I have developed a view of SN 12.15, a sutta I always found confusing due to its language/words/terms.
My new view is the two dualities or extremes in the sutta (of existence & non-existence) are not wrong views but, instead, represent two right views; of which neither is taken as a sole right view.
My view is as follows:
1. SN 12.15 asks the question: "How is right view defined?"
2. The question is answered as follows: "[Right view is defined] relying on two types [of definition], indeed this world mostly exists and non-exists: dvayanissito khvāyaṃ, kaccāna, loko yebhuyyena—atthitañceva natthitañca".
3. SN 12.15 then says when the origin of the world is discerned with right view, the view the world does not exist does not occur.
4. SN 12.15 then says when the cessation of the world is discerned with right view, the view the world exists does not occur.
5. SN 12.15 then explains what 'the world' is (per SN 12.44), namely, being shackled by self-views, i.e., cravings, attachments, becomings, etc, which is the arising of suffering.
6. SN 12.15 then has its most difficult part, referring to "all exists" ("sabbamatthī") and "all does not exist" ("sabbaṃ natthī").
7. My view is when self-view towards all internal & external objects ceases; the whole (sabbaṃ) world [of suffering] ceases to exist.
8. To the contrary when self-view towards all internal & external objects arises, the whole (sabbaṃ) world arises or comes to exist.
9. Therefore, my view is the word "sabbaṃ" ("all") refers to "all of the world" ("sabbalokaṃ"), which is found in many places, such as:
10. Therefore, when SN 12.15 concludes by saying the Buddha teaches Dhamma in the middle, this means the Buddha teaches about both arising/existence & cessation/non-existence (rather than only teaches one extreme of these two right views).Sabbalokaṃ abhiññāya,
sabbalokeyathātathaṃ;
Sabbalokavisaṃyutto,
sabbalokeanūpayo
By knowledge of the whole world,
The whole world as it truly is,
He is released from all the world,
In all the world he is unattached.
https://suttacentral.net/iti112/en/ireland
What do we think? Does the Pali itself negate my interpretation? Thank you.
Also, non-Pali-folks please feel free to discuss, debate or refute my interpretation.