DC> I found on the internet an interview you'd given with WIE magazine
DC> and I was fascinated by the point you and the interviewer discussed
DC> about the different levels of teaching the Buddha gave out --
DC> the "real thing" for those who were close enough to understanding it,
DC> and "puthujjana Buddhism" (wonderful expression!) for everyone else.
DC> I also agreed with your view about the benefits of actually being
DC> around a Buddha, or at the very least an arahant, in order to "get
DC> it."

There are actually two interviews:

http://www.wie.org/j14/mase.asp
http://www.wie.org/j18/masefieldintro.asp

As for the first interview:

Personally I consider that there are practices by means of which right
view might be acquired. However they are a far cry from some popular modern
paractices.

There are instences when people acquired Dhamma eye without meeting
Buddha personally. See, for example, Mahavagga 1, 23, 5
Upatissa-pasine.

There is a textual evidence for different kinds, or different degrees,
of right view. See MN 117.

The teaching is holographic and it would be an oversimplification to divide
it in just two levels. Each sutta was adjusted for particular
abilities (paramis) of listeners.

I mostly agree with the second interview. Kalama Sutta is indeed
often misinterpreted.

Metta,
Dimitry