One of the classic ways of conceptualising the Buddhist path is in terms of moving from wrong view to right view (and ultimately to perfect view, which involves letting go of all speculative opinion). According to this model, our wrong views stand in the way of seeing things as they really are and, consequently, result in suffering since our conduct is out of sync with reality. It is our ignorance of the nature of reality that is at the heart of our spiritual predicament.

The kinds of wrong views that we are dealing with here are not like believing that a red post box is really blue or that London is the capital of the USA, rather they are metaphysical views, at least at root. The most fundamental wrong views are characterised in Buddhist thought in terms of eternalism and nihilism. Crudely stated, eternalism is the belief that we have a soul that is eternal and nihilism is the belief that at death we will be annihilated forever.

This model appears to assume that we hold views consistently – in other words that we hold to a particular metaphysical view all of the time and in all circumstances. Accordingly, our fundamental views constitute a kind of fixed lens through which we see our world. Further, our views are regarded as a coherent system where commitment to one view requires the rejection of another. Seemingly, we cannot accept eternalism and nihilism at the same time – we are either an eternalist or we are a nihilist, we can’t be both. We then build a superstructure of other views on top of our most fundamental metaphysical convictions, all of which are consistent with them. This allows us – or someone else – to trace back our expressed views to their underlying metaphysical roots through a process of cognitive archaeology.

But our relationship to views seems to me much more complex than this, and less consistent. It is not so much that we have unwavering metaphysical convictions that underpin everything we think, say, and do but rather that particular views tend to manifest in particular circumstances. In this sense, our views are emergent, revealing themselves in specific contexts. It is perfectly possible that in one context we may appear to subscribe to one view, whereas in another circumstance we subscribe to another. For instance, when engaged in a sevenfold puja, I may find myself entreating the Buddhas and bodhisattvas in all sincerity, yet later, if asked, ‘Do you really believe that Buddhas and bodhisattvas are transcendent beings raining down blessings and wisdom?’, I would be reticent about saying yes.

Views function more like tools that we may employ for particular jobs. Consequently, a wrong view is more like a tool used at the wrong time or for the wrong purpose. Recognising a wrong view involves being able to see that the tool we are using does not accomplish the task we want it too. Moreover, our belief system is more like a tool kit; it is not necessarily the case that all of our views fit together as a harmonious system, rather that we have a ragbag of views that we employ at particular times, mostly from habit. This suggests then that to eradicate wrong views, we need to be more attentive to which particular views manifest in specific circumstances and then begin to work with them when they do – it is not just a matter of pulling them up from the roots since they don’t really function like that.

TBC