DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**PypeDeft** · 08-08-2012, 06:03 PM

Can the teaching be more accurately described as being that right view is not about belief in reincarnation?

MN 117 advises there are two kinds of right view

1. ordinary right view, with fermentations, which believes in 'beings' subject to reincarnation

2. noble right view, without fermentations, which believes in selfless elements (emptiness)

in the noble right view, it is considered inappropriate to believe in a past, present & future 'self' or 'being'

Through his attending to ideas unfit for attention and through his not attending to ideas fit for attention, both unarisen fermentations arise in him and arisen fermentations increase.

This is how he 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?'

MN 2 regards

08-08-2012, 06:03 PM	#22
PypeDeft Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 411 Senior Member	Can the teaching be more accurately described as being that right view is not about belief in reincarnation? MN 117 advises there are two kinds of right view 1. ordinary right view, with fermentations, which believes in 'beings' subject to reincarnation 2. noble right view, without fermentations, which believes in selfless elements (emptiness) in the noble right view, it is considered inappropriate to believe in a past, present & future 'self' or 'being' Through his attending to ideas unfit for attention and through his not attending to ideas fit for attention, both unarisen fermentations arise in him and arisen fermentations increase. This is how he 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?' MN 2 regards
	Quote