Are views form? Including the right view?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22382
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Are views form? Including the right view?

Post by Ceisiwr »

AlexBrains92 wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 12:54 pm

First of all, I didn't affirm that conditioned dhammas can sometimes bring satisfaction. Also satisfaction is something related to a subject who would experience it.
Their unsatisfactoriness is related to their impermanence, which isn't subjective.
Second, the Buddha never described his truths as absolute or ultimate, too. Think about it: they are truths designed for the human being, they are about the human existential condition. They have no value for a stone.
You sure about that?

“Mendicants, these four things are real, not unreal, not otherwise. What four? ‘This is suffering’ … ‘This is the origin of suffering’ … ‘This is the cessation of suffering’ … ‘This is the practice that leads to the cessation of suffering’ … These four things are real, not unreal, not otherwise.

That’s why you should practice meditation …”


- SN 56.20

"Monks, whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands—this steadfastness of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma: All processes are inconstant.

“The Tathagata directly awakens to that, breaks through to that. Directly awakening & breaking through to that, he declares it, teaches it, describes it, sets it forth. He reveals it, explains it, & makes it plain: All processes are inconstant.

“Whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands—this steadfastness of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma: All processes are stressful.

“The Tathagata directly awakens to that, breaks through to that. Directly awakening & breaking through to that, he declares it, teaches it, describes it, sets it forth. He reveals it, explains it, & makes it plain: All processes are stressful.

“Whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands—this steadfastness of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma: All phenomena are not-self.

“The Tathagata directly awakens to that, breaks through to that. Directly awakening & breaking through to that, he declares it, teaches it, describes it, sets it forth. He reveals it, explains it, & makes it plain: All phenomena are not-self.”


- AN 3.136

The truths aren't "designed for human beings". They are discovered. They are real and true regardless of if people know them or not, which is why so many beings are stuck in saṃsāra. They also do not only apply to humans, but also to animals and devas etc too.

"The truth is one,
there is no second"
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22382
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Are views form? Including the right view?

Post by Ceisiwr »

“Mendicants, these four things are real, not unreal, not otherwise. What four? ‘This is suffering’ … ‘This is the origin of suffering’ … ‘This is the cessation of suffering’ … ‘This is the practice that leads to the cessation of suffering’ … These four things are real, not unreal, not otherwise.

That’s why you should practice meditation …”

- SN 56.20
1st Noble Truth - All conditioned dhammas. Therefore, all conditioned dhammas are real, not unreal, not otherwise.

2nd Noble Truth - All types of craving. Therefore, all types of craving are real, not unreal, not otherwise.

3rd Noble Truth - Nibbāna. Therefore nibbāna is real, not unreal, not otherwise.

4th Noble Truth - The factors of the path. Therefore the dhammas of the path are real, not unreal, not otherwise.

Impermanent consciousness is real. Impermanent vedanā & sañña is real. Nibbāna is real. Having this view is Right View. Knowing and understanding this is Right Knowledge and wisdom.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
AlexBrains92
Posts: 1211
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2020 11:25 pm

Re: Are views form? Including the right view?

Post by AlexBrains92 »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 1:02 pm
AlexBrains92 wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 12:54 pm

First of all, I didn't affirm that conditioned dhammas can sometimes bring satisfaction. Also satisfaction is something related to a subject who would experience it.
Their unsatisfactoriness is related to their impermanence, which isn't subjective.
Second, the Buddha never described his truths as absolute or ultimate, too. Think about it: they are truths designed for the human being, they are about the human existential condition. They have no value for a stone.
You sure about that?

“Mendicants, these four things are real, not unreal, not otherwise. What four? ‘This is suffering’ … ‘This is the origin of suffering’ … ‘This is the cessation of suffering’ … ‘This is the practice that leads to the cessation of suffering’ … These four things are real, not unreal, not otherwise.

That’s why you should practice meditation …”


- SN 56.20

"Monks, whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands—this steadfastness of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma: All processes are inconstant.

“The Tathagata directly awakens to that, breaks through to that. Directly awakening & breaking through to that, he declares it, teaches it, describes it, sets it forth. He reveals it, explains it, & makes it plain: All processes are inconstant.

“Whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands—this steadfastness of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma: All processes are stressful.

“The Tathagata directly awakens to that, breaks through to that. Directly awakening & breaking through to that, he declares it, teaches it, describes it, sets it forth. He reveals it, explains it, & makes it plain: All processes are stressful.

“Whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands—this steadfastness of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma: All phenomena are not-self.

“The Tathagata directly awakens to that, breaks through to that. Directly awakening & breaking through to that, he declares it, teaches it, describes it, sets it forth. He reveals it, explains it, & makes it plain: All phenomena are not-self.”


- AN 3.136

The truths aren't "designed for human beings". They are discovered. They are real and true regardless of if people know them or not, which is why so many beings are stuck in saṃsāra. They also do not only apply to humans, but also to animals and devas etc too.

"The truth is one,
there is no second"
True, real, existing... yes, but conventionally (that doesn't mean untrue, unreal, unexisting...)
Why do I make this clarification? I would gladly avoid doing it, if you weren't talking about reality and truth in terms of sabhava and paramattha (the Buddha didn't do that).

Oh, impermanence too is a characteristic which only makes sense subjectively, since it's related to the concept of time.

«He does not construct even the subtlest apperception with regard
to what is seen, heard or thought; how would one conceptualise
that Brahmin in this world, who does not appropriate a view?

They do not fabricate, they do not prefer, they do not accept any
doctrine; the Brahmin cannot be inferred through virtue or vows,
such a person has gone to the far shore and does not fall back.»


- Snp 4.5 -
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22382
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Are views form? Including the right view?

Post by Ceisiwr »

AlexBrains92 wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 1:38 pm

True, real, existing... yes, but conventionally (that doesn't mean untrue, unreal, unexisting...)
Why do I make this clarification? I would gladly avoid doing it, if you weren't talking about reality and truth in terms of sabhava and paramattha (the Buddha didn't do that).
"Conventionally" is your own unwarranted insertion here. The Buddha never used the word "conventionally" nor "conceptually" in the above, and it would make little sense if he did. If something is objectively true then it isn't a mere concept. If it were a mere concept then it would only be true when conceptualised, and so would be conventional. That isn't what is being said above. What is being said above is that said dhammas are real meaning they exist independently of conceptual thought, which is what makes them ultimately true. Here the Buddha explicitly affirms the existence of the sabhāva-dhammas. Regardless of concept nibbāna is real, not otherwise. Ask yourself this question, if there was no Buddha and so no Dhamma in this world would nibbāna exist? Would it be real? The above says yes, therefore nibbāna is not a mere concept. It's an objective reality.

"Great seers who are free from craving declare that Nibbāna is an objective state which is deathless, absolutely endless, unconditioned, and unsurpassed. Thus as fourfold the Tathāgatas reveal the ultimate realities— consciousness, mental factors, matter, and Nibbāna."

- Abhidhammattha-saṅgaha

Oh, impermanence too is a characteristic which only makes sense subjectively, since it's related to the concept of time.
Dhammas existing and then not existing is not subjective. It's an objective fact. You are correct to say that time is merely a paññatti. For there to be the paññatti of time there has to be conditioned dhammas which arise, persist and then cease.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
AlexBrains92
Posts: 1211
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2020 11:25 pm

Re: Are views form? Including the right view?

Post by AlexBrains92 »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 1:45 pm
AlexBrains92 wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 1:38 pm

True, real, existing... yes, but conventionally (that doesn't mean untrue, unreal, unexisting...)
Why do I make this clarification? I would gladly avoid doing it, if you weren't talking about reality and truth in terms of sabhava and paramattha (the Buddha didn't do that).
"Conventionally" is your own unwarranted insertion here. The Buddha never used the word "conventionally" nor "conceptually" in the above, and it would make little sense if he did. If something is objectively true then it isn't a mere concept. If it were a mere concept then it would only be true when conceptualised, and so would be conventional. That isn't what is being said above. What is being said above is that said dhammas are real, meaning they exist independent of conceptual thought which is what makes them true. Here the Buddha explicitly affirms the existence of the sabhāva-dhammas.

Oh, impermanence too is a characteristic which only makes sense subjectively, since it's related to the concept of time.
Dhammas existing and then not existing is not subjective. It's an objective characteristic. You are correct to say that time is merely a paññatti. For there to be the paññatti of time there has to be conditioned dhammas which arise, persist and then cease.
What I tried to tell you, in many occasions, in different ways, is that no concept can effectively reflect actuality. This doesn't mean that there are just concepts and there's no actuality, but that actuality can't be faithfully conceptualized. Everything we think of and speak of is a mere concept as it don't correspond to 'things as they really are', but it's the product of artificial discrimination. Actuality can only be directly known, and only noble silence can "describe" it.

«He does not construct even the subtlest apperception with regard
to what is seen, heard or thought; how would one conceptualise
that Brahmin in this world, who does not appropriate a view?

They do not fabricate, they do not prefer, they do not accept any
doctrine; the Brahmin cannot be inferred through virtue or vows,
such a person has gone to the far shore and does not fall back.»


- Snp 4.5 -
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22382
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Are views form? Including the right view?

Post by Ceisiwr »

AlexBrains92 wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 2:16 pm

What I tried to tell you, in many occasions, in different ways, is that no concept can effectively reflect actuality. This doesn't mean that there are just concepts and there's no actuality, but that actuality can't be faithfully conceptualized. Everything we think of and speak of is a mere concept as it don't correspond to 'things as they really are', but it's the product of artificial discrimination. Actuality can only be directly known, and only noble silence can "describe" it.
Well that's quite a move towards the Abhidhamma and away from Ven. Nāgārjuna, which is most pleasing to see.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Are views form? Including the right view?

Post by chownah »

AlexBrains92 wrote: Sat Jul 31, 2021 1:36 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Jul 31, 2021 1:27 pm
AlexBrains92 wrote: Sat Jul 31, 2021 1:26 pm

What about sotapanna's ignorance?
What about it? Both have the same view, but the Arahant has full knowledge whereas the sotāpanna does not. Both look at the world the same way, but the Arahant also truly knows that it is so. View and knowledge are two different, yet related, things.
Related how?
While there are suttas which implicate direct knowing in the arising of right view in a major way (such as "Right View" https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html) it should be kept in mind that there are at least two suttas which say that right view arises either from the voice of another or by appropriate attention. It seem likely that the appropriate attention alternative is the arising from direct knowledge while the voice of another alternative is something else entirely I guess.

Also, I have noticed that all but one of the suttas I have seen seem to deal with right view without effluents......here is the sutta reference which talks about right view both with and without effluents:
An excerpt from MN 117
"And what is right view? Right view, I tell you, is of two sorts: There is right view with effluents, siding with merit, resulting in acquisitions [of becoming]; there is right view that is noble, without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path.

"And what is the right view with effluents, siding with merit, resulting in acquisitions? 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are contemplatives & brahmans who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is the right view with effluents, siding with merit, resulting in acquisitions.

"And what is the right view that is noble, without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path? The discernment, the faculty of discernment, the strength of discernment, analysis of qualities as a factor for awakening, the path factor of right view[1] in one developing the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is without effluents, who is fully possessed of the noble path. This is the right view that is noble, without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path.
It seems to me that the kinds of things listed in right view with effluents are things that one is likely to hear about from the voice of another......while the description of right view without effluents stresses discernment which I associate with direct knowing and the rest of the description seems to be consistent with the mn009: Right View sutta in which direct knowing is strongly implicated in the arising of right view.

So....it seems there are various modes for the arising of right view and direct knowing is implicated in only some of them....I guess....don't know for sure....
chownah
User avatar
AlexBrains92
Posts: 1211
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2020 11:25 pm

Re: Are views form? Including the right view?

Post by AlexBrains92 »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 2:19 pm
AlexBrains92 wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 2:16 pm

What I tried to tell you, in many occasions, in different ways, is that no concept can effectively reflect actuality. This doesn't mean that there are just concepts and there's no actuality, but that actuality can't be faithfully conceptualized. Everything we think of and speak of is a mere concept as it don't correspond to 'things as they really are', but it's the product of artificial discrimination. Actuality can only be directly known, and only noble silence can "describe" it.
Well that's quite a move towards the Abhidhamma and away from Ven. Nāgārjuna, which is most pleasing to see.
I wouldn't say that :D

«He does not construct even the subtlest apperception with regard
to what is seen, heard or thought; how would one conceptualise
that Brahmin in this world, who does not appropriate a view?

They do not fabricate, they do not prefer, they do not accept any
doctrine; the Brahmin cannot be inferred through virtue or vows,
such a person has gone to the far shore and does not fall back.»


- Snp 4.5 -
User avatar
mjaviem
Posts: 2299
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:06 pm

Re: Are views form? Including the right view?

Post by mjaviem »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 10:48 am ... Only at the end of life was he free from all dukkha for good. During life only temporally ...
Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 11:24 am ... the full escape from dukkha is not under the Bodhi tree but at the end of life...
:quote: :roll:
Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammā Sambuddhassa
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Are views form? Including the right view?

Post by chownah »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 1:02 pm
AlexBrains92 wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 12:54 pm

First of all, I didn't affirm that conditioned dhammas can sometimes bring satisfaction. Also satisfaction is something related to a subject who would experience it.
Their unsatisfactoriness is related to their impermanence, which isn't subjective.
Their unsatisfactoriness is related to the suffering which arises due to ignorance of their impermanence, which is subjective.
chownah
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22382
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Are views form? Including the right view?

Post by Ceisiwr »

chownah wrote: Tue Aug 03, 2021 9:03 am
Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 1:02 pm
AlexBrains92 wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 12:54 pm

First of all, I didn't affirm that conditioned dhammas can sometimes bring satisfaction. Also satisfaction is something related to a subject who would experience it.
Their unsatisfactoriness is related to their impermanence, which isn't subjective.
Their unsatisfactoriness is related to the suffering which arises due to ignorance of their impermanence, which is subjective.
chownah
Impermanence is suffering, along with pain. The unsatisfactoriness of dhammas is their inability to provide lasting satisfaction, because they are impermanent. Once awakened Buddhas and Arahants still experience dukkha, until the end of life when it ceases without remainder.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Are views form? Including the right view?

Post by chownah »

Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Aug 03, 2021 9:46 am
chownah wrote: Tue Aug 03, 2021 9:03 am
Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Aug 01, 2021 1:02 pm

Their unsatisfactoriness is related to their impermanence, which isn't subjective.
Their unsatisfactoriness is related to the suffering which arises due to ignorance of their impermanence, which is subjective.
chownah
Impermanence is suffering, along with pain. The unsatisfactoriness of dhammas is their inability to provide lasting satisfaction, because they are impermanent. Once awakened Buddhas and Arahants still experience dukkha, until the end of life when it ceases without remainder.
Once awakened, buddhas and arahants do not suffer because they have dispelled ignorance including ignorance about impermanence.
chownah
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22382
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Are views form? Including the right view?

Post by Ceisiwr »

chownah wrote: Tue Aug 03, 2021 12:02 pm
Once awakened, buddhas and arahants do not suffer because they have dispelled ignorance including ignorance about impermanence.
chownah
They still experience unsatisfactory dhammas, and still experience pain. Pain is intrinsically dukkha. All conditioned dhammas are intrinsically dukkha. This is why any form of existence is dukkha. The pleasant vedana of Jhana is dukkha because it doesn’t last.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Are views form? Including the right view?

Post by chownah »

Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Aug 03, 2021 12:19 pm
chownah wrote: Tue Aug 03, 2021 12:02 pm
Once awakened, buddhas and arahants do not suffer because they have dispelled ignorance including ignorance about impermanence.
chownah
They still experience unsatisfactory dhammas, and still experience pain. Pain is intrinsically dukkha. All conditioned dhammas are intrinsically dukkha. This is why any form of existence is dukkha. The pleasant vedana of Jhana is dukkha because it doesn’t last.
Whatever they experience they do not suffer from it since they have abandoned ignorance.
chownah
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22382
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Are views form? Including the right view?

Post by Ceisiwr »

chownah wrote: Tue Aug 03, 2021 1:45 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Aug 03, 2021 12:19 pm
chownah wrote: Tue Aug 03, 2021 12:02 pm
Once awakened, buddhas and arahants do not suffer because they have dispelled ignorance including ignorance about impermanence.
chownah
They still experience unsatisfactory dhammas, and still experience pain. Pain is intrinsically dukkha. All conditioned dhammas are intrinsically dukkha. This is why any form of existence is dukkha. The pleasant vedana of Jhana is dukkha because it doesn’t last.
Whatever they experience they do not suffer from it since they have abandoned ignorance.
chownah
They still experience dukkha. They perception of all conditioned dhammas is that of them being anicca, dukkha and anatta.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Post Reply