Even some views of the sekhas, saints on the path, short of arhathood, may
be flawed.
Only the asekha, the arhat, has full right view. At least in theory.

We can always keep trying and working towards right view, without paining
one another too much. It's called compassion.

Very often we forget that our ability to discuss some finer points of
Buddhism, be it philosophy, Pali and meditation, is because we are blessed
with good health (mental and physical), and some surplus income, and perhaps
some academic qualification.

So Buddhism becomes another "professional" topic like any other.

Today, one of my ex-students emailed saying that his brother has been
admitted into a local mental health institution because of psychosis. He is
told by Mahayana teachers that "merits" should be transferred to him.

In times like this, I leave the finer points of Buddhism aside, and simply
say. may these suffering persons grow of their pains, as I am pained too to
know of such sufferings so close to me.

Be well and happy, so that compassion and wisdom can arise when we most need
them.

Piya Tan

Piya Tan

On 09 Mar 2007 07:51:09 -0800, Gunnar Gällmo <gunnargallmo@...> wrote:
>
> --- rjkjp1 <rjkjp1@... <rjkjp1%40yahoo.com>> skrev:
>
> > Dera Gunnar ,
> > and this view of yours (above)is it fallible?
> >
> > Is sammaditthi , right view, true and factual, or
> > fallible?
> >
> > The view that the texts are wrong (fallible). Is
> > that view true?
> > Robert
>
> Every view held by a puthujjana is fallible.
>
> Gunnar
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Flyger tiden iväg? Fånga dagen med Yahoo! Mails inbyggda
> kalender. Dessutom 250 MB gratis, virusscanning och antispam. Få den på:
> http://se.mail.yahoo.com
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]