How to Reach a Final Fixed View Concerning The ‘False views’ verses ‘Fixed views’ debate – the Definitive Answer! Graham Smetham There has been some confusion recently amongst the Brighton Forest Sangha Group as to whether the reference to views in the last lines of this sutta should be translated as „false views‟ or „fixed views‟. This debate apparently was generated by a more wide ranging confusion within the Forest Sangha at large as to the difference between, and the appropriateness of the terms. On the „access to insight‟ Dharma website the following versions can be found: The Amaravati Sangha This is said to be the sublime abiding. By not holding to fixed views, The pure-hearted one, having clarity of vision, Being freed from all sense desires, Is not born again into this world. Acharya Buddharakkhita Pursue this awareness with your might: It is deemed the Divine State here. Holding no more to wrong beliefs, With virtue and vision of the ultimate, And having overcome all sensual desire, Never in a womb is one born again. Piyadassi Thera Let him develop this mindfulness. This, they say, is 'Noble Living' here. Not falling into wrong views Being virtuous, endowed with insight, lust in the senses discarded verily never again will he return to conceive in a womb. Thanissaro Bhikkhu One should be resolved on this mindfulness. This is called a sublime abiding here & now. Not taken with views, But virtuous & consummate in vision, Having subdued desire for sensual pleasures, One never again will lie in the womb. Ñanamoli Thera Let him resolve upon this mindfulness: This is Divine Abiding here, they say. But when he has no trafficking with views, Is virtuous, and has perfected seeing, And purges greed for sensual desires, He surely comes no more to any womb. So we see there are different formulations of the indication that one should adopt some kind of attitude concerning „views‟. If we equate „wrong‟ with „false‟ then clearly there seems to be a difference of opinions, some think „false‟ others „fixed‟. Of course it might be thought there is nothing significant in the distinction; however, we shall see there is significance in the distinction. ‘False’ or ‘Wrong’ Views The use of the term „false‟ or „wrong‟ views or view should clearly be put in the context of the first steps of the Noble Eightfold Path – Right View. False views, then, must be taken to views opposed to those which are indicated by the Buddha to be „right views‟. „Right views‟ are outlined, unsurprisingly in the „Discourse on Right View‟ (Sammadithi Sutta). The following is a summary of the components of „right view‟ taken from the translation by Ñanamoli Thera and Bhikkhu Bodhi: Firstly, the understanding of what is wholesome and unwholesome. The unwholesome actions are: killing living beings; taking what is not given; misconduct in sensual pleasures; false, malicious, harsh speech and gossip; covetousness; ill will, wrong view. Added to these the Buddha speaks of the necessity of knowing the „roots of the unwholesome‟. These are greed, hate and delusion. Wholesome behaviours of course are the reverse of the unwholesome. Through this practice the „noble disciple‟: “entirely abandons the underlying tendency to lust, he abolishes the underlying tendency to aversion, he extirpates the underlying tendency to the view and conceit „I am,‟ and by abandoning ignorance and arousing true knowledge he here and now makes an end of suffering. In that way too a noble disciple is one of right view, whose view is straight, who has perfect confidence in the Dhamma and has arrived at this true Dhamma.” This announcement of the fruits of the practice serves as a refrain which is repeated at the end of the other sections of the sutta. Central to the achievement is removal of the “view and conceit „I am,‟” so here we have an example of a kind of „view‟ which needs to be „extirpated.‟ Let‟s call this fragment the „abandonment refrain.‟ The next section of the right view discourse concerns the topic of „nutriment‟, which refers to the stuff and processes which underpin the operation of samsara, the cycle of „suffering‟ existence: “And what is nutriment, what is the origin of nutriment, what is the cessation of nutriment, what is the way leading to the cessation of nutriment? There are these four kinds of nutriment for the maintenance of beings that already have come to be and for the support of those seeking a new existence. What four? They are physical food as nutriment, gross or subtle; contact as the second; mental volition as the third; and consciousness as the fourth. With the arising of craving there is the arising of nutriment. With the cessation of craving there is the cessation of nutriment. The way leading to the cessation of nutriment is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration.” The formula “and what is X, what is the origin of X, what is the cessation of X, what is the way leading to the cessation of X?‟ is used for each key concept the Buddha describes in this discourse. In the above explanation we see the significance of the factor of „craving,‟ the core factor of second of the noble truths and the motive force for the twelve links of dependent origination; unenlightened beings are constantly craving ‟nutriments‟ for both body and mind. After this the Buddha repeats the abandonment refrain. The next section is comprised of an outline of the four noble truths. In this outline the Buddha identifies „craving‟ (tanha) as the core of second noble truth as the origin of suffering and indicates that the operation of the fourth truth, which is the eightfold path, leads to the abandonment of craving. This is followed by the abandonment refrain. There then follows a fairly detailed exposition of the twelve links of dependent origination: ignorance, kammic formations (sankhara), consciousness, name and form, sense bases, contact, feeling, craving, grasping, becoming, birth, aging and death. For each of these the fourfold question is used, for instance in reference to craving: …when, friends, a noble disciple understands craving, the origin of craving, the cessation of craving, and the way leading to the cessation of craving, in that way he is one of right view... and has arrived at this true Dhamma. And what is craving, what is the origin of craving, what is the cessation of craving, what is the way leading to the cessation of craving? There are these six classes of craving: craving for forms, craving for sounds, craving for odors, craving for flavors, craving for tangibles, craving for mind-objects. With the arising of feeling there is the arising of craving. With the cessation of feeling there is the cessation of craving. The way leading to the cessation of craving is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right view … And so for each link, the eightfold path is indicated as the means for cessation of each link and the explanation of each link is followed by the abandonment refrain. The final section of the discourse on right view describes the „taints‟: And what are the taints, what is the origin of the taints, what is the cessation of the taints, what is the way leading to the cessation of the taints? There are three taints: the taint of sensual desire, the taint of being and the taint of ignorance. With the arising of ignorance there is the arising of the taints. With the cessation of ignorance there is the cessation of the taints. The way leading to the cessation of the taints is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration. All the above then constitute „Right View‟. False view or views, then, must be contrary to the above. In other words asserting the contrary of: the spiritual efficacy of ethical conduct; the significance of the operation of „craving‟ (tanha), which is the root of the second noble truth, in the process of samsara; the four noble truths; the twelvefold links of dependent origination or arising (which implicitly include karma and rebirth) and the efficacy of the eightfold path; the importance of ignorance in the generation of the „taints.‟ The question arises then as to whether it is correct to consider it incorrect to consider „Right View‟ as being a „fixed view‟. In other words would it be correct to assert the opposite of what the Buddha considered to be „Right View?‟ Or should we consider „Right View‟ to be pretty much „fixed‟ and not amenable to personal modification. Bhikkhu Bodhi clearly indicates that the latter is the correct attitude; „Right View‟ should be considered to be a „fixed view‟ in the sense that it is not open to picking and choosing according to personal preference. The following is from his short article From Views to Vision: One particular misinterpretation into which newcomers to the Dhamma (and some veterans too!) are especially prone to fall is to hold that the Buddha's counsel to transcend all views means that even the doctrines of Buddhism are ultimately of no vital importance. For these doctrines too, it is said, are merely views, intellectual constructs, filaments of thought, which may have been meaningful in the context of ancient Indian cosmology but have no binding claims on us today. After all, aren't the words and phrases of the Buddhist texts simply that - words and phrases - and aren't we admonished to get beyond words and phrases in order to arrive at direct experience, the only thing that really counts? And doesn't the Buddha enjoin us in the Kalama Sutta to judge things for ourselves and to let our own experience be the criterion for deciding what we will accept? Such an approach to the Dhamma may be sweet to chew upon and easy to digest, but we also need to beware of its effect upon our total spiritual organism, Too often this kind of slippery reasoning provides simply a convenient excuse for adhering, at a subtle level of the mind, to ideas which are fundamentally antithetical to the Dhamma. Right View has its origin in the Buddha‟s enlightenment, it is one of the fruits of his enlightenment: The attainment of right view is at its core essentially a matter of understanding – of understanding in a deeply personal way the vital truths of existence upon which our lives devolve. Right view aims at the big picture. It seeks to comprehend our place in the total scheme of things and to discern the laws that govern the unfolding of our lives for better or for worse. The ground of right view is the Perfect Enlightenment of the Buddha, and by striving to rectify our view we seek nothing less than to align our own understanding of the nature of existence with that of the Buddha's Enlightenment. Right view may begin with concepts and propositional knowledge but it does not end with them. Through study, deep reflection and meditative development it gradually becomes transmuted into wisdom, the wisdom of insight that can cut asunder the beginningless fetters of the mind. And Ajahn Chah also emphasised the „fixed‟ nature of „Right View‟, the following is from the introduction to the collection of Ajahn Chah‟s Dharma talks Food for the Heart When asked what he considered to be the most essential elements of the teaching, Ajahn Chah frequently responded that his experience had shown him that all spiritual progress depended upon Right View and on purity of conduct. Of Right View the Buddha once said: “Just as the glowing of the dawn sky foretells the rising of the sun, so too is Right View the forerunner of all wholesome states.” To establish Right View means firstly that one has a trustworthy map of the terrain of the mind and the world - particularly with respect to an appreciation of the law of kamma - secondly it means that one sees experience in the light of the Four Noble Truths and is thus turning that flow of perceptions, thoughts, and moods into fuel for insight. The four points become the quarters of the compass by which we orient our understanding and thus guide our actions and intentions. Ajahn Chah saw sila (virtue) as the great protector of the heart and encouraged a sincere commitment to the precepts by all those who were serious about their search for happiness and a skillfully lived life … In many ways sila is the external corollary to the internal quality of Right view… So if the „Right View‟ of the Noble Eightfold Path is pretty much immutable, what are the „fixed views‟ which need to be avoided? ‘Fixed’ Views The notion of „fixed views‟ within the teachings of the Pali Canon refers to a particular set of metaphysical viewpoints concerning the nature of the „self‟ and the universe. These „fixed‟ or „extreme‟ views are discussed by the Buddha in the Brahmajāla Sutta, which has been translated as The All-embracing Net of Views (in the following discussion the quotes are all from the version translated from the Pali by Bhikkhu Bodhi which can be found on the access to insight website). There are 62 varieties of „fixed views‟ elucidated in the Brahmajāla Sutta but we need only briefly look at the first sixteen. The distinguishing feature of all these „fixed‟ views is that they assert in some form an absolute „existence‟ or an absolute non-existence. For example the first „fixed‟ view discussed by the Buddha in the Brahmajāla Sutta is that of „eternalism‟: Fixed Views type 1 – Eternalism (views 1 to 4) There are actually four types of eternalism delineated by the Buddha dependent upon the way that the view is arrived at. The Buddha describes the general view of eternalism: There are, bhikkhus, some recluses and brahmins who are eternalists, and who on four grounds proclaim the self and the world to be eternal. The Buddha then goes on to describe how the view of eternalism arises. The recluses and brahmins who embrace this view have through effort achieved a high degree of meditational mental concentration and thereby achieves paranormal powers of perception. Then through the application of such powers they recall a multitude of past lives in great detail, and on the basis of this supernormal insight they conclude that there is a „fixed‟ „self‟ which has existed as a permanent entity throughout all the lifetimes which have been recalled. Such a recluse or Brahmin reasons as follows: The self and the world are eternal, barren, steadfast as a mountain peak, standing firm like a pillar. And though these beings roam and wander (through the round of existence), pass away and re-arise, yet the self and the world remain the same just like eternity itself. What is the reason? Because I, by means of ardor, endeavor, application, diligence, and right reflection, attain to such a degree of mental concentration that with my mind thus concentrated, I recollect my numerous past lives in their modes and their details. For this reason I know this: the self and the world are eternal, barren, steadfast as a mountain peak, standing firm like a pillar. And though these beings roam and wander (through the round of existence), pass away and re-arise, yet the self and the world remain the same just like eternity itself.‟ The term „barren‟ in the above means „not giving rise to any essentially new phenomena‟. The point is that this conception of the metaphysical structure of the universe and the beings within it is that both are essentially fixed, immutable, unchanging. One might ask about the obvious changes which can be seen to occur such as the seasons, the birth and death of beings and so on. The central point which must be grasped that in the eternalist view these obvious changes take place against the backdrop of a deep, essential „fixed‟ nature; each sentient being has a permanent „self‟ which cycles through various embodiments, the changing seasons are superficial changes within the nature of an essential set of universally „fixed‟ substances and so on. The Buddha next discusses other ways through which someone might reach an eternalist view. For instance the person develops supernormal perception and then is able to recollect not only his only numerous live but also aeon after aeon of „world-contraction and expansion.‟ Another case is that of a „rationalist‟ or an „investigator‟ who “hammered out by reason, deduced from his investigations, following his own flight of thought”. The Buddha, however, tells his followers that the view of eternalism is mistaken. Furthermore he indicates that holding, or being attached to such a „fixed‟ view is detrimental to achieving liberation, which is the aim of the spiritual path: This, bhikkhus, the Tathāgata understands. And he understands: „These standpoints, thus assumed and thus misapprehended, lead to such a future destination, to such a state in the world beyond.‟ He understands as well what transcends this, yet even that understanding he does not misapprehend. And because he is free from misapprehension, he has realized within himself the state of perfect peace. Having understood as they really are the origin and the passing away of feelings, their satisfaction, their unsatisfactoriness, and the escape from them, the Tathāgata, bhikkhus, is emancipated through non-clinging. Furthermore the Buddha indicates that, contrary to what certain modern scholars and practitioners claim, he does know about the metaphysical depths of reality, the way that the universe functions, he is a fully enlightened being so how could he not know. However the task of liberation requires „direct knowledge‟ and this requires the direct non-conceptual development of an experiential mode of being which is „beyond the sphere of reasoning‟: These are those dhammas, bhikkhus, that are deep, difficult to see, difficult to understand, peaceful and sublime, beyond the sphere of reasoning, subtle, comprehensible only to the wise, which the Tathāgata, having realized for himself with direct knowledge, propounds to others; and it is concerning these that those who would rightly praise the Tathāgata in accordance with reality would speak. Therefore being overly intellectually concerned with knowing answers to questions as to a „fixed‟ nature of the universe and the beings within it is a block to direct experiential and metaphysical insight, it makes more sense to put aside such intellectual worries because all will be revealed when a Buddhist practitioner is enlightened anyway. The other „fixed views‟ that the Buddha discusses, along with his indications of how these views are arrived at, are: Fixed Views type 2 – Partial Eternalism (Views 5–8) There are, bhikkhus, some recluses and brahmins who are eternalists in regard to some things and non-eternalists in regard to other things, and who on four grounds proclaim the self and the world to be partly eternal and partly non-eternal. Again there are four sub types dependent upon the manner in which the view is arrived at. Fixed Views type 3. Doctrines of the Finitude and Infinity of the World (Views 9–12) There are, bhikkhus, some recluses and brahmins who are extensionists (i.e. come to a definite conclusion regarding the extension of the universe), and who on four grounds proclaim the world to be finite or infinite. Again four sub-types: finite and bounded, infinite and boundless, both finite and infinite, The world is neither finite nor infinite. The next section is anomalous in that it describes doctrines which cannot come to a conclusion regarding „fixed views‟: Fixed Views type 4. Doctrines of Endless Equivocation (Views 13–16) There are, bhikkhus, some recluses and brahmins who are endless equivocators (the term actually used is „Eel-wrigglers‟) .When questioned about this or that point, on four grounds they resort to evasive statements and to endless equivocation. And owing to what, with reference to what, do these honorable recluses and brahmins do so? Here is how the Buddha describes the first type of „eel-wriggler‟: Herein, bhikkhus, a certain recluse or a brahmin does not understand as it really is what is wholesome and what is unwholesome. He thinks: “I do not understand as it really is what is wholesome and what is unwholesome. If, without understanding, I were to declare something to be wholesome or unwholesome, my declaration might be false. If my declaration should be false, that would distress me, and that distress would be an obstacle for me.” Therefore, out of fear and loathing of making a false statement, he does not declare anything to be wholesome or unwholesome. But when he is questioned about this or that point, he resorts to evasive statements and to endless equivocation: “I do not take it thus, nor do I take it in that way, nor do I take it in some other way. I do not say that it is not, nor do I say that it is neither this nor that.” Now it appears on the face of it that this formulation of the kind of answer resorted to by an „eel-wriggler' was actually given by the Buddha himself on significant occasions. For example in the Samyutta Nikaya we read: A Brahmin approached the Buddha and asked, "Venerable Gotama, do all things exist?” The Buddha replied, “The view that all things exist is one extreme materialistic view.” Question: Then all things do not exist? Answer: The view that all things do not exist is the second materialistic view. Question: Are all things, then, one? Answer: The view that all things are one is the third materialistic view. Question: Are all things, then, a plurality? Answer: The view that all things are a plurality is the fourth materialistic view. "Brahmin! The Tathagata proclaims a teaching that is balanced, avoiding these extremes … [S.II.77] It looks as if the Buddha is avoiding making any answer just like „eel-wriggler‟. The difference, however, is that the Buddha does know the answer, and he knows that the answer to the metaphysical depth of reality does not lie in any of these extreme views. In his discourse on Dependent Origination Ajahn Payutto remarks that: To understand the principle of Dependent Origination is said to be Right View (samma-ditthi). This Right View is a very balanced kind of view, one which does not tend to extremes. Thus the principle of Dependent Origination is a law which teaches the truth in a median and unbiased way, known as the Middle Teaching. The „median-ness‟ of this truth is more clearly understood when it is compared with other teachings … the principle of Dependent Origination differs from these extreme views…i In other words the nature of reality, which contrary to the views of some modern „Buddhists‟, was known to the Buddha, is such that none of the extreme or „fixed‟ views are appropriate. The nature of reality itself is such that all phenomena are dependently originated, and because of this everything is interrelated and therefore nothing is „fixed‟ in the way that an extreme view would entail. Today the latest discoveries of physics indicates that all phenomena are „epiontic‟ which means that all phenomena depend in a deep way on perception and this means that no phenomena is established independently from its own side. As Ajahn Payutto indicates, then, it is a facet of „Right View‟ to understand that „fixed views‟ regarding the metaphysical structure of reality are inappropriate. It would seem then that the Amaravati Sangha have got it right: This is said to be the sublime abiding. By not holding to fixed views, The pure-hearted one, having clarity of vision, Being freed from all sense desires, Is not born again into this world. Although: Let him develop this mindfulness. This, they say, is 'Noble Living' here. Not falling into wrong views Being virtuous, endowed with insight, Lust in the senses discarded Verily never again will he return to conceive in a womb. Is not entirely wrong; I would not want to be accused of having a fixed view on the issue! Both quotes from Bruce Evans‟s translation of Chapter 4 of Ajahn Payutto‟s Buddhadhamma: „Dependent Origination: The Buddhist Law of Conditionality‟. http://www.buddhanet.net/cmdsg/coarise.htm i