother, there is giving and fruit of giving, there is kamma and fruit of kamma etc.
I do not believe that the sutta’s teach that if one embraces such views, holds such views, one will naturally make an end to suffering. But they lead to relative wellbeing in this life and after this life. But they are connected to bright kamma with bright results, and do not represent the kamma that makes an end also to bright kamma. Those views have an sich no liberating power.
It is not like this, i believe, that if one is born in a country in which such views are normal, part of the cultural heritage, one is is naturally on the Path to stream entry. No therefor one must also see anicca, dukkka, anatta, this is not me, not mine, not myself and the four noble truths, to a certain degree.
I also doubt if belief in rebirth an sich is always meritorious. For example, if one lives one life to be reborn in higher states, one still bites in the bait of Mara, because high rebirth or even just aiming at rebirth, is in the sutta’s seen as the bait of Mara. (SN5.6, SN5.7, SN2.30, Ud4.10)
How important the list of right views really are i do not really know. I tend to see it this way that they pave the Path and other views might become obstacles?
I also feel AN1.314 and AN1.315 are true and show that having right view is more important for the outcome of deeds, then intention. This is true, i feel.
I know and see that views are often a real battleground, but i feel we may be happy that people before us (or now) have battled for right view, right understanding. Otherwise we would still have to deal with all kinds of wrong views on what is the cause of sickness, disasters, treatment etc. which makes things only worse.
I think it is not really evil or bad or immoral to battle for right views if one sees how important it is to have a good understanding of how things arise, are caused, exist and cease.
Some people loose interest in right view. I believe this shows one does not care about the welfare of beings. I do not see that as a good signs.
One might judge that views are mere a ground for even more defilement, mere ego wants to be right, but i feel it is not that worthless. For example, people here in the Netherlands have endlessly with much effort fight the wrong view that animals have no pain, no feelings, no desires etc. As if they are machines and do not need to be treated like we treat ourselves, as sensitive beings who desire to be happy and do not want to suffer. Poor animals. At least it has let to laws on their wellbeing. Also all kind of rules regarding the way they are killed and slaughtered.
But often conservative, economic and sectarian forces must be battled and overcome to even make a small step. What a struggle. What a fight. What an energy one must have. It is a real struggle to change wrong views but still i feel this serves a good purpose. How we look at animals is just an example.
I feel there are many examples that show that views as a kind of battleground is not worthless, it does not only deal with ego and his needs.
You should take into account that development of faculties is bright kamma. Intelligence, concentration, beauty, health, strength, wealth, good family, good friends & teachers, long life, all this is a blessing, a result of bright kamma and acquired by merit.
If one holds views that lead to a bad place, not meritorious views, it’s not good, one will be dull, ugly, isolated from good people, sick, destitute and have a short life span. Why? Because one produces much bad kamma on account of those views.
It’s still possible for him to make much merit if he trains correctly, for example developing the perception of impermanence, but he might not want to or it’d be difficult and take longer time.
Id advise to train aniccasanna, dukkhasanna and anattasanna because of this
“If one were to develop even for just a finger-snap the perception of inconstancy, that would be more fruitful than the gift, the great gift, that Velāma the brahman gave, and if one were to feed one person… 100 people consummate in view, and if one were to feed one once-returner… 100 once-returners, and if one were to feed one non-returner… 100 non-returners, and if one were to feed one arahant… 100 arahants, and if one were to feed one Private Buddha… 100 Private Buddhas, and if one were to feed a Tathāgata—a worthy one, rightly self-awakened—and if one were to feed a Saṅgha of monks headed by the Buddha, and if one were to have a dwelling built and dedicated to the Community of the four directions, and if one with a confident mind were to go to the Buddha, Dhamma, & Saṅgha for refuge, and if one with a confident mind were to undertake the training rules—refraining from taking life, refraining from taking what is not given, refraining from sexual misconduct, refraining from lying, refraining from distilled & fermented drinks that cause heedlessness—and if one were to develop even just one whiff of a heart of goodwill.” AN 9:20 Velāma Sutta | About Velāma
There is also other multiplying circumstances in cases of giving
"Having given this gift seeking his own profit — with a mind attached [to the reward], seeking to store up for himself, [with the thought], ‘I’ll enjoy this after death’ — on the break-up of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of the Four Great Kings. Then, having exhausted that action, that power, that status, that sovereignty, he is a returner, coming back to this world.
“Then there is the case of a person who gives a gift not seeking his own profit, not with a mind attached [to the reward], not seeking to store up for himself, nor [with the thought], ‘I’ll enjoy this after death.’ Instead, he gives a gift with the thought, ‘Giving is good.’ He gives his gift — food, drink, clothing, a vehicle; a garland, perfume, & ointment; bedding, shelter, & a lamp — to a brahman or a contemplative. What do you think, Sariputta? Might a person give such a gift as this?”
“Yes, lord.”
"Having given this gift with the thought, ‘Giving is good,’ on the break-up of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of the Devas of the Thirty-three. Then, having exhausted that action, that power, that status, that sovereignty, he is a returner, coming back to this world.
"Or, instead of thinking, ‘Giving is good,’ he gives a gift with the thought, ‘This was given in the past, done in the past, by my father & grandfather. It would not be right for me to let this old family custom be discontinued’… on the break-up of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of the Devas of the Hours. Then, having exhausted that action, that power, that status, that sovereignty, he is a returner, coming back to this world.
"Or, instead… he gives a gift with the thought, ‘I am well-off. These are not well-off. It would not be right for me, being well-off, not to give a gift to those who are not well-off’… on the break-up of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of the Contented Devas. Then, having exhausted that action, that power, that status, that sovereignty, he is a returner, coming back to this world.
"Or, instead… he gives a gift with the thought, ‘Just as there were the great sacrifices of the sages of the past — Atthaka, Vamaka, Vamadeva, Vessamitta, Yamataggi, Angirasa, Bharadvaja, Vasettha, Kassapa, & Bhagu — in the same way will this be my distribution of gifts’… on the break-up of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of the devas who delight in creation. Then, having exhausted that action, that power, that status, that sovereignty, he is a returner, coming back to this world.
"Or, instead… he gives a gift with the thought, ‘When this gift of mine is given, it makes the mind serene. Gratification & joy arise’… on the break-up of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of the devas who have power over the creations of others. Then, having exhausted that action, that power, that status, that sovereignty, he is a returner, coming back to this world.
“Or, instead of thinking, ‘When this gift of mine is given, it makes the mind serene. Gratification & joy arise,’ he gives a gift with the thought, ‘This is an ornament for the mind, a support for the mind.’ He gives his gift — food, drink, clothing, a vehicle; a garland, perfume, & ointment; bedding, shelter, & a lamp — to a brahman or a contemplative. What do you think, Sariputta? Might a person give such a gift as this?”
“Yes, lord.”
"Having given this, not seeking his own profit, not with a mind attached [to the reward], not seeking to store up for himself, nor [with the thought], ‘I’ll enjoy this after death,’
" — nor with the thought, ‘Giving is good,’
" — nor with the thought, ‘This was given in the past, done in the past, by my father & grandfather. It would not be right for me to let this old family custom be discontinued,’
" — nor with the thought, ‘I am well-off. These are not well-off. It would not be right for me, being well-off, not to give a gift to those who are not well-off,’ nor with the thought, ‘Just as there were the great sacrifices of the sages of the past — Atthaka, Vamaka, Vamadeva, Vessamitta, Yamataggi, Angirasa, Bharadvaja, Vasettha, Kassapa, & Bhagu — in the same way this will be my distribution of gifts,’
" — nor with the thought, ‘When this gift of mine is given, it makes the mind serene. Gratification & joy arise,’
" — but with the thought, ‘This is an ornament for the mind, a support for the mind’ — on the break-up of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of Brahma’s Retinue. Then, having exhausted that action, that power, that status, that sovereignty, he is a non-returner. He does not come back to this world. Dana Sutta: Giving
I think that i would apply same reasoning to development of perceptions
Having done this work, not seeking profit, not with a mind attached [to the reward], not seeking to store up for himself, nor [with the thought], ‘I’ll enjoy this after death,’
" — nor with the thought, ‘Training is good,’
" — nor with the thought, ‘This was done in the past, by the noble disciples. It would not be right for me to let this old noble custom be discontinued’
" — nor with the thought, ‘I am well-off. These are not well-off. It would not be right for me, being well-off, not to train,’ nor with the thought, ‘Just as there was effort made by the noble savakas in the past — in the same way this will be my good effort,’
" — nor with the thought, ‘When this training of mine is done, it makes the mind serene. Gratification & joy arise,’
" — but with the thought, ‘This is an ornament for the mind, a support for the mind’ —
I think strategically this is most merit/hr and will develop the mind into a beautiful thing eventually abandoning wrong views & understanding the important things.
Please, @Green this thread is NOT for proselytizing about your own views about what you have decided that the Buddha meant or your opinion about if it works for you and society today. Ironically, such hypothesizing and conjecture is the definition of papancha itself!
This thread is for sharing sutta quotes, to just give the words of the Buddha on a theme. The contemplation and meditation on them needs to be done by each person for themselves.
This thread is NOT about being given an answer ie a View to own as the ‘Truth’ and defend, but of turning Right Attention towards the formation of Views, and on how Perception itself works.
In this light it’s also not so much about the ‘RIGHT to have views’ (again this is focusing on the views themselves instead of how they are formed), but to understand that views arise dependent on Perception.
Perception is one of the Khandas, and the Buddha instructs trainees to contemplate them as impermanent, suffering and non self. It is to understand how Views arise as a result of perception which is completely unreliable, completely Dependently Arisen, and are thus not worth holding on to. One holds them lightly and uses them only as needed and does not take a stand on them as they have nothing to do with ‘seeing things as they truly are’ . It is only with the complete destruction of all the defilements and all the Asavas that seeing things as they truly are is possible.
This is demonstrated in MN1 (quoted above) which outlines the 3 different levels of perceiving the world, and the progressive penetrating and relinquishment of Perception and Views. This is the training to move from a position where one believes and accepts all views that come into ones mind unquestioningly and understanding them as wholly Dependently Arisen phenomena, that which, when clung to are the cause of suffering.
Here are a couple more suttas that make this clearer
AN10.96 Kokanusasuuta (excerpts on the section on views.
At one time Venerable Ānanda was staying near Rājagaha in the Hot Springs Monastery. Then Ānanda rose at the crack of dawn and went to the hot springs to bathe. When he had bathed and emerged from the water he stood in one robe drying himself. The wanderer Kokanada also rose at the crack of dawn and went to the hot springs to bathe.
…
I know and see the scope of convictions, the scope of grounds for views, fixation on views, obsession with views, the origin of views, and the uprooting of views. Knowing and seeing thus, why should I say: ‘I neither know nor see?’ I do know and see.”
AN6.63 Penetrative
‘Perceptions should be known. And their source, diversity, result, cessation, and the practice that leads to their cessation should be known.’ That’s what I said, but why did I say it? There are these six perceptions: perceptions of sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches, and ideas.
And what is the source of perceptions? Contact is their source.
And what is the diversity of perceptions? The perceptions of sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches, and ideas are all different. This is called the diversity of perceptions.
And what is the result of perceptions? Communication is the result of perception, I say. You communicate something in whatever manner you perceive it, saying ‘That’s what I perceived.’ This is called the result of perceptions.
And what is the cessation of perception? When contact ceases, perception ceases. The practice that leads to the cessation of perceptions is simply this noble eightfold path, that is: right view, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right immersion."
…
Views arise on the basis of perceptions. Below is one of my favorite similes that demonstrates how and why perception is completely unreliable and impermanent. There are many such similes that the Buddha gives. As such, if views are formed on a completely unstable foundation, how stable can they themselves be? … If one understands that the initial perception (that the fire was pleasant) is dependently arisen based on those conditions (terrible itching etc), then one can understand that as those conditions change (no more leprosy discomfort), so do the perceptions. There is no permanent essential Truth to the perceptions… they are simply Dependently Arisen, not me or mine, not permanent, and result in suffering if grasped. The fire is neither pleasant nor unpleasant in itself (seeing only the seen in the seen)… the judgement/view or perception of this is wholly dependent on conditions.
MN75 Magandiya sutta
Suppose there was a person affected by leprosy, with sores and blisters on their limbs. Being devoured by worms, scratching with their nails at the opening of their wounds, they’d cauterize their body over a pit of glowing coals. Their friends and colleagues, relatives and kin would get a surgeon to treat them. The surgeon would make medicine for them, and by using that they’d be cured of leprosy. They’d be healthy, happy, autonomous, master of themselves, able to go where they wanted. Then two strong men would grab them by the arms and drag them towards the pit of glowing coals.
What do you think, Māgaṇḍiya? Wouldn’t that person writhe and struggle to and fro?”
“Yes, Master Gotama. Why is that? Because that fire is really painful to touch, fiercely burning and scorching.”
“What do you think, Māgaṇḍiya? Is it only now that the fire is really painful to touch, fiercely burning and scorching, or was it painful previously as well?”
“That fire is painful now and it was also painful previously. That person was affected by leprosy, with sores and blisters on their limbs. Being devoured by worms, scratching with their nails at the opening of their wounds, their sense faculties were impaired. So even though the fire was actually painful to touch, they had a distorted perception that it was pleasant.”
@NgXinZhao
I think the concluding verse of Snp 4.12 is more apt to this topic.
Standing in judgment,
measuring by their own standard,
they keep getting into disputes with the world.
But a person who has given up all judgments
creates no conflict in the world.”
Here judgments = a View on whether something is inherently good or inherently bad ie not seeing the dependently arisen (not self) nature of Perception.
Thank you to everyone who participated.
May all beings be happy and well and thrive in the Dhamma. It is a great journey of discovery, to be done each for themselves via the Noble 8 fold Path.
I think your point is good about the elephant, i won’t comment on the molecular biology.
However i do not think everyone is worth talking to, it depends on how they participate in a discussion but it’s not what i was getting at.
Rather i was alluding to people not being willing to entertain new challenging ideas which serve them no apparent benefit.
It is only when they have some reason like admiration or an emergent need that they would place conviction, lend ear, take notes and really ponder what someone has to say on a matter.
Kaccāna, for the most part this world is based upon a duality – existence and non-existence. Kaccāna, one who accurately sees with right wisdom the arising of the world does not have the thought of non-existence. Kaccāna, one who accurately sees with right wisdom the cessation of the world does not have the thought of existence.
SN 12.15
For me, this is a definitive sutta about views and what to do with them:
Thus I have heard: One time, the Buddha was staying at Anāthapiṇḍada’s Park in Jeta’s Grove of Śrāvastī.
It was then that the Bhagavān addressed the monks, “You should know that there are two kinds of views. What are the two? They are the views of existence and views of inexistence. There are ascetics and priests who, having developed and recited these two kinds of views, never follow their Dharmas and don’t truly understand them. They therefore aren’t ascetics or priests, for those ascetics violate the way of ascetics, and those priests violate the way of priests. Those ascetics and priests entertain themselves with things they never realize for themselves.
“There are ascetics and priests who recite and memorize these two kinds of views, but they know to discard them when they truly understand them. These therefore are ascetics who keep to the ascetic practice and priests who know the priestly practice. They entertain themselves with things they’ve realized for themselves. Birth and death is ended, the religious practice is established, and the task is accomplished. They truly know that they won’t be subject to another existence.
“Therefore, monks, you shouldn’t cultivate these two kinds of views, nor should you recite them. You should abandoned all of them. Thus, monks, you should train yourselves.”
When the monks heard what the Buddha taught, they rejoiced and approved.
DN29
The main theme concludes with exhortation to recite those things in harmony which have been rightly taught and are beneficial. “you should all come together and recite in concert, without disputing, those things I have taught you.” He goes on to address the case of speculations about certain subject matter he leaves “undeclared.”
The wanderers might say, ‘Then is this your view: “A realized one neither still exists nor no longer exists after death. This is the only truth, other ideas are silly”?’ You should say to them, ‘This too has not been declared by the Buddha.’
pts-cs31The wanderers might say, ‘But why has this not been declared by the ascetic Gotama?’
You should say to them,
‘Because it’s not beneficial or relevant to the fundamentals of the spiritual life. It doesn’t lead to disillusionment, dispassion, cessation, peace, insight, awakening, and extinguishment. That’s why it hasn’t been declared by the Buddha.’
So, which is more fitting… to speak as instructed by the teacher, or to have wanderers to continue wandering?
When it comes to the view of the ascetics and brahmins to whom some things are acceptable to me and some things are not, a sensible person reflects like this: ‘I have the view that some things are acceptable and some things are not. Suppose I were to obstinately stick to this view and insist, “This is the only truth, other ideas are silly.” Then I’d argue with two people—an ascetic or brahmin to whom everything is acceptable, and an ascetic or brahmin to whom nothing is acceptable. And when there’s arguing, there’s quarreling; when there’s quarreling there’s anguish; and when there’s anguish there’s harm.’ So, considering in themselves the potential for arguing, quarreling, anguish, and harm, they give up that view by not grasping another view. That’s how those views are given up and let go.
Great idea for a thread. It’s nice to collect suttas around a single theme into a single thread—would be cool to see more of these. It would be nice if everyone who posted read the OP’s instructions and contributed in line with them, but alas, c’est la vie.
~~
Long one of my favorite suttas, Canki Sutta MN 95. The Buddha describes the right way to hold views. For those skeptical of rebirth or other teachings, I would point them here to show the way the Buddha taught to hold these views. This is just an excerpt from the middle of the sutta and the whole thing should be read if one hasn’t read it before to put it into context.
“Bhāradvāja, first you took your stand on faith, now you speak of oral tradition. There are five things, Bhāradvāja, that may turn out in two different ways here and now. What five? Faith, approval, oral tradition, reasoned cogitation, and reflective acceptance of a view. These five things may turn out in two different ways here and now. Now something may be fully accepted out of faith, yet it may be empty, hollow, and false; but something else may not be fully accepted out of faith, yet it may be factual, true, and unmistaken. Again, something may be fully approved of…well transmitted…well cogitated…well reflected upon, yet it may be empty, hollow, and false; but something else may not be well reflected upon, yet it may be factual, true, and unmistaken. Under these conditions it is not proper for a wise man who preserves truth to come to the definite conclusion: ‘Only this is true, anything else is wrong.’”
“But, Master Gotama, in what way is there the preservation of truth? How does one preserve truth? We ask Master Gotama about the preservation of truth.”
“If a person has faith, Bhāradvāja, he preserves truth when he says: ‘My faith is thus’; but he does not yet come to the definite conclusion: ‘Only this is true, anything else is wrong.’ In this way, Bhāradvāja, there is the preservation of truth; in this way he preserves truth; in this way we describe the preservation of truth. But as yet there is no discovery of truth.
“If a person approves of something…if he receives an oral tradition…if he reaches a conclusion based on reasoned cogitation…if he gains a reflective acceptance of a view, he preserves truth when he says: ‘My reflective acceptance of a view is thus’; but he does not yet come to the definite conclusion: ‘Only this is true, anything else is wrong.’ In this way too, Bhāradvāja, there is the preservation of truth; in this way he preserves truth; in this way we describe the preservation of truth. But as yet there is no discovery of truth.”
~~
Another sutta I’ve tagged in my notes, AN 10.93. In it, we see the wisdom of Anāthapiṇḍika showing some wanderers how views are to be seen. You could also categorize this one under the “inspiring suttas about how far a layperson can advance in Dhamma” category.
At one time the Buddha was staying near Sāvatthī in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s monastery.
Then the householder Anāthapiṇḍika left Sāvatthī in the middle of the day to see the Buddha. Then it occurred to him, “It’s the wrong time to see the Buddha, as he’s in retreat. And it’s the wrong time to see the esteemed mendicants, as they’re in retreat. Why don’t I visit the monastery of the wanderers of other religions?”
Then he went to the monastery of the wanderers of other religions. Now at that time, the wanderers of other religions had come together, making an uproar, a dreadful racket as they sat and talked about all kinds of low topics.
They saw Anāthapiṇḍika coming off in the distance, and stopped each other, saying, “Be quiet, good sirs, don’t make a sound. The householder Anāthapiṇḍika, a disciple of the ascetic Gotama, is coming into our monastery. He is included among the white-clothed lay disciples of the ascetic Gotama, who is residing in Sāvatthī. Such venerables like the quiet, are educated to be quiet, and praise the quiet. Hopefully if he sees that our assembly is quiet he’ll see fit to approach.”
Then those wanderers of other religions fell silent. Then Anāthapiṇḍika went up to them, and exchanged greetings with those wanderers. When the greetings and polite conversation were over, he sat down to one side. The wanderers said to him, “Tell us, householder, what is the view of the ascetic Gotama?”
“Sirs, I don’t know all his views.”
“Well then, since it seems you don’t know all the views of the ascetic Gotama, tell us, what are the views of the mendicants?”
“Sirs, I don’t know all the mendicants’ views.”
“Well then, since it seems you don’t know all the views of the ascetic Gotama or of the mendicants, tell us, householder, what is your view?”
“Sirs, it’s not hard for me to explain what my views are. But please, let the venerables explain their own convictions first. Afterwards it won’t be hard for me to explain my views.”
When he said this, one of the wanderers said to him, “The cosmos is eternal. This is the only truth, other ideas are silly. That’s my view, householder.”
Another wanderer said, “The cosmos is not eternal. This is the only truth, other ideas are silly. That’s my view, householder.”
Another wanderer said, “The cosmos is finite …” … “The cosmos is infinite …” … “The soul and the body are the same thing …” … “The soul and the body are different things …” … “A realized one still exists after death …” … “A realized one no longer exists after death …” … “A realized one both still exists and no longer exists after death …” … “A realized one neither still exists nor no longer exists after death. This is the only truth, other ideas are silly. That’s my view, householder.”
When this was said, Anāthapiṇḍika said this, “Sirs, regarding the venerable who said this: ‘The cosmos is eternal. This is the only truth, other ideas are silly. That’s my view, householder.’ This view of his has either arisen from his own irrational application of mind, or is conditioned by what someone else says. But that view is created, conditioned, chosen, dependently originated. Anything that is created, conditioned, chosen, and dependently originated is impermanent. And what’s impermanent is suffering. What he clings to and holds to is just suffering.
Regarding the venerable who said this: ‘The cosmos is not eternal. This is the only truth, other ideas are silly. That’s my view, householder.’ This view of his has either arisen from his own irrational application of mind, or is conditioned by what someone else says. But that view is created, conditioned, chosen, dependently originated. Anything that is created, conditioned, chosen, and dependently originated is impermanent. And what’s impermanent is suffering. What he clings to and holds to is just suffering.
Regarding the venerable who said this: ‘The cosmos is finite …’ … ‘The cosmos is infinite …’ … ‘The soul and the body are the same thing …’ … ‘The soul and the body are different things …’ … ‘A realized one still exists after death …’ … ‘A realized one no longer exists after death …’ … ‘A realized one both still exists and no longer exists after death …’ … ‘A realized one neither still exists nor no longer exists after death. This is the only truth, other ideas are silly. That’s my view, householder.’ This view of his has either arisen from his own irrational application of mind, or is conditioned by what someone else says. But that view is created, conditioned, chosen, dependently originated. Anything that is created, conditioned, chosen, and dependently originated is impermanent. And what’s impermanent is suffering. What he clings to and holds to is just suffering.”
When he said this the wanderers said to him, “Householder, we’ve each explained our own convictions. Tell us, householder, what is your view?”
“Sirs, anything that is created, conditioned, chosen, and dependently originated is impermanent. And what’s impermanent is suffering. And what’s suffering is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self. That’s my view, sirs.”
“Householder, anything that is created, conditioned, chosen, and dependently originated is impermanent. And what’s impermanent is suffering. What you cling to and hold to is just suffering.”
“Sirs, anything that is created, conditioned, chosen, and dependently originated is impermanent. And what’s impermanent is suffering. And I’ve truly seen clearly with right wisdom that what’s suffering is not mine, I am not this, it’s not my self. And I truly understand the escape beyond that.”
When this was said, those wanderers sat silent, dismayed, shoulders drooping, downcast, depressed, with nothing to say. Seeing this, Anāthapiṇḍika got up from his seat. He went to the Buddha, bowed, sat down to one side, and informed the Buddha of all they had discussed.
“Good, good, householder! That’s how you should legitimately and completely refute those foolish men from time to time.”
Then the Buddha educated, encouraged, fired up, and inspired the householder Anāthapiṇḍika with a Dhamma talk, after which Anāthapiṇḍika got up from his seat, bowed, and respectfully circled the Buddha before leaving.
Then, not long after Anāthapiṇḍika had left, the Buddha addressed the mendicants: “Mendicants, even a mendicant who has ordained for a hundred years in this teaching and training would legitimately and completely refute those wanderers of other religions just as the householder Anāthapiṇḍika did.”
I find it heart breaking when views invite to harsh and negative speech - the total opposite of what Lord Buddha teaches. Contemplation and reminding oneself again and again that every one has the right to have her/his own view, regardless if one likes this view or not. Hard work but always rewarding when another blind corner in the mind gets more, healthy light 