Dear Stephen Hodge, Robert Kirpatrick, Dimitry, Nina, Jim and all

Stephen Hodge wrote:

"A wonderdful piece of reasoning here -- no doubt the result of "com
[ing] from a scientific background". The actual sequence of
reasoning here is "I believe them" therefore "I know this". Now
*that* is what I would call "speculative ideology".

Thank you for your comment.

Please kindly allow me to analyse your own reasoning.

Stephen Hodge wrote:

"The actual sequence of reasoning here is "I believe them"
therefore "I know this". Now *that* is what I would call
"speculative ideology".

You appeared to not have read my actual statements carefully.

Anyone who carefully read my statements would clearly understand
them as follows.

"Suan Lu Zaw knows this because he has read what is stated by the
ancient Buddhist masters in Pali texts."

That is to say, what Suan Lu Zaw knows is the result of reading Pali
texts.

The next statement of mine is:

"I believe them because I do not see any reason why they would tell
lie"

Suan Lu Zaw believes the statements of the ancient Theravada
ascetics because he trusts the purity of their adherance to the
Vinaya rules.

It is worth recalling here how the elder Arahants' (Theras')
insistence on exact observance of Vinaya rules led to the weaker
puttjjana monks setting up their own groups without uncomfortable
original rules.

As you would clearly see now, my statements did not contain the
sequence of reasoning you accused them of having, namely, "I believe
them, therefore I know this".

My knowledge (knowing this) is the result of reading Pali texts, not
the result of believing the purity of the Theravada ascetics' Vinaya
observance.

Stephen Hodge, you had advised me in your previous post to improve
my reading skills. I willingly accepted it. Now, IT IS YOUR TURN.
Please try your best to improve your reading skills in English. By
the way, Robert Kirkpatrick teaches English in Japan. It is never
too late for you to ask assistance.

With kind regards,

Suan Lu Zaw

http://www.bodhiology.org