Clinging to Views

[Ceisiwr]

In the suttas we are taught that one of the floods to be over come are views. We are taught not to cling to views, to let go of views. What do you understand by this? What do you understand by clinging to views and letting go of views? What do you understand by the word "view"?

"The extent to which there are viewpoints, view-stances, the taking up of views, obsessions of views, the cause of views, & the uprooting of views: that’s what I know. That’s what I see. Knowing that, I say ‘I know.’ Seeing that, I say ‘I see.’ Why should I say ‘I don’t know, I don’t see’? I do know. I do see.”

https://suttacentral.net/an10.96/en/thanissaro

[asahi]

In the suttas we are taught that one of the floods to be over come are views. We are taught not to cling to views, to let go of views. What do you understand by this? What do you understand by clinging to views and letting go of views? What do you understand by the word "view"?

Hi , is it possible to let go of views in the beginning of the path ? I suppose the priority of practice is to understand the dependent arising before the views can be revealed and not just intellectually .

[Sam Vara]

In the suttas we are taught that one of the floods to be over come are views. We are taught not to cling to views, to let go of views. What do you understand by this? What do you understand by clinging to views and letting go of views? What do you understand by the word "view"?

"The extent to which there are viewpoints, view-stances, the taking up of views, obsessions of views, the cause of views, & the uprooting of views: that’s what I know. That’s what I see. Knowing that, I say ‘I know.’ Seeing that, I say ‘I see.’ Why should I say ‘I don’t know, I don’t see’? I do know. I do see.”

https://suttacentral.net/an10.96/en/thanissaro

Restricting ourselves to that particular sutta, views might be defined as the ten speculative ideas about the external world listed there; or any such idea which is held to be the sole exclusive truth; or those speculative views which are held in that way. That would be a good start, and from there we could look at other suttas to see if they define "views" more widely.

It seems the Buddha discouraged thinking based on these metaphysical gobbets, and simply asked us to avoid them; to think in other terms.

[Ceisiwr]

In the suttas we are taught that one of the floods to be over come are views. We are taught not to cling to views, to let go of views. What do you understand by this? What do you understand by clinging to views and letting go of views? What do you understand by the word "view"?

"The extent to which there are viewpoints, view-stances, the taking up of views, obsessions of views, the cause of views, & the uprooting of views: that’s what I know. That’s what I see. Knowing that, I say ‘I know.’ Seeing that, I say ‘I see.’ Why should I say ‘I don’t know, I don’t see’? I do know. I do see.”

https://suttacentral.net/an10.96/en/thanissaro

Restricting ourselves to that particular sutta, views might be defined as the ten speculative ideas about the external world listed there; or any such idea which is held to be the sole exclusive truth; or those speculative views which are held in that way. That would be a good start, and from there we could look at other suttas to see if they define "views" more widely.

It seems the Buddha discouraged thinking based on these metaphysical gobbets, and simply asked us to avoid them; to think in other terms.

Based on my current understanding I can see how the Dhamma rejects metaphysics, but then we find what seems like a paradox. Having Right View which is knowledge that one does not cling to and lets go of, thus having no view:

When this had been said, the wanderers said to Anathapindika the householder, “We have each & every one expounded to you in line with our own positions. Now tell us what views you have.”

“Whatever has been brought into being, is fabricated, willed, dependently originated, that is inconstant. Whatever is inconstant is stress. Whatever is stress is not me, is not what I am, is not my self. This is the sort of view I have.”

“So, householder, whatever has been brought into being, is fabricated, willed, dependently originated, that is inconstant. Whatever is inconstant is stress. You thus adhere to that very stress, submit yourself to that very stress.”

“Venerable sirs, whatever has been brought into being, is fabricated, willed, dependently originated, that is inconstant. Whatever is inconstant is stress. Whatever is stress is not me, is not what I am, is not my self. Having seen this well with right discernment as it actually is present, I also discern the higher escape from it as it actually is present.”

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

Buddha:

"The raft [including Right View] is bound and well together cast,
the Further Shore attained, the flood o’erpassed;
of well-made raft what further need have I?
so, an it liketh thee, rain on O sky!"

Snp 1.2

[chownah]

Views are not to be clung to because views are conditioned. The views that an individual holds arise from the conditions of the individual holding the view. As conditioned things they are stressful and should not be seen as self.
chownah

[confusedlayman]

only this is true, others are false

when u have more than 1 view for one same thing then u can't cling as there is more than 1 view...

[Bundokji]

Similar sutta is the Tittha sutta. Blind people were shown a part of the elephant (which constitutes a view point), and dependent on what they saw/felt, they described the elephant. When their descriptions did not match, they began to quarrel.

The paradox of the parts vs the all is relevant and discussed in different ways in the suttas. The partial view or the individual view (the view point) is all that is known by the individual. The partial view undergoes constant updates, but it remains both partial and all that is known. Conversely, when everything is partial, the partial is universal.

Clinging is caused by the universality of the partial. When the partial/nominal is the universal, any acts of denying its universality is not less deceptive than affirming it. The input of Ven Ananda in the quoted sutta appears deceptively different than Kokanuda the wanderer, but it is not.

[Sam Vara]

Based on my current understanding I can see how the Dhamma rejects metaphysics, but then we find what seems like a paradox. Having Right View which is knowledge that one does not cling to and lets go of, thus having no view:

When this had been said, the wanderers said to Anathapindika the householder, “We have each & every one expounded to you in line with our own positions. Now tell us what views you have.”

“Whatever has been brought into being, is fabricated, willed, dependently originated, that is inconstant. Whatever is inconstant is stress. Whatever is stress is not me, is not what I am, is not my self. This is the sort of view I have.”

“So, householder, whatever has been brought into being, is fabricated, willed, dependently originated, that is inconstant. Whatever is inconstant is stress. You thus adhere to that very stress, submit yourself to that very stress.”

“Venerable sirs, whatever has been brought into being, is fabricated, willed, dependently originated, that is inconstant. Whatever is inconstant is stress. Whatever is stress is not me, is not what I am, is not my self. Having seen this well with right discernment as it actually is present, I also discern the higher escape from it as it actually is present.”

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

Buddha:

"The raft [including Right View] is bound and well together cast,
the Further Shore attained, the flood o’erpassed;
of well-made raft what further need have I?
so, an it liketh thee, rain on O sky!"

Snp 1.2

Yes, I'm not sure whether it's right to say that the Dhamma rejects metaphysics, in that there are elsewhere what look like some metaphysical claims. But the Buddha certainly seemed to discourage people from thinking in terms of those ten positions or ideas, presumably at least in part because they were fruitless. The dialogue with Anathapindika in 10.93 suggests to me that the focus is primarily on the way that views are held. Unlike the others, who cling rigidly to their view, Anathapindika is able to see the fabricated nature of his own position; even though that position is the apparently humble one of knowing the origin, nature, and danger of views in general. The others are unable to convict him of the same tendency towards views because he knows he is not those views. He merely knows them as a series of related statements, but doesn't cling to them. He won't be let down by them.

[Spiny Norman]

In the suttas we are taught that one of the floods to be over come are views. We are taught not to cling to views, to let go of views. What do you understand by this? What do you understand by clinging to views and letting go of views? What do you understand by the word "view"?

"The extent to which there are viewpoints, view-stances, the taking up of views, obsessions of views, the cause of views, & the uprooting of views: that’s what I know. That’s what I see. Knowing that, I say ‘I know.’ Seeing that, I say ‘I see.’ Why should I say ‘I don’t know, I don’t see’? I do know. I do see.”

https://suttacentral.net/an10.96/en/thanissaro

Anatta is a view which many Buddhists cling to.

[cappuccino]

the flood of views leads to debating for endless hours online

[lnn]

I am currently studying Buddhism in school and something that puzzled me about clinging was that to me, everything I do seems to be clinging - even practicing Buddhism. How would dedicating time to Buddhism not be clinging to something impermanent?

Similarly, in regards to the 10 questions that the Buddha did not answer, if our universe is not eternal, would we all achieve enlightenment eventually? Or if it is not eternal, then how would the cycle of rebirth continue?

[circuit]

I am currently studying Buddhism in school and something that puzzled me about clinging was that to me, everything I do seems to be clinging - even practicing Buddhism. How would dedicating time to Buddhism not be clinging to something impermanent?

imho.
in order to able to release, i.e. not clinging, we should go through it, and left it behind after realise ultimate goal, i.e. Nibbana. cmiiw

Similarly, in regards to the 10 questions that the Buddha did not answer, if our universe is not eternal, would we all achieve enlightenment eventually? Or if it is not eternal, then how would the cycle of rebirth continue?

imho.
universe eternal or not eternal etc., to think about those are very stressing, while The Buddha taught about release the stresses. cmiiw

[pegembara]

"With regard to those brahmans & contemplatives who are of the view, of the opinion that 'A part is pleasing to me; a part is not pleasing to me': A wise person among them considers that 'If I were to grasp and insist firmly on this view of mine that "A part is pleasing to me; a part is not pleasing to me," and to state that "Only this is true, all else is worthless," I would clash with two — the brahman or contemplative who is of the view, of the opinion that "All is pleasing to me" and the brahman or contemplative who is of the view, of the opinion that "All is not pleasing to me." I would clash with these two. Where there is a clash, there is dispute. Where there is a dispute, quarreling. Where there is quarreling, annoyance. Where there is annoyance, frustration.' Envisioning for himself clash, dispute, quarreling, annoyance, frustration, he both abandons that view and does not cling to another view. Thus there is the abandoning of these views; thus there is the relinquishing of these views.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/ati/tip ... .than.html

[SteRo]

In the suttas we are taught that one of the floods to be over come are views. We are taught not to cling to views, to let go of views. What do you understand by this? What do you understand by clinging to views and letting go of views? What do you understand by the word "view"?

"The extent to which there are viewpoints, view-stances, the taking up of views, obsessions of views, the cause of views, & the uprooting of views: that’s what I know. That’s what I see. Knowing that, I say ‘I know.’ Seeing that, I say ‘I see.’ Why should I say ‘I don’t know, I don’t see’? I do know. I do see.”

https://suttacentral.net/an10.96/en/thanissaro

"view" can be understood as concept having specific signs ('concept with signs') or as mere concept.
If it is said "not clinging to views" then the latter meaning is referred to and it is assumed that there are views which are mere concepts and that it is the clinging that adds signs to the mere concept.
If it is said "letting go of views" then concept with signs is referred to because that meaning does not exclude knowing and using mere concepts altough one does not have views.
The use of "view" leads to misunderstandings if one party uses "view" as 'concept with signs' but the other party understands "view" as mere concept. An example is: one says "I have no views" and the other responds "That's a view".
The difference between 'concept with signs' and 'mere concept' can only be discerned on citta level which is why one hearing the utterances of another cannot assess whether the utterances are concepts with or without signs.

[DooDoot]

... clinging to views....

But why is birth suffering?

Birth is not necessarily suffering. Consider a sotapanna that is reborn. Sotapanna is free from suffering.