Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

On Views, Snp4.5

Expand Messages
  • truth_aerator
    Dear Nina, KenH, all, Can you please comment on this sutta? A person who associates himself with certain views, considering them as best and making them
    Message 1 of 10 , Nov 12, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Nina, KenH, all,

      Can you please comment on this sutta?

      ""A person who associates himself with certain views, considering them as best and making them supreme in the world, he says, because of that, that all other views are inferior; therefore he is not free from contention (with others). In what is seen, heard, cognized and in ritual observances performed, he sees a profit for himself. Just by laying hold of that view he regards every other view as worthless. Those skilled (in judgment)[1] say that (a view becomes) a bond if, relying on it, one regards everything else as inferior. Therefore a bhikkhu should not depend on what is seen, heard or cognized, nor upon ritual observances. He should not present himself as equal to, nor imagine himself to be inferior, nor better than, another. Abandoning (the views) he had (previously) held and not taking up (another), he does not seek a support even in knowledge. Among those who dispute he is certainly not one to take sides. He does not [have] recourse to a view at all. In whom there is no inclination to either extreme, for becoming or non-becoming, here or in another existence, for him there does not exist a fixed viewpoint on investigating the doctrines assumed (by others). Concerning the seen, the heard and the cognized he does not form the least notion. That brahmana[2] who does not grasp at a view, with what could he be identified in the world?

      "They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion); doctrines are not accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does not fall back on views."
      http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.4.05.irel.html


      Specifically these parts are interesting:

      1) Abandoning (the views) he had (previously) held and not taking up (another), he does not seek a support even in knowledge.

      2) "They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion); doctrines are not accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does not fall back on views."



      With metta,

      Alex
    • sarah abbott
      Hi Alex, In these suttas in Sn, the views (di.t.thi) referred to are all to wrong views. As I wrote before: the Paramatthaka sutta, specifically refers in the
      Message 2 of 10 , Nov 12, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Alex,

        In these suttas in Sn, the views (di.t.thi) referred to are all to wrong views. As I wrote before:

        "the Paramatthaka sutta, specifically refers in the translation I have to 'dogmatic view' and how the 'brahmin is not led by rule and rite'. These are wrong views or wrong understandings (i.e. the opposite of samma ditthi, the first factor of the noble 8fold Path) that are referred to."

        If you look in Nyantiloka's dictionary, you'll see it tells you under ditthi:

        "(lit. 'sight'; dis, to see): view, belief, speculative opinion, insight.
        If not qualified by sammaa, 'right', it mostly refers to wrong and evil view or opinion"

        Metta

        Sarah

        >A:Can you please comment on this sutta?

        ""A person who associates himself with certain views, considering them as best and making them supreme in the world, he says, because of that, that all other views are inferior; therefore he is not free from contention (with others). <...>
        "They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion); doctrines are not accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does not fall back on views."
        http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.4.05.irel.html
        ========
      • truth_aerator
        Hi Sarah, all, So by views you mean only the wrong views? While this strained interpretation is possible for first few sentences, it is refuted later on.
        Message 3 of 10 , Nov 13, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi Sarah, all,

          So by views you mean only the wrong views? While this strained interpretation is possible for first few sentences, it is refuted later on.

          "...he does not seek a support even in knowledge"
          "That brahmana who does not grasp at a view, with what could he be identified in the world? "They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion); doctrines are not accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does not fall back on views.""
          http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.4.05.irel.html

          This part seems to refer to an Arahant if not a sekha.

          With metta,

          Alex
        • sarah abbott
          Hi Alex, ... ...he does not seek a support even in knowledge That brahmana who does not grasp at a view, with what could he be identified in the world?
          Message 4 of 10 , Nov 15, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            Hi Alex,

            --- On Sun, 14/11/10, truth_aerator <truth_aerator@...> wrote:
            >So by views you mean only the wrong views? While this strained interpretation is possible for first few sentences, it is refuted later on.

            "...he does not seek a support even in knowledge"
            "That brahmana who does not grasp at a view, with what could he be identified in the world? "They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion); doctrines are not accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does not fall back on views.""
            http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.4.05.irel.html

            >This part seems to refer to an Arahant if not a sekha.
            ....
            S: No wrong views, no attachment of any kind. The highest or samma di.t.thi however.

            Metta

            Sarah
            =====
          • truth_aerator
            Hi Sarah, all, ... Why didn t the Buddha specifically mentioned Wrong views, but simply stated views ? Are you saying that an Arahant is identified with right
            Message 5 of 10 , Nov 15, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi Sarah, all,

              --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> wrote:
              >
              > Hi Alex,
              >
              > --- On Sun, 14/11/10, truth_aerator <truth_aerator@...> wrote:
              > >So by views you mean only the wrong views? While this strained interpretation is possible for first few sentences, it is refuted later on.
              >
              > "...he does not seek a support even in knowledge"
              > "That brahmana who does not grasp at a view, with what could he be identified in the world? "They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion); doctrines are not accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does not fall back on views.""
              > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.4.05.irel.html
              >
              > >This part seems to refer to an Arahant if not a sekha.
              > ....
              > S: No wrong views, no attachment of any kind. The highest or samma di.t.thi however.
              >
              > Metta
              >
              > Sarah
              > =====
              >


              Why didn't the Buddha specifically mentioned Wrong views, but simply stated "views"?


              Are you saying that an Arahant is identified with right views?



              With metta,

              Alex
            • ptaus1
              Hi Sarah, Abandoning (the views) he had (previously) held and not taking up (another), he does not seek a support even in knowledge. pt: While it s
              Message 6 of 10 , Nov 27, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi Sarah,

                "Abandoning (the views) he had (previously) held and not taking up (another), he does not seek a support even in knowledge."

                pt: While it's reasonable that in the above "the views" refer to ditthi (wrong view), what does "knowledge" refer to (panna?) and what does "seek a support in" refer to?

                Best wishes
                pt
              • sarah abbott
                Hi Pt & all, ... Abandoning (the views) he had (previously) held and not taking up (another), he does not seek a support even in knowledge. ... .... S: I
                Message 7 of 10 , Dec 1, 2010
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hi Pt & all,

                  --- On Sat, 27/11/10, ptaus1 <ptaus1@...> wrote:
                  "Abandoning (the views) he had (previously) held and not taking up (another), he does not seek a support even in knowledge."

                  >pt: While it's reasonable that in the above "the views" refer to ditthi (wrong view), what does "knowledge" refer to (panna?) and what does "seek a support in" refer to?
                  ....
                  S: I understand it, in the context of the sutta as a whole, to be referring to the abandoning of all wrong views (di.t.thi) and the giving up of all attachments, even to wisdom (~naa.na). Remember the raft? Even the attachment to the raft has to be relinquished. The last sentence in the sutta is "Gone to the far shore, such a one does not fall back [on anything]."

                  I think the sutta and commentary refer to the abandoning of all kinds of attadi.t.thi (and other di.t.thi) along with all kinds of (wrong) conceiving (na ma~n~netha.

                  Saddhatissa's translation of the verse:

                  "The sage has abandoned the notion of self or ego and is free from clinging. He does not depend even on knowledge; he does not take sides in teh midst of controversy; he has no dogmatic views."

                  Metta

                  Sarah
                  =======
                • truth_aerator
                  Hello Sarah, all, ... What do you think He does not depend even on knowledge (nana) means? With metta, Alex
                  Message 8 of 10 , Dec 1, 2010
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hello Sarah, all,

                    > S: > "The sage has abandoned the notion of self or ego and is free >from clinging. He does not depend even on knowledge; he does not take >sides in teh midst of controversy; he has no dogmatic views."


                    What do you think "He does not depend even on knowledge (nana)" means?


                    With metta,

                    Alex
                  • ptaus1
                    Hi Sarah and Alex, ... Best wishes pt
                    Message 9 of 10 , Dec 4, 2010
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Hi Sarah and Alex,

                      Thanks Sarah for your reply on this. Alex, I think your query:

                      > A: What do you think "He does not depend even on knowledge (nana)" means? <


                      has been answered in this bit in her reply - marked with *!*:


                      > S: I understand it, in the context of the sutta as a whole, to be referring to the abandoning of all wrong views (di.t.thi) and *!*the giving up of all attachments, even to wisdom (~naa.na). Remember the raft? Even the attachment to the raft has to be relinquished. The last sentence in the sutta is "Gone to the far shore, such a one does not fall back [on anything]."*!*
                      >
                      > I think the sutta and commentary refer to the abandoning of all kinds of attadi.t.thi (and other di.t.thi) along with all kinds of (wrong) conceiving (na ma~n~netha.


                      Best wishes
                      pt
                    • sarah
                      Hi Alex, ... ... S: By di.t.thi in context, wrong views are understood. See Nyantiloka dict. again. Just as samadhi in context usually means kusala - no
                      Message 10 of 10 , Dec 9, 2010
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Hi Alex,

                        --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" <truth_aerator@...> wrote:
                        > Why didn't the Buddha specifically mentioned Wrong views, but simply stated "views"?
                        >
                        >
                        > Are you saying that an Arahant is identified with right views?
                        ...
                        S: By "di.t.thi" in context, wrong views are understood. See Nyantiloka dict. again. Just as "samadhi" in context usually means kusala - no need to add "sammaa". The audience understood.

                        The arahat's cittas are accompanied by pa~n~naa, i.e. sammaa di.t.thi very, very often during the javana process.

                        Metta

                        Sarah
                        =====
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.