Right View & Right Resolve

Advanced search

[Terms Of Conduct]

Terms Of Conduct

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[wiscidea]

The first two elements of the Eightfold Path are Right View and Right Resolve.

Translation of Pali text (Magga-vibhanga Sutta) by Thanissaro Bhikkhu:

"And what, monks, is right view? Knowledge with regard to stress, knowledge with regard to the origination of stress, knowledge with regard to the stopping of stress, knowledge with regard to the way of practice leading to the stopping of stress: This, monks, is called right view.”

“And what is right resolve? Being resolved on renunciation, on freedom from ill will, on harmlessness: This is called right resolve.”

[copyright © 1996, Thanissaro Bhikkhu, courtesy of Access to Insight, www.accesstoinsight.org]

Regarding Right View:

Of course one must acknowledge and understand the problem before they can attempt to solve it, let alone succeed. Understanding the problem includes full awareness and comprehension of the origin of the problem. Is this as this as simple as it appears or am I missing something?

Regarding Right Resolve:

Once a person identifies and understands the problem, and identifies and understand the solution, they’re going to have to devote sustained effort toward solving the problem. It will not really go away unless every factor contributing to the problem is carefully addressed. So it appears a Buddhist, if they’re sincerely interested in liberation from painfulness, must commit to renouncing clinging, renouncing aversion, and not harming others.

Is it really all or nothing?

I clearly see the advantage of renouncing clinging and aversion. But this is—was—the first time I encountered, as part of Right View, a commitment to not harming the self or others. Is this, as far as the Buddha taught, an absolute principle or a strong suggestion? Can you harm a person determined to kill a thousand others? There are times when harming one being can avert harm to many beings and reduce total suffering. I think moral absolutism is a dangerous game. How do others feel about this?

I brief remark on "right"... I've seen different interpretations of this or different translations of Buddhist texts. It doesn't really mean "correct" as in there is a certain dogma that must be followed. I don't have access to this material at the moment. Could someone with more experience cover this? Perhaps start a thread devoted to what the Buddha meant by "right"? Thank you.

[Metis]

I brief remark on "right"... I've seen different interpretations of this or different translations of Buddhist texts. It doesn't really mean "correct" as in there is a certain dogma that must be followed. I don't have access to this material at the moment. Could someone with more experience cover this? Perhaps start a thread devoted to what the Buddha meant by "right"? Thank you.

Substitute the word "appropriate" for the word "right" and you'll pretty much have a more accurate idea of the approach that is recommended.  And since each situation tends to be at least somewhat unique, then absolutes generally are to be avoided, thus the term "middle path". 

Therefore, it's the application of dharma, which can be quite dicey at times, that's the devil in the details.  How to deal with this?  Through meditation and contemplation prior to actions taken.  And, because of this, different Buddhists can have different ideas as to how to deal with a given situation. 

For example, even though there's a general abhorrance to the use deadly force, some monks will fight if it's a matter of self defense or defending the helpless.  Given a chance to kill Hitler or Stalin before they killed millions of others, some monks would refuse and some others would be willing to pull the trigger.

Even though the teachings are often put in absolute terms, it's been long recongized that there are many "Catch-22" situations that complicate decision making, and that our course of action or inaction needs to be seriously dealt with before we decide what to do.     

[wiscidea]

Substitute the word "appropriate" for the word "right" and you'll pretty much have a more accurate idea of the approach that is recommended.  And since each situation tends to be at least somewhat unique, then absolutes generally are to be avoided, thus the term "middle path". 

Therefore, it's the application of dharma, which can be quite dicey at times, that's the devil in the details.  How to deal with this?  Through meditation and contemplation prior to actions taken.  And, because of this, different Buddhists can have different ideas as to how to deal with a given situation.

This is one of the reasons I find Buddhism so sensible. It recognizes that the world is complicated place and that what works in one time and place will not necessarily work in another time and place.

The training seems to prepare a person for handling new situations as they arise. There is a lot of emphasis on learning how to make decisions calmly and rationally vs. memorizing a set of rules that must be followed under all circumstances.

[Metis]

This is one of the reasons I find Buddhism so sensible. It recognizes that the world is complicated place and that what works in one time and place will not necessarily work in another time and place.

The training seems to prepare a person for handling new situations as they arise. There is a lot of emphasis on learning how to make decisions calmly and rationally vs. memorizing a set of rules that must be followed under all circumstances.

I completely agree, which is probably quite obvious, with your opinion here. 

I think there's all too often a tendency for us to fall into what I sometimes call "ideological constipation" whereas we might be inclined to find simplistic "answers" to rather complicated situations.  One of the main goals that meditation can help us accomplish is to attempt to find what might be called "the bottom line", namely to strip away some of the attachments that we may have and then contemplate the "nitty-gritty" of a given situation.  However, this takes time and effort, and it's just much easier for us to wallow in simplicity, which obviously should be something we should resist, imo.   

[Flitzerbiest]

Substitute the word "appropriate" for the word "right" and you'll pretty much have a more accurate idea of the approach that is recommended. 

Is this a modern or a traditional translation?  I certainly know nothing of sanskrit, but I am quite familiar with the tendency of religious institutions to subtly alter their texts and creeds over time.

[wiscidea]

Substitute the word "appropriate" for the word "right" and you'll pretty much have a more accurate idea of the approach that is recommended. 

Is this a modern or a traditional translation?  I certainly know nothing of sanskrit, but I am quite familiar with the tendency of religious institutions to subtly alter their texts and creeds over time.

One of the dharma teachers I've read or listened to—I can't keep track of this stuff—described the original word... something like... how one would describe an upright sailboat floating in the water, not tipping to one side or the other, forward or backward. Does this make sense? I'll try to find the reference if you are really interested, but it might take a while.

[Flitzerbiest]

Substitute the word "appropriate" for the word "right" and you'll pretty much have a more accurate idea of the approach that is recommended. 

Is this a modern or a traditional translation?  I certainly know nothing of sanskrit, but I am quite familiar with the tendency of religious institutions to subtly alter their texts and creeds over time.

One of the dharma teachers I've read or listened to—I can't keep track of this stuff—described the original word... something like... how one would describe an upright sailboat floating in the water, not tipping to one side or the other, forward or backward. Does this make sense? I'll try to find the reference if you are really interested, but it might take a while.

That image would suggest "balance", but then we've introduced yet another word.

• Children's Prayer.... unc... by SteveC [July 30, 2010, 11:08:14 PM]
• Riot against Messianic Je... by SteveC [July 30, 2010, 09:43:30 PM]
• Court Upholds Expulsion o... by SteveC [July 30, 2010, 09:25:51 PM]
• The Kids Are All Right. by SteveC [July 30, 2010, 09:08:19 PM]
• Honduras... here we come!... by SquirleyWurley [July 30, 2010, 06:23:50 PM]
• A thought by Betsy by kwd111 [July 29, 2010, 03:56:49 PM]
• 77'7" Kerrville Cross Rai... by SteveC [July 28, 2010, 01:54:13 PM]
• That Darling of Creationi... by SteveC [July 27, 2010, 05:51:56 PM]
• Segmentation & Evolution by SteveC [July 27, 2010, 10:56:42 AM]
• I must have overslept on ... by SteveC [July 26, 2010, 11:12:09 PM]
• 'Little Brown Balls' Tie ... by charliejohn [July 25, 2010, 07:34:39 PM]
• Whales Descended From Tin... by SteveC [July 25, 2010, 07:23:50 PM]
• South Pacific Plant May B... by SteveC [July 25, 2010, 07:05:31 PM]
• Transitional Species Exis... by SteveC [July 25, 2010, 05:09:41 PM]
• Fundamentalist's Peppered... by SteveC [July 25, 2010, 02:32:03 PM]
• Haeckel and his Embryos by SteveC [July 25, 2010, 10:36:39 AM]
• Flagellum,"poster child" ... by SteveC [July 24, 2010, 11:10:12 PM]
• Evo's Fundamentalist Posi... by Ed.W [July 22, 2010, 10:44:19 AM]

Members

• Total Members: 558
• Latest: Messedumbessy

Stats

• Total Posts: 86510
• Total Topics: 2615
• Online Today: 21
• Online Ever: 135
• (July 09, 2010, 02:08:16 PM)

Users Online

Users: 1
Guests: 20
Total: 21

SteveC