Study Guide on Right View with Ajahn Thanissaro (Geoff)
Right View & Appropriate Attention
THE USES OF CLINGING
These four are clingings: sensuality-clinging, view-clinging, habit-&-practice-
clinging, and doctrine-of-self-clinging. This is called clinging.” — SN 12:2
[Ven. Ānanda:] “It’s amazing, lord. It’s astounding. For truly, the Blessed One has
declared to us the way to cross over the flood by going from one support to the next.”
— MN 106
The Blessed One said: “Suppose a man were traveling along a path. He would see
a great expanse of water, with the near shore dubious & risky, the further shore
secure & free from risk, but with neither a ferryboat nor a bridge going from this
shore to the other. The thought would occur to him, ‘Here is this great expanse of
water, with the near shore dubious & risky, the further shore secure & free from
risk, but with neither a ferryboat nor a bridge going from this shore to the other.
What if I were to gather grass, twigs, branches, & leaves and, having bound them
together to make a raft, were to cross over to safety on the other shore in
dependence on the raft, making an effort with my hands & feet?’ Then the man,
having gathered grass, twigs, branches, & leaves, having bound them together to
make a raft, would cross over to safety on the other shore in dependence on the raft,
making an effort with his hands & feet. Having crossed over to the further shore, he
might think, ‘How useful this raft has been to me! For it was in dependence on this
raft that, making an effort with my hands & feet, I have crossed over to safety on
the further shore. Why don’t I, having hoisted it on my head or carrying it on my
back, go wherever I like?’ What do you think, monks? Would the man, in doing that,
be doing what should be done with the raft?“
“No, lord.”
“And what should the man do in order to be doing what should be done with the
raft? There is the case where the man, having crossed over, would think, ‘How
useful this raft has been to me! For it was in dependence on this raft that, making an
effort with my hands & feet, I have crossed over to safety on the further shore. Why
don’t I, having dragged it on dry land or sinking it in the water, go wherever I like?’ In
doing this, he would be doing what should be done with the raft. In the same way,
monks, I have taught the Dhamma compared to a raft, for the purpose of crossing
over, not for the purpose of holding onto. Understanding the Dhamma as taught
compared to a raft, you should let go even of Dhammas, to say nothing of non-
Dhammas.” — MN 22
“‘The great expanse of water’ stands for the fourfold flood: the flood of sensuality,
the flood of becoming, the flood of views, & the flood of ignorance.
‘The near shore, dubious & risky’ stands for self-identification. ‘The further shore,
secure and free from risk’ stands for unbinding. ‘The raft’ stands for just this noble
eightfold path: right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood,
right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration.” — SN 35:197
One of the wanderers said to Anāthapiṇḍika the householder, “The cosmos is
eternal. Only this is true; anything otherwise is worthless. This is the sort of view I
have.”
Another wanderer said to Anāthapiṇḍika, “The cosmos is not eternal. Only this is
true; anything otherwise is worthless. This is the sort of view I have.”
Another wanderer said, “The cosmos is finite…”…“The cosmos is
infinite…”…“The soul & the body are the same…”…“The soul is one thing and the body
another…”…“After death a Tathāgata exists…”…“After death a Tathāgata does not
exist…”…“After death a Tathāgata both does & does not exist…”…“After death a
Tathāgata neither does nor does not exist. Only this is true; anything otherwise is
worthless. This is the sort of view I have.”
When this had been said, Anāthapiṇḍika the householder said to the wanderers,
“As for the venerable one who says, ‘The cosmos is eternal. Only this is true; anything
otherwise is worthless. This is the sort of view I have,’ his view arises from his own
inappropriate attention or in dependence on the words of another. Now this view has
been brought into being, is fabricated, willed, dependently co-arisen. Whatever has
been brought into being, is fabricated, willed, dependently co-arisen: That is
inconstant. Whatever is inconstant is stress. This venerable one thus adheres to that
very stress, submits himself to that very stress.” [Similarly for the other positions.]
When this had been said, the wanderers said to Anāthapiṇḍika 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 co-
arisen: That is inconstant. Whatever is inconstant is stress. Whatever is stress is not
me, is not what I am, is not myself. This is the sort of view I have.”
“So, householder, whatever has been brought into being, is fabricated, willed,
dependently co-arisen: 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 co-arisen: 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 has come to be, I also discern the higher escape from it
as it has come to be.” — AN 10:93
WRONG V IEWS
“Monks, there are these three sectarian guilds that—when cross-examined,
pressed for reasons, & rebuked by wise people—even though they may explain
otherwise, remain stuck in (a doctrine of) inaction. Which three?
“There are contemplatives & brahmans who hold this teaching, hold this view:
‘Whatever a person experiences—pleasant, painful, or neither pleasant nor painful—
is all caused by what was done in the past.’ There are contemplatives & brahmans
who hold this teaching, hold this view: ‘Whatever a person experiences—pleasant,
painful, or neither pleasant nor painful—is all caused by a supreme being’s act of
creation.’ There are contemplatives & brahmans who hold this teaching, hold this
view: ‘Whatever a person experiences—pleasant, painful, or neither pleasant nor
painful—is all without cause & without condition.’
“Having approached the contemplatives & brahmans who hold that… ‘Whatever
a person experiences… is all caused by what was done in the past,’ I said to them: ‘Is
it true that you hold that… whatever a person experiences… is all caused by what
was done in the past?’ Thus asked by me, they admitted, ‘Yes.’ Then I said to them,
‘Then in that case, a person is a killer of living beings because of what was done in
the past. A person is a thief… uncelibate… a liar… a divisive speaker… a harsh
speaker… an idle chatterer… greedy… malicious… a holder of wrong views because
of what was done in the past.’ When one falls back on what was done in the past as
being essential, monks, there is no desire, no effort (at the thought), ‘This should be
done. This shouldn’t be done.’ When one can’t pin down as a truth or reality what
should & shouldn’t be done, one dwells bewildered & unprotected. One cannot
righteously refer to oneself as a contemplative. This was my first righteous
refutation of those contemplatives & brahmans who hold to such teachings, such
views.
“[Similarly with the other two views.]” — AN 3:62
[King Ajātasattu is speaking to the Buddha:] “Pūraṇa Kassapa said to me, ‘Great
king, in acting or getting others to act, in mutilating or getting others to mutilate, in
torturing or getting others to torture, in inflicting sorrow or in getting others to inflict
sorrow, in tormenting or getting others to torment, in intimidating or getting others
to intimidate, in taking life, taking what is not given, breaking into houses,
plundering wealth, committing burglary, ambushing highways, committing adultery,
speaking falsehood—one does no evil. If with a razor-edged disk one were to turn all
the living beings on this earth to a single heap of flesh, a single pile of flesh, there
would be no evil from that cause, no coming of evil. Even if one were to go along the
right bank of the Ganges, killing and getting others to kill, mutilating and getting
others to mutilate, torturing and getting others to torture, there would be no evil
from that cause, no coming of evil. Even if one were to go along the left bank of the
Ganges, giving and getting others to give, making sacrifices and getting others to
make sacrifices, there would be no merit from that cause, no coming of merit.
Through generosity, self-control, restraint, and truthful speech there is no merit
from that cause, no coming of merit.’…
“Makkhali Gosāla said to me, ‘Great king, there is no cause, no requisite
condition, for the defilement of beings. Beings are defiled without cause, without
requisite condition. There is no cause, no requisite condition, for the purification of
beings. Beings are purified without cause, without requisite condition. There is
nothing self-caused, nothing other-caused, nothing human-caused. There is no
strength, no effort, no human energy, no human endeavor. All living beings, all life,
all beings, all souls are powerless, devoid of strength, devoid of effort. Subject to the
changes of fate, serendipity, & nature, they are sensitive to pleasure & pain in the
six great classes of birth.
“‘Though one might think, “Through this morality, this practice, this austerity, or
this holy life I will ripen unripened kamma and eliminate ripened kamma whenever
touched by it”—that is impossible. Pleasure & pain are measured out. The
wandering-on is fixed in its limits. There is no shortening or lengthening, no
accelerating or decelerating. Just as a ball of string, when thrown, comes to its end
simply by unwinding, in the same way, having transmigrated and wandered on, the
wise & the foolish alike will put an end to pain.’…
“Ajita Kesakambalin said to me, ‘Great king, there is nothing given, nothing
offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is
no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings;
no contemplatives or brahmans who, faring rightly and practicing rightly, proclaim
this world and the next after having directly known and realized it for themselves. A
person is a composite of four primary elements. At death, the earth (in the body)
returns to and merges with the (external) earth-substance. The fire returns to and
merges with the external fire-substance. The liquid returns to and merges with the
external liquid-substance. The wind returns to and merges with the external wind-
substance. The sense-faculties scatter into space. Four men, with the bier as the
fifth, carry the corpse. Its eulogies are sounded only as far as the charnel ground.
The bones turn pigeon-colored. The offerings end in ashes. Generosity is taught by
idiots. The words of those who speak of existence after death are false, empty
chatter. With the break-up of the body, the wise & the foolish alike are annihilated,
destroyed. They do not exist after death.’…
“Pakudha Kaccāyana said to me, ‘Great king, there are these seven substances—
unmade, irreducible, uncreated, without a creator, barren, stable as a mountain-
peak, standing firm like a pillar—that do not alter, do not change, do not interfere
with one another, are incapable of causing one another pleasure, pain, or both
pleasure & pain. Which seven? The earth-substance, the liquid-substance, the fire-
substance, the wind-substance, pleasure, pain, & the soul as the seventh….
“‘And among them there is no killer nor one who causes killing, no hearer nor
one who causes hearing, no cognizer nor one who causes cognition. When one cuts
off (another person’s) head, there is no one taking anyone’s life. It is simply between
the seven substances that the sword passes.’” — DN 2
“Now, householders, of those contemplatives & brahmans who hold this
doctrine, hold this view—’There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed.
There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next
world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no contemplatives or
brahmans who, faring rightly and practicing rightly, proclaim this world and the next
after having directly known and realized it for themselves’—it can be expected that,
shunning these three skillful activities—good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct,
good mental conduct—they will adopt & practice these three unskillful activities: bad
bodily conduct, bad verbal conduct, bad mental conduct. Why is that? Because those
venerable contemplatives & brahmans do not see, in unskillful activities, the
drawbacks, the degradation, and the defilement; nor in skillful activities the rewards
of renunciation, resembling cleansing….
“Now, householders, of those contemplatives & brahmans who hold this
doctrine, hold this view—’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’—it can be
expected that, shunning these three unskillful activities—bad bodily conduct, bad
verbal conduct, bad mental conduct—they will adopt & practice these three skillful
activities: good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, good mental conduct. Why is
that? Because those venerable contemplatives & brahmans see in unskillful
activities the drawbacks, the degradation, and the defilement; and in skillful
activities the rewards of renunciation, resembling cleansing.
“With regard to this, an observant person considers thus: ‘If there is the next
world, then this venerable person—on the breakup of the body, after death—will
reappear in a good destination, a heavenly world. Even if we didn’t speak of the next
world, and there weren’t the true statement of those venerable contemplatives &
brahmans, this venerable person is still praised in the here-&-now by the observant
as a person of good habits & right view: one who holds to a doctrine of existence.’ If
there really is a next world, then this venerable person has made a good throw twice,
in that he is praised by the observant here-&-now; and in that—with the breakup of
the body, after death—he will reappear in a good destination, a heavenly world. Thus
this safe-bet teaching, when well grasped & adopted by him, covers both sides, and
leaves behind the possibility of the unskillful….
“There are some contemplatives & brahmans who hold this doctrine, hold this
view: ‘There is no total cessation of becoming [i.e., unbinding].’ Some contemplatives
& brahmans, speaking in direct opposition to those contemplatives & brahmans, say
this: ‘There is total cessation of becoming.’ What do you think, householders? Don’t
these contemplatives & brahmans speak in direct opposition to each other?”
“Yes, lord.”
“With regard to this, an observant person considers thus: ‘As for those venerable
contemplatives & brahmans who hold this doctrine, hold this view—“There is no
total cessation of becoming”—I haven’t seen that. As for those venerable
contemplatives & brahmans who hold this doctrine, hold this view—“There is total
cessation of becoming”—I haven’t known that. If I, not knowing, not seeing, were to
take one side and declare, “Only this is true, anything otherwise is worthless,” that
would not be fitting for me. As for those venerable contemplatives & brahmans who
hold this doctrine, hold this view—“There is no total cessation of becoming”: If their
statement is true, there’s the safe-bet possibility that I might [at best] reappear
among the perception-made devas of no form. As for those venerable
contemplatives & brahmans who hold this doctrine, hold this view—“There is total
cessation of becoming”: If their statement is true, it is possible that I will be totally
unbound in the here-&-now. As for those venerable contemplatives & brahmans
who hold this doctrine, hold this view—“There is no total cessation of becoming”: This
view of theirs borders on passion, borders on fettering, borders on relishing, borders
on grasping, borders on clinging. As for those venerable contemplatives & brahmans
who hold this doctrine, hold this view—“There is total cessation of becoming”: This
view of theirs borders on non-passion, borders on non-fettering, borders on non-
relishing, borders on non-grasping, borders on non-clinging.’ Reflecting thus, he
practices for disenchantment toward becomings, for dispassion toward becomings,
and for the cessation of becomings.” — MN 60
AGNOSTICISM
“There is the case where a certain contemplative or brahman doesn’t discern as it
has come to be that ‘This is skillful,’ or that ‘This is unskillful.’ The thought occurs to
him: ‘I don’t discern as it has come to be that “This is skillful,” or that “This is
unskillful.” If I—not discerning as it has come to be that “This is skillful,” not
discerning as it has come to be that “This is unskillful”—were to declare that “This is
skillful,” or that “This is unskillful”: That would be a desire on my part, a passion, an
aversion, or an irritation on my part. Whatever would be a desire or passion or
aversion or irritation on my part would be a clinging on my part. Whatever would be
a clinging on my part would be a distress for me. Whatever would be a distress for
me would be an obstacle for me.’ So, out of fear of clinging, a loathing for clinging,
he does not declare that ‘This is skillful,’ or that ‘This is unskillful.’ Being asked
questions regarding this or that, he resorts to verbal contortions, to eel-wriggling: ‘I
don’t think so. I don’t think in that way. I don’t think otherwise. I don’t think not. I
don’t think not not.’” — DN 1
[An uninstructed run-of-the-mill person] may be doubtful & uncertain, having
come to no conclusion with regard to the true Dhamma. That doubt, uncertainty, &
coming-to-no-conclusion is a fabrication.
“What is the cause, what is the origination, what is the birth, what is the coming-
into-existence of that fabrication? To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person,
touched by what is felt born of contact with ignorance, craving arises. That
fabrication is born of that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, dependently
co-arisen. That craving… That feeling… That contact… That ignorance is
inconstant, fabricated, dependently co-arisen. It is by knowing & seeing in this way
that one without delay puts an end to effluents.” — SN 22:81
Then Vajjiya Māhita the householder went to where the wanderers of other
persuasions were staying. On arrival he greeted them courteously. After an
exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was sitting
there, the wanderers said to him, “Is it true, householder, that the contemplative
Gotama criticizes all asceticism, that he categorically denounces & disparages all
ascetics who live the rough life?”
“No, venerable sirs, the Blessed One does not criticize all asceticism, nor does he
categorically denounce or disparage all ascetics who live the rough life. The Blessed
One criticizes what should be criticized, and praises what should be praised.
Criticizing what should be criticized, praising what should be praised, the Blessed
One is one who speaks making distinctions, not one who speaks categorically on this
matter.”
When this was said, one of the wanderers said to Vajjiya Māhita the
householder, “Now wait a minute, householder. This contemplative Gotama whom
you praise is a nihilist, one who doesn’t declare anything.”
“I tell you, venerable sirs, that the Blessed One righteously declares that ‘This is
skillful.’ He declares that ‘This is unskillful.’ Declaring that ‘This is skillful’ and ‘This is
unskillful,’ he is one who has declared (a teaching). He is not a nihilist, one who
doesn’t declare anything.” — AN 10:94
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 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.
“One makes an effort for the abandoning of wrong view & for entering into right
view: This is one’s right effort. One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter &
remain in right view: This is one’s right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities—
right view, right effort, & right mindfulness—run & circle around right view.” —
MN 117
As Ven. Ānanda was sitting there, the Blessed One said to him, “I say
categorically, Ānanda, that bodily misconduct, verbal misconduct, & mental
misconduct should not be done.”
“Given that the Blessed One has declared, lord, that bodily misconduct, verbal
misconduct, & mental misconduct should not be done, what drawbacks can one
expect when doing what should not be done?”
“… One can fault oneself; observant people, on close examination, criticize one;
one’s bad reputation gets spread about; one dies confused; and—with the breakup of
the body, after death—one reappears in a plane of deprivation, a bad destination, a
lower realm, hell….
“I say categorically, Ānanda, that good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, &
good mental conduct should be done.”
“Given that the Blessed One has declared, lord, that good bodily conduct, good
verbal conduct, & good mental conduct should be done, what rewards can one
expect when doing what should be done?”
“… One doesn’t fault oneself; observant people, on close examination, praise one;
one’s good reputation gets spread about; one dies unconfused; and—with the
breakup of the body, after death—one reappears in a good destination, in a heavenly
world.” — AN 2:18
“Abandon what is unskillful, monks. It’s possible to abandon what is unskillful. If
it weren’t possible to abandon what is unskillful, I wouldn’t say to you, ‘Abandon
what is unskillful.’ But because it is possible to abandon what is unskillful, I say to
you, ‘Abandon what is unskillful.’ If this abandoning of what is unskillful were
conducive to harm and pain, I wouldn’t say to you, ‘Abandon what is unskillful.’ But
because this abandoning of what is unskillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I
say to you, ‘Abandon what is unskillful.’
“Develop what is skillful, monks. It’s possible to develop what is skillful. If it
weren’t possible to develop what is skillful, I wouldn’t say to you, ‘Develop what is
skillful.’ But because it is possible to develop what is skillful, I say to you, ‘Develop
what is skillful.’ If this development of what is skillful were conducive to harm and
pain, I wouldn’t say to you, ‘Develop what is skillful.’ But because this development
of what is skillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, ‘Develop what is
skillful.’” — AN 2:19
“And what have I taught and declared to be categorical teachings? ‘This is stress’ I
have taught and declared to be a categorical teaching. ‘This is the origination of
stress’… ‘This is the cessation of stress’… ‘This is the path of practice leading to the
cessation of stress’ I have taught and declared to be a categorical teaching. And why
have I taught and declared these teachings to be categorical? Because they are
conducive to the goal, conducive to the Dhamma, and basic to the holy life. They
lead to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to calm, to direct knowledge, to
self-awakening, to unbinding. That’s why I have taught and declared them to be
categorical.” — DN 9
“And what is the faculty of discernment? There is the case where a monk, a
disciple of the noble ones, is discerning, endowed with discernment of arising &
passing away—noble, penetrating, leading to the right ending of stress. He discerns,
as it has come to be: ‘This is stress…This is the origination of stress…This is the
cessation of stress…This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress.’
This is called the faculty of discernment.” — SN 48:10
“Now this, monks, is the noble truth of stress: Birth is stressful, aging is stressful,
death is stressful; sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair are stressful;
association with the unbeloved is stressful, separation from the loved is stressful, not
getting what is wanted is stressful. In short, the five clinging-aggregates are
stressful.
“And this, monks, is the noble truth of the origination of stress: the craving that
makes for further becoming—accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here
& now there—i.e., craving for sensuality, craving for becoming, craving for non-
becoming.
“And this, monks, is the noble truth of the cessation of stress: the remainderless
fading & cessation, renunciation, relinquishment, release, & letting go of that very
craving.
“And this, monks, is the noble truth of the way of practice leading to the cessation
of stress: precisely this noble eightfold path—right view, right resolve, right speech,
right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration.
“‘This noble truth of stress is to be comprehended’ … ‘This noble truth of the
origination of stress is to be abandoned’ … ‘This noble truth of the cessation of stress
is to be realized’ … ‘This noble truth of the way of practice leading to the cessation of
stress is to be developed’”— SN 56:11
APPROPRIATE ATTENTIO N
“From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications.
“From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness.
“From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form….
“And which name-&-form? Feeling, perception, intention, contact, & attention:
This is called name. The four great elements, and the form dependent on the four
great elements: This is called form. This name & this form are called name-&-form.
“And which consciousness? These six are classes of consciousness: eye-
consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-
consciousness, intellect-consciousness. This is called consciousness.
“And which fabrications? These three are fabrications: bodily fabrications, verbal
fabrications, mental fabrications. These are called fabrications.
“And which ignorance? Not knowing stress, not knowing the origination of stress,
not knowing the cessation of stress, not knowing the way of practice leading to the
cessation of stress: This is called ignorance.” — SN 12:2
“A virtuous monk, Koṭṭhita my friend, should attend in an appropriate way to the
five clinging-aggregates as inconstant, stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow,
painful, an affliction, alien, a dissolution, an emptiness, not-self. Which five? The
form clinging-aggregate, the feeling clinging-aggregate, the perception clinging-
aggregate, the fabrications clinging-aggregate, the consciousness clinging-aggregate.
A virtuous monk should attend in an appropriate way to these five clinging-
aggregates as inconstant, stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an
affliction, alien, a dissolution, an emptiness, not-self. For it is possible that a virtuous
monk, attending in an appropriate way to these five clinging-aggregates as
inconstant… not-self, would realize the fruit of stream-entry.” — SN 22:122
“And what is the food for the arising of unarisen analysis of qualities as a factor
for awakening, or for the growth & increase of analysis of qualities… once it has
arisen? There are mental qualities that are skillful & unskillful, blameworthy &
blameless, gross & refined, siding with darkness & with light. To foster appropriate
attention to them: This is the food for the arising of unarisen analysis of qualities as
a factor for awakening, or for the growth & increase of analysis of qualities… once it
has arisen….
“And what is lack of food for the arising of unarisen uncertainty, or for the growth
& increase of uncertainty once it has arisen? There are mental qualities that are
skillful & unskillful, blameworthy & blameless, gross & refined, siding with
darkness & with light. To foster appropriate attention to them: This is lack of food for
the arising of unarisen uncertainty, or for the growth & increase of uncertainty once
it has arisen.” — SN 46:51
“This is how [the uninstructed person] attends inappropriately: ‘Was I in the past?
Was I not in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been
what, what was I in the past? Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in the future?
What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in the future? Having been what, what
shall I be in the future?’ Or else he is inwardly perplexed about the immediate
present: ‘Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Where has this being come from?
Where is it bound?’
“As he attends inappropriately in this way, one of six kinds of view arises in him:
The view I have a self arises in him as true & established, or the view I have no self
… or the view It is precisely by means of self that I perceive self … or the view It is
precisely by means of self that I perceive not-self … or the view It is precisely by means
of not-self that I perceive self arises in him as true & established, or else he has a view
like this: This very self of mine—the knower that is sensitive here & there to the ripening
of good & bad actions—is the self of mine that is constant, everlasting, eternal, not
subject to change, and will endure as long as eternity. This is called a thicket of views, a
wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views.
Bound by a fetter of views, the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person is not freed from
birth, aging, & death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair. He is not
freed, I tell you, from suffering & stress.
“He [the instructed disciple of the noble ones] attends appropriately, This is stress
… This is the origination of stress … This is the cessation of stress … This is the way
leading to the cessation of stress. As he attends appropriately in this way, three fetters
are abandoned in him: self-identification view, doubt, and grasping at habits &
practices.” — MN 2
BEYOND RIGHT VIEW
I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Sāvatthī at
the Eastern Gatehouse. There he addressed Ven. Sāriputta: “Sāriputta, do you take it
on conviction that the faculty of conviction, when developed & pursued, gains a
footing in the deathless, has the deathless as its final end & consummation? Do you
take it on conviction that the faculty of persistence… mindfulness…
concentration… discernment, when developed & pursued, gains a footing in the
deathless, has the deathless as its final end & consummation?”
“Lord, it’s not that I take it on conviction in the Blessed One that the faculty of
conviction… persistence… mindfulness… concentration… discernment, when
developed & pursued, gains a footing in the deathless, has the deathless as its final
end & consummation. Those who have not known, seen, penetrated, realized, or
attained it by means of discernment would have to take it on conviction in others
that the faculty of conviction… persistence… mindfulness… concentration…
discernment, when developed & pursued, gains a footing in the deathless, has the
deathless as its final end & consummation; whereas those who have known, seen,
penetrated, realized, & attained it by means of discernment would have no doubt or
uncertainty that the faculty of conviction… persistence… mindfulness…
concentration… discernment, when developed & pursued, gains a footing in the
deathless, has the deathless as its final end & consummation. And as for me, I have
known, seen, penetrated, realized, & attained it by means of discernment. I have no
doubt or uncertainty that the faculty of conviction… persistence… mindfulness…
concentration… discernment, when developed & pursued, gains a footing in the
deathless, has the deathless as its final end & consummation.” — SN 48:44
“Monks, there are these five faculties. Which five? The faculty of conviction, the
faculty of persistence, the faculty of mindfulness, the faculty of concentration, the
faculty of discernment. When a disciple of the noble ones discerns, as they have
come to be, the origination, the passing away, the allure, the drawbacks, and the
escape from these five faculties, he is called a disciple of the noble ones who has
attained the stream: never again destined for the lower realms, certain, headed for
self-awakening.” — SN 48:3
FROM THE FOREST TRADITION
If we can get our practice on the noble path, though, we’ll enter nibbāna. Virtue
will disband, concentration will disband, discernment will disband. In other words, we
won’t dwell on our knowledge or discernment. If we’re intelligent enough to know,
we simply know, without taking intelligence as being an essential part of ourselves.
On the lower level, we’re not stuck on virtue, concentration, or discernment. On a
higher level, we’re not stuck on the stages of stream-entry, once-returning, or non-
returning. Nibbāna isn’t stuck on the world, the world isn’t stuck on nibbāna. Only at
this point can we use the term ‘arahant.’
This is where we can relax. They can say ‘inconstant,’ but it’s just what they say.
They can say ‘stress,’ but it’s just what they say. They can say ‘not-self,’ but it’s just
what they say. Whatever they say, that’s the way it is. It’s true for them, and they’re
completely right—but completely wrong. As for us, only if we can get ourselves
beyond right and wrong will we be doing fine. Roads are built for people to walk on,
but dogs and cats can walk on them as well. Sane people and crazy people will use
the roads. They didn’t build the roads for crazy people, but crazy people have every
right to use them. As for the precepts, even fools and idiots can observe them. The
same with concentration: Crazy or sane, they can come and sit. And discernment:
We all have the right to come and talk our heads off, but it’s simply a question of
being right or wrong.
None of the valuables of the mundane world give any real pleasure. They’re
nothing but stress. They’re good as far as the world is concerned, but nibbāna doesn’t
have any need for them. Right views and wrong views are an affair of the world.
Nibbāna doesn’t have any right views or wrong views. For this reason, whatever is a
wrong view, we should abandon. Whatever is a right view, we should develop—until
the day it can fall from our grasp. That’s when we can be at our ease. — Ajaan Lee:
“Beyond Right & Wrong” in Inner Strength
I’ll give you a simple comparison. Suppose you’ve bought a banana or a coconut
in the market and you walk along carrying it. Someone asks you, “Why did you buy
the banana?”
“I bought it to eat it.”
“But do you have to eat the peel, too?”
“No.”
“I don’t believe you. If you’re not going to eat the peel, why are you carrying it
too?”
Or suppose you’re carrying a coconut:
“Why are you carrying the coconut?”
“I’m carrying it home to make a curry.”
“And you’re going to curry the husk too?”
“No.”
“Then why are you carrying it?”
So. With what you going to answer his question?
With desire. If there’s no desire, you can’t give rise to ingenuity, to discernment.
That’s the way it is as we make an effort in our meditation. Even though we do
this through letting go, it’s like the banana or the coconut: Why are you carrying the
peel or the husk? Because the time hasn’t come yet to throw it away. It’s still
protecting the inner flesh. The time hasn’t come yet to throw it away, so you hold
onto it for the time being.
The same with our practice: Suppositions and release have to be mixed together,
just as the coconut has a husk mixed together with a shell and the flesh, so you
carry them all together. If they accuse us of eating the coconut husk, so what? We
know what we’re doing. — Ajaan Chaa, In Simple Terms