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

**isopsmypovA** · 11-13-2010, 11:37 PM

Hello friends

I just read this article on wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parayanavagga

I found it particularly interesting here

According to some scholars (but not all, see below), they also place considerable emphasis on the rejection of all views, and are reluctant to put forward positions of their own regarding basic metaphysical issues.

I agree that the suttas in question do teach the non-adherence to views and stay away from metaphysics. If these are the earliest suttas then its interesting to see how in other suttas metaphysics starts to be embraced and then, when we get to the Digha Nikaya, taught outright

An example of one of these suttas

"A person who associates himself with certain views, considering them as best and making them supreme in the world, he says, because of that, that all other views are inferior; therefore he is not free from contention (with others). In what is seen, heard, cognized and in ritual observances performed, he sees a profit for himself. Just by laying hold of that view he regards every other view as worthless. Those skilled (in judgment)[1] say that (a view becomes) a bond if, relying on it, one regards everything else as inferior. Therefore a bhikkhu should not depend on what is seen, heard or cognized, nor upon ritual observances. He should not present himself as equal to, nor imagine himself to be inferior, nor better than, another. Abandoning (the views) he had (previously) held and not taking up (another), he does not seek a support even in knowledge. Among those who dispute he is certainly not one to take sides. He does not [have] recourse to a view at all. In whom there is no inclination to either extreme, for becoming or non-becoming, here or in another existence, for him there does not exist a fixed viewpoint on investigating the doctrines assumed (by others). Concerning the seen, the heard and the cognized he does not form the least notion. That brahmana[2] who does not grasp at a view, with what could he be identified in the world?

"They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion); doctrines are not accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does not fall back on views.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipit...4.05.irel.html

Contrast this with the now entrenched Reincarnation view

any comments?

11-13-2010, 11:37 PM	#1
isopsmypovA Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 493 Senior Member	Earliest Suttas and Metaphysics Hello friends I just read this article on wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parayanavagga I found it particularly interesting here According to some scholars (but not all, see below), they also place considerable emphasis on the rejection of all views, and are reluctant to put forward positions of their own regarding basic metaphysical issues. I agree that the suttas in question do teach the non-adherence to views and stay away from metaphysics. If these are the earliest suttas then its interesting to see how in other suttas metaphysics starts to be embraced and then, when we get to the Digha Nikaya, taught outright An example of one of these suttas "A person who associates himself with certain views, considering them as best and making them supreme in the world, he says, because of that, that all other views are inferior; therefore he is not free from contention (with others). In what is seen, heard, cognized and in ritual observances performed, he sees a profit for himself. Just by laying hold of that view he regards every other view as worthless. Those skilled (in judgment)[1] say that (a view becomes) a bond if, relying on it, one regards everything else as inferior. Therefore a bhikkhu should not depend on what is seen, heard or cognized, nor upon ritual observances. He should not present himself as equal to, nor imagine himself to be inferior, nor better than, another. Abandoning (the views) he had (previously) held and not taking up (another), he does not seek a support even in knowledge. Among those who dispute he is certainly not one to take sides. He does not [have] recourse to a view at all. In whom there is no inclination to either extreme, for becoming or non-becoming, here or in another existence, for him there does not exist a fixed viewpoint on investigating the doctrines assumed (by others). Concerning the seen, the heard and the cognized he does not form the least notion. That brahmana[2] who does not grasp at a view, with what could he be identified in the world? "They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion); doctrines are not accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does not fall back on views. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipit...4.05.irel.html Contrast this with the now entrenched Reincarnation view any comments?
	Quote