Dear Connie, Steven, Dimitry, Suan Lu Zaw, Piya, Nina, Jim, Tim,
Gunnar and friends,

I agree very well the importance of tolerance, or rather mutual
understanding. It is crucial that we refrain ourselves from being
dragged in unproductive argument.

The wisdom of the Buddha, Confucius and Socrates have inspirational
values to me. All of them have tried to deliver the way to a
peaceful, tolerant and equal society. Surprisingly they all lived at
around the same time, but in different parts of the world, working
hard to save mankind from self-destruction through greed, hatred and
ignorance. They all ended up as educators/philosophers, realising
that it is impossible to convince everyone, lest through the use of
force. The best way, they must have deduced, is the harder but better
and lasting way: that of education.

Buddha joined the Indian samana movement, later formed his own
sangha, and even had a large and influential group of lay-followers.
Buddhism, unlike Confucius' and Socrates', crossed the boundary of
philosphy by offering an answer beyond life. It was possibly the
earliest organised religion in history, with the
earliest 'missionary' movement to spread the dhamma.

I'm afraid, with my limited knowledge and little time at hand, I
can't conduct any research and contribute much to the discussion.
However, I will be moderating the list, and any provocative language
will be filtered out.


metta,
Yong Peng

--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Stephen Hodge wrote:
Thank you for your kind words of appreciation and encouragement. I
think that people calling themselves Buddhists should be more
tolerant of others who with equal validity call themselves
Buddhists. It should not matter which lineage one follows provided
it conforms with certain key teachings of the Buddha -- all the rest
is nothing more than upaya, a temporary raft, which answers the needs
of various individuals. If believing in the Theravada lineage works
for one, then fine. Similarly, with the various Mahayana schools,
Vajrayana and so on. At the end of the day, most people have very
little knowledge of the true meaning of the Dharma but often like to
reinforce their faith with the delusion that they have knowledge.
Myself included. I therefore think that the first step to true
understanding and knowledge in a realization that one knows so
little. When the Pythian Oracle at Delphi said that Socrates was the
wisest man alive, he knew that he was not wise at all. Yet because
the Pythian Oracle never lied, he realized that the only way in which
he might possible be called wise was his own profound understanding
that he knew so little. Let us strive for a little Socratean wisdom !

I also note that the several learned bhikkhus in this group have
refrained from contributing to this heated debate -- thereby
demonstrating their tact, wisdom and true adherence to the Buddha-
Dharma as it relates to such exchanges.