What is right view?

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
vinasp
Posts: 1675
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Bristol. United Kingdom.

Re: What is right view?

Post by vinasp »

Hi everyone,

I think that I have found yet another way that the term "right view" is used. In MN 117 it is used to refer to the understanding of what is, and is not the path.

"One understands wrong view as wrong view and right view as right view : this is one's right view"

Do you see that there are two things being called "right view" here ? One is the path factor of right view, the other is an understanding of the difference between that path factor and its opposite - wrong view. The sutta goes on to say the same thing about more path factors :

"One understands wrong intention as wrong intention and right intention as right intention : this is one's right view".

The same is said about speech, action and livelihood. Although this sutta does not go further, we know that there is wrong effort, wrong mindfulness and wrong concentration. These would have to be distinguished from their counterparts in the same way. So, there is a right view which sees what is, and is not, the path.

We are told what the path factor of right view actually is :

"There is what is given and what is offered and what is sacrificed ..."

But this can not be the true path factor of right view, because it can not be developed, and could not lead to enlightenment. So something else is being substituted here in place of the real right view.

Best wishes, Vincent.
vinasp
Posts: 1675
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Bristol. United Kingdom.

Re: What is right view?

Post by vinasp »

Hi retrofuturist,

Sorry - my fault ! I thought that right view could be discussed without problems arising due to my "new interpretation". But I was wrong. Most peoples understanding of the path is different to mine, and this includes right view. I had forgotten that the momentary paths/fruits are explained by a "supramundane" right view. I will read a bit on this topic to refresh my memory.

I have no problem with right view being understanding or wisdom, it is the four truths that are the problem. For me, they are a shallow useless teaching which would not result in enlightenment for anyone. Understanding dependent origination, or no-self in relation to the five aggregates of clinging, would lead to enlightenment. The four noble truths do not tell you how to bring about the cessation of craving.

I think that my understanding of the path is actually simpler, right view is the no-self view.

Best wishes, Vincent.
vinasp
Posts: 1675
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Bristol. United Kingdom.

Re: What is right view?

Post by vinasp »

Hi pt1,

I feel that I should thank you for thoughtful posts. I do not want you to think that I am ignoring you. I need more time to reflect on them before replying. I find the abhidhamma perspective difficult to combine with my suttanta orientation.

Is there really any problem understanding right view ? If so, what do you think the problem is ? What role does no-self have in right view according to the abhidhamma ? Thanks.

Best wishes, Vincent.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: What is right view?

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi Vincent,
vinasp wrote: Is there really any problem understanding right view ? If so, what do you think the problem is ?
I don't think there is any serious problem (of course there is always room for clarification...). You're the one who disagrees with the standard interpretations, so there's little point in repeatedly asking others to explain whath the problem is...

Metta
Mike
User avatar
acinteyyo
Posts: 1706
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 9:48 am
Location: Bavaria / Germany

Re: What is right view?

Post by acinteyyo »

Hi Vincent,
since I'm not a native speaker of english I maybe expressing myself not clearly. So if there is something which isn't clear, just ask and I'll try to explain it in other words if possible. The most of my post here is about what you said in the following quote.
vinasp wrote:[the 4 noble truth] For me, they are a shallow useless teaching which would not result in enlightenment for anyone.
there is the Maha-satipatthana sutta (DN22), where it is written:
"And what is right view? Knowledge with regard to stress, knowledge with regard to the origination of stress, knowledge with regard to the cessation of stress, knowledge with regard to the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress: This is called right view.
So here knowledge with regard to the 4 noble truths is called right view.
When one understands the 4 noble truths, then one can distinguish what is well spoken from what is ill spoken.
This is also called "right view" as you already mentioned (MN117).
vinasp wrote:"One understands wrong view as wrong view and right view as right view : this is one's right view"
Right view is not a static thing. It is impossible to say, "right view is this particular thing", so that one can understand "right view" by such an explanation. Furthermore right view is not independent. It depends on two conditions.
MN43 Mahavedalla Sutta wrote:Right view:
"Friend, how many conditions are there for the arising of right view?"
"Friend, there are two conditions for the arising of right view : the voice of another and appropriate attention. These are the two conditions for the arising of right view."
So when there is the voice of another (or something written of another) and appropriate attention, then there arises right view. This means the certain kind of view arises, which is the ideal view for the certain situation. The certain view, which is totally in accordance to dhamma or truth or nature or how one likes to call it. The certain kind of view which doesn't lead to suffering.
Therefore first of all one has to understand what suffering or stress (dukkha) is, which is the first noble truth. And one has to understand what the origin of dukkha is, which is the second noble truth. To avoid further arising of dukkha. Well, one also has to understand what the cessation of dukkha is, which is the third noble truth. To reduce dukkha which already exists. But usually one doesn't know anything about dukkha, its origin, its cessation and the path leading to the cessation of dukkha. This is the reason why one has to understand the 4th noble truth - the path leading to the cessation of dukkha - to "gain right view" to know "how to act appropriate", which is the kind of "acting" where no suffering follows.
vinasp wrote:Understanding dependent origination, or no-self in relation to the five aggregates of clinging, would lead to enlightenment. The four noble truths do not tell you how to bring about the cessation of craving.
Why should one bring craving to an end?
Because craving is the origin of dukkha (2rd noble truth) and when craving ceases dukkha ceases (3rd noble truth).
But why should one do anything to end suffering, when one actually doesn't know that one is suffering or doesn't know from what one is suffering?
How should a puthujjana know that "he is" suffering? The puthujjana doesn't know anything about dukkha.
So the Buddha told us what dukkha is. (1st noble truth).
When one understands it, one will do everything what is necessary to develop the noble eigthfold path, which leads to the cessation of dukkha.(4th noble truth).
For some beings this is enough to live and fullfill the holy life. For others more detailed explanation is necessary, e.g. dependent origination.
So we have plenty of more or less detailed explanations to start developing what is necessary to live the holy life.
Let's have a look on dependent origination. the first link is avijja (ignorance). What is ignorance? There is written something in MN 9:
"And what is ignorance, what is the origin of ignorance, what is the cessation of ignorance, what is the way leading to the cessation of ignorance? Not knowing about dukkha, not knowing about the origin of dukkha, not knowing about the cessation of dukkha, not knowing about the way leading to the cessation of dukkha — this is called ignorance.
This means ignorance is not knowing the four noble truths. How will one understand dependent origination without knowing the four noble truths?
vinasp wrote:I think that my understanding of the path is actually simpler, right view is the no-self view.
"the no-self view" is only then right view, when it arises in the appropriate situation. When it is hold as an absolute view it is just ditthi, but not samma-ditthi.
I hope this may help someone.
best wishes, acinteyyo
Thag 1.20. Ajita - I do not fear death; nor do I long for life. I’ll lay down this body, aware and mindful.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: What is right view?

Post by mikenz66 »

Dear acineyyo,
acinteyyo wrote:
vinasp wrote:I think that my understanding of the path is actually simpler, right view is the no-self view.
"the no-self view" is only then right view, when it arises in the appropriate situation. When it is hold as an absolute view it is just ditthi, but not samma-ditthi.
I hope this may help someone.
Thank you for your very clear expression of this. "Not self" is something to be experienced, not just understood intellectually. Nihilists like Richard Dawkins understand not-self intellectually (it's in The God Delusion somewhere, but curiously he doesn't know enough about Buddhism to see the connection...). In fact, I would say that many "non-religious" people understand it intellectually.

Vincent: I think most of us would agree that not-self is the key to the Buddha's Dhamma. He says as much in MN 11 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .ntbb.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Cula-sihanada Sutta.
"Though certain recluses and brahmans claim to propound the full understanding of all kinds of clinging... they describe the full understanding of clinging to sensual pleasures, clinging to views, and clinging to rules and observances without describing the full understanding of clinging to a doctrine of self. They do not understand one instance... therefore they describe only the full understanding of clinging to sensual pleasures, clinging to views, and clinging to rules and observances without describing the full understanding of clinging to a doctrine of self.
But, in my opinion, the full understanding is not just an intellectual understanding.

It occurs to me that if you want to discuss the "think yourself to enlightenment" approach you might check out the Yahoo Dhamma Study Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
There are some very knowledgeable people there whose emphasis seems to be on "understanding" rather than "formal practise".

Metta
Mike
User avatar
Prasadachitta
Posts: 974
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:52 am
Location: San Francisco (The Mission) Ca USA
Contact:

Re: What is right view?

Post by Prasadachitta »

Hello Acinteyyo,

Thank you For this and the rest of your post. Its spot on with my understanding.
acinteyyo wrote:So when there is the voice of another (or something written of another) and appropriate attention, then there arises right view. This means the certain kind of view arises, which is the ideal view for the certain situation. The certain view, which is totally in accordance to dhamma or truth or nature or how one likes to call it. The certain kind of view which doesn't lead to suffering.
This is why I dont really think its all that helpful to discuss right view in an out of context or generic way. Right veiw may arise within our mind steam but if we act out of the idea that it does not change in relation to its supporting conditions then it has already vanished. :rolleye:

Kind regards and thanks

Gabriel
"Beautifully taught is the Lord's Dhamma, immediately apparent, timeless, of the nature of a personal invitation, progressive, to be attained by the wise, each for himself." Anguttara Nikaya V.332
pt1
Posts: 417
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 2:30 am

Re: What is right view?

Post by pt1 »

vinasp wrote:Is there really any problem understanding right view ? If so, what do you think the problem is ? What role does no-self have in right view according to the abhidhamma ? Thanks.
Hi Vincent,

Good questions again. Here’s as I see it:

-the problem in understanding right view at the moment is usually the presence of wrong view at the moment (wrong view is again just another mental factor).

-that means that the “mind” at the moment is trying to hold onto a certain thought/idea/view about how things are (it can even be a thought "what is right view?").

-that trying to hold onto something means that there is craving (yet another mental factor) presently in the ”mind”.

-if craving is present at the time, that means there’s no direct understanding of anatta characteristic (not-self) of the present mind-state – in other words, impermanent phenomena (various mental factors present at the moment in the mind, which are together trying to hold onto that thought) are wrongly viewed/understood as lasting and satisfactory and there’s trying to hold onto them through craving (either through greed or aversion).

-if however not-self characteristic of the presently arisen mind-state/mental factors/phenomena is understood (and I’d add – understood directly, i.e. not just intellectually, even though that is also a good start), then no craving arises, and hence no wrong view either, and that understanding of presently arisen phenomena/mind-state/mental factors as impermanent, unsatisfactory and not-self is in fact right view.

That’s how it looks to me, and I think that for most of us, it’s hard to distinguish between “understanding right view/anatta/etc” as a concept – which can become just another thought that the mind is trying to hold onto through craving (in thinking, in arguments, etc) and understanding right view about the present moment conceptually as an aid that guides to understanding directly the present mind-state/factors as anatta, anicca and dukkha – i.e the real thing.

Regarding the four noble truths, I agree that this is a very hard part of the teaching, in fact imo, it’s the essence into which the whole of the Buddha’s message can be packed into, so usually we need a lot of help to gradually unpack the meaning, because the true depth of the 4 noble truths is realized only at awakening or thereabout imo. Many of the teachings in the suttas are very, very deep, and some things that I initially dismissed as shallow and non-important often turn out to be immensely relevant.

Best wishes
mudra
Posts: 51
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 10:33 am

Re: What is right view?

Post by mudra »

Not sure if this is off topic, but from the Theravada POV, what is wrong view? Is it the same as ignorance? Or does the latter lead to the former?
pt1
Posts: 417
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 2:30 am

Re: What is right view?

Post by pt1 »

mudra wrote:Not sure if this is off topic, but from the Theravada POV, what is wrong view? Is it the same as ignorance? Or does the latter lead to the former?
Hi, in abhidhammic classification:

Wrong view (ditthi) is one of the unwholesome mental factors (akusala cetasikas).

Ignorance (moha) is also an unwholesome mental factor, but it is also considered one of the 3 unwholesome root mental factors (the other two being greed and aversion). So, when an unwholesome consciousness (akusala citta) arises, it has to have ignorance as the root mental factor (maybe also greed or aversion) and is accompanied by a number of unwholesome mental factors, like wrong view (ditthi) for example.

Right view on the other hand is synonymous with wholesome mental factor of wisdom/understanding (panna), which is also one of the 3 wholesome root mental factors - non-ignorance (amoha), the other two wholesome roots being non-greed (alobha-generosity) and non-hate (adosa-kindness). When a wholesome consciousness (kusala citta) arises, it can have 2 or 3 wholesome roots mental factors (non-greed and non-hate, but no wisdom, or all 3 roots at the same time) and is accompanied by a number of other wholesome mental factors like abstinence from wrong speech, wrong action (virati cetasikas) etc.

Best wishes
User avatar
catmoon
Posts: 369
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 1:59 am

Re: What is right view?

Post by catmoon »

Sometimes I think u guyz overcomplicate things.


When I need right view, I just close my left eye. Works great.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: What is right view?

Post by tiltbillings »

catmoon wrote:Sometimes I think u guyz overcomplicate things.


When I need right view, I just close my left eye. Works great.
For me it is closing my right eye. While it can be important carefully understand what is entailed in Right View, "Sometimes I think u guyz overcomplicate things."
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
catmoon
Posts: 369
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 1:59 am

Re: What is right view?

Post by catmoon »

OMG he's got Left View! Burn the witch!!!!
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: What is right view?

Post by tiltbillings »

catmoon wrote:OMG he's got Left View! Burn the witch!!!!
No, no, no. The witch would be my wife and no one is burning her, but Left View might explain why I like Keith Olbermann rather than that relentless whack-job Glenn Beck.

As for my right eye, in a couple years the cataract will be bad enough to be removed and with a lens replacement, I have very good vision in that eye. Things change.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
nowheat
Posts: 543
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 3:42 am
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: What is right view?

Post by nowheat »

catmoon wrote:Sometimes I think u guyz overcomplicate things.
We do, don't we? It seems to me there's really only one truly right view, and that's what you see when you see the dhamma; it's the one that gets you there; it's the only one that really matters. Any lower levels of views are just steps on the way, they aren't the true view. And that view is the viewless view, the one that doesn't cling to anything unverifiable by direct insight (and even there keeps an open mind).

:namaste:
Post Reply