Eternalism and Nihilism
The nihilistic view and the eternalistic view. If he would observe, 'The constructions are impermanent,' that would be his nihilistic view; that would not be his right view.
If he would observe, 'Nirvana is permanent,' that would be his eternalistic view; that would not be his right view.
Why is that? Lord, when someone observes that body, sense organs, feelings, and volitions deteriorate in the present life, and he cannot understand or find their transmigration, then his viewpoint with such reasons, being a confused view, is the nihilistic view.
Lord, when someone is confused regarding the stream of consciousness and cannot understand the momentary perishing of consciousness, his viewpoint with such reasons, being the view that the domain of perception does not alter, is the eternalistic view.
Lord, in that way the reasoning views declare such to be the case; they insist on nihilism or insist on eternalism because their view goes too far from the meaning, or their view falls short of the meaning, or their view is mixed with a different character. Lord, the sentient beings go astray regarding the five grasping personality aggregates; they have the idea that the impermanent is permanent, suffering is pleasure, nonself is self, the impure is pure.
Very interesting -- never understood how eternalism was wrong view -- is this a contradiction of the following:
When sentient beings have faith in the Tathagata and those sentient beings conceive [him] with permanence, pleasure, self, and purity, they do not go astray.
Those sentient beings have the right view. Why so?
Because the Dharmakaya of the Tathagata has the perfection of permanence, the perfection of pleasure, the perfection of self, the perfection of purity.
Whatever sentient beings see the Dharmakaya of the Tathagata that way, see correctly. Whoever see correctly are called the sons of the Lord born from his heart, born from his mouth, born from the Dharma, who behave as manifestation of Dharma and as heirs of Dharma.
NO! In fact nihilism and eternalism are views born from ignorance -- if I say or think Nirvana is permanent --that would be wrong view -- because it is not born out of true insight.
So right view and wrong view are differentiated based on the actual insight of the Dharmakaya (called Samyak Drishti) -- vs. the presupposition of philosophical, logical dogmatic statements made without true insight (Wrong view).
For example, a professor of religion teaching Buddhism, teaching that Buddhism teaches that Nibbana is permanent would be wrong view .
However, a person of faith in the Tathagatha who meditates and KNOWS and touches the Dharmakaya, is the one with right view, he correctly sees what is impermanent and sees what is permanent.
Am I understanding correctly?