Dear Nina,

thanks again. While the commentary is a good source for understanding
the Buddha's words, a large portion of the suttas can be read and
understood without the aid of the commentary. Therefore, I do not
favor incorporating the commentary in the sutta. The commentary, at
the very best, can only be a secondary source for Buddha's teachings.

I think every sutta presents a fountain of knowledge, a chart for
discoveries, and we should preserve its original form as much as
possible so that each individual can then make the discovery for him
or herself. In this way, the sutta and the commentary (or the
commentator) each has its place and role.

The commentary says "dukanipaatassa pa.thame vajjaaniiti dosaa
aparaadhaa": in the first of Dukanipaata, vajjaani = dosaa aparaadhaa.
We will take note of this whenever we come across 'vajja' in the first
five vaggas.

Thanks also for your expansion on 'kamma'.

metta,
Yong Peng.

--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote:

> I understand 'vajja' not just to refer to something severe,
> but misdeeds and wrongdoings in general. In the perspective
> of this sutta, we may infer 'vajja' to mean "evil deeds",
> but I think the word has a wider and more general usage.

N: I looked at the Co: vajjaaniiti dosaa aparaadhaa. Dosa is here from
another stem than dosa meaning illwill. It means corruption,
depravity, fault etc. Vajja has a wide sense as you say. Aparaadha:
sin, fault, offense. I think, considering the heavy punishments, that
fault is too weak. We could chose: offense, corruption, depravity.