Dear Frank, Rett, and all,

--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, "frank" <frank@4...> wrote:
> All 3 views expressed so far have their merits, but I have to say
I'm
> skeptical that narrowing the range of topics would solve the real
problem,
> since some pali issues are inherently linked with very heated and
passionate
> clinging. For example, on a thread discussing the etymology and
usage of
> jhana, we could stay completely on topic and within the charter of
pali list
> and have a repeat of the recent scenario.
>
> The real problem, which Rett summed up nicely:
> [snip] My best guess would be to leave the range of
> topics as wide as possible, but discourage accusations of heresy,
> personal attacks, exhortations to repent or the like. Demands for
> sectarian conformity belong on some other list, but not this one,
at
> least in my experience of the usual open and friendly climate here.
> -----------------------------------

Absolutely! The topics of discussion on this list have, by and
large, in fact been concerned with issues and subjects to do with
Pali and Buddhism; the problem is not the content, but the manner of
the discussion. In this i think there should be some
reconsideration, and perhaps some asking for forgiveness, as the
Sangha do when we have had a personal dispute among ourselves. I
also appreciate Nina's comment, that we are sometimes not conscious
enough when popping off an email of how it can feel to the one who
receives it. I have been quite hurt by some of the statements made,
and i've got off quite lightly compared with some!

We come to this list for interesting discussions on dhamma, pali,
and related issues, and many of us know how difficult it is to find
a community of people who understand and care about these issues. We
should cherish what we have, because we might not know how much it
means until it's gone. There never has been, never will be, and is
not now any group of people who agree with each other about
everything - and if there was it would be very boring. What would we
do, sit around and tell each other how right we are? Even among
great monks, who are reputed to be attained, there will still be
differences of opinion on some issues.

The idea that there ever was a totally conformist body of people
sharing the same views on every doctrinal point is bizarre; it
certainly was never the case in historical Theravada, for the
commentaries are constantly referring to differing views on various
matters.

A community such as this should really be understood, not as a group
of people who have the same beliefs, but those who care about the
same kinds of questions. This is why it is valuable to engage in
reasoned discussion on Dhamma - to encourage that spirit of inquiry.
This will take us far further in our spiritual practice than
subscribing to a set of beliefs, even if they are 'right' beliefs.

Pali is a complex of language, literature, and ideas; this complex
has always evolved in a historical and cultural context. It was made
by real people in the real world, and addresses real issues of life
and death urgency. Each of us takes what has been presented here and
assimilates it differently, with anger, laughter, reflection, or
sorrow. And this is how it has always been. We cannot pretend that
Pali can be isolated and sanitized, drained of blood, and presented
in its crystalline purity. It is messy, complicated, with fracture
lines and connections running all over the place : just like life.

Let's try to take the attitude of Socrates: I know i have no wisdom
now, so if someone tells me i'm right i can never learn wisdom. But
if they show me i'm wrong, at least i can learn, and maybe someday
will find wisdom.

in Dhamma

Bhante Sujato