Dear Ven. Yuttadhammo,

Quite some time ago, we began a discussion about AN6.11.04 but my continued
input was interrupted by pressing matters.
As for the matter of sa~n~naa, we can let that go -- the different
translations of the term we prefer arises, I think, because we accept
different different definitions of the term, though I thank you (Dmitri) for
your lengthy reply at the time. Basically, you seem to be following the
standard Theravadin interpretation whereas I follow that given in other
Abhidharmic explanatory systems. Both viewpoints have merit -- we can
discuss them at some other time if the occasion arises.

However, I am still not happy with your "redefinition" of byaapaada and
vihi.msa. Couild I suggest another interpretation of the triad kaama,
byaapaada and vihi.msa that seems to make some sense to me ? As you will
know well, the Buddha criticized the two extremes of sensual indulgence and
asceticism. If we take the first two terms, kaama and byaapaada, these
concern the ways in which one aproaches and deals with sensual objects --
one has desire for some things and one is ill-disposed to other things.
Vihi.msa is what one does to oneself through extreme asceticism. This
interpretation seems to fit quite nicely, so does it make any sense to you ?

Best wishes,
Stephen Hodge