Another problem with the Nigantha view is that they did not see that the act
of being equanimous in the face of pain is also a type of kamma, and as such can
become a center for craving and clinging. The Buddha discusses this point in his
analysis of another view, one that he adapted from meditators of sects who
aimed at non‐becoming.
This viewpoint is expressed in a fairly cryptic statement that, because of an
idiomatic peculiarity of the Pali language, can be translated in two ways:
“The supreme viewpoint external (to the Dhamma) is this: ‘I should
not be and it should not be mine; I will not be; it will not be mine.’” — AN
10:29
“The supreme viewpoint external (to the Dhamma) is this: ‘I should
not be and it should not occur to me; I will not be; it will not occur to me.’”
— AN 10:29
In the first reading, the “it” in “it should not be … it will not be,” apparently
refers to any object of consciousness. In the second reading, the “it” apparently
refers to any thought or perception appearing in the mind. In either reading, this
viewpoint is aimed at putting an end to all thought, perception, consciousness,
and any sense of identity at all.
The Buddha regarded this as the supreme
viewpoint external to the Dhamma because it prevents the person holding it
from regarding becoming as an attractive option, and the cessation of becoming
as an unattractive one. In this way, it could prove useful in a path aiming at the
cessation of becoming.
“The supreme viewpoint external (to the Dhamma) is this: ‘I should
not be and it should not occur to me; I will not be; it will not occur to me.’
Of one with this view it may be expected, ‘(The thought of)
unloathsomeness with regard to becoming will not occur to him, and (the
thought of) loathsomeness with regard to the cessation of becoming will
not occur to him.’” — AN 10:29
However, this viewpoint—in and of itself—does not lead to freedom from the
changeablility of becoming.
Сообщение от Оскольд
Ответить с цитированием
