On the simile of the raft, and letting go of what is not the teachings

[sujato]

@Deeele

Have I missed something here?

No, I think this is right.

@Deeele

Does the above indicate anything about the authenticity of MN 22?

Not much. It’s a widely found set. Probably the original list was somewhat shorter (three items, I think). But at the most it just suggests the list was standardized at a somewhat later time.

[Deeele]

@sujato

Not much. It’s a widely found set. Probably the original list was somewhat shorter (three items, I think). But at the most it just suggests the list was standardized at a somewhat later time.

Thank you. That makes sense since MN 22 is such a marvelous sutta.

[dougsmith]

@Deeele

[Doug:] I am currently reading through Gil Fronsdal’s new translation of the latter. In his intro he says that the text establishes the Buddha as teaching ‘no-views’…

[Deele:] By the nature of the teachings, this is obviously not true. I think one should always err on the side of caution when imagining a one-off-isolated-phrase sums up the entire Buddha-Dhamma.

Having finished the book and reconsidered Fronsdal’s wording in his intro, I think he actually does not make the stronger claim I initially attributed to him. So I wanted to clear up that mistake of mine. Although he does say it seems as though the Buddha is arguing for ‘no-views’, I think in the final analysis he is probably agreeing with Paul Fuller, who he cites in his bibliography. Though it is not entirely clear.

[Deeele]

@dougsmith

‘no-views’

Right View is salient. There is little support for a dhamma of ‘no-views’. One cannot live & function in the world with no-views. Even the view of ‘no-views’ is a view.

[SarathW1]

@Deeele

One cannot live & function in the world with no-views.

So what you are saying is Arahants have views?

https://suttacentral.net/en/an10.93