Dear Nina,
Thanks for your comments. Actually you have pointed rightly from the Abhidhamma perspective.
Thanks for sharing your good knowledge with us.
With metta,
Dipankaro


----- Original Message ----
From: Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...>
To: Pali@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2007 4:54:41 PM
Subject: Re: [Pali] Literal meaning of Metta?

Dear Dipankaro and friends,
Reading about your posts about mettaa, I want to add something.
Dipankaro quoted from the subco:
The sub-commentaries defined the word in this way: "mejjati
siniyhatiiti
mitto"; (Mahavagga .tiikaa etc.) It implies to the dhamma that loves
but not the
person.
I appreciate this. Mettaa is not a person, it is a dhamma, a reality
arising because of its own conditions. It is the cetasika adosa, non-
aversion, it is not mine or self. It is one of the three sobhana
hetus, the others being alobha, non-attachment, and amoha or paññaa.
When it is directed towards a living being, it is mettaa, kindness.
When kusala citta with adosa cetasika arises, there is always alobha,
non-attachment as well. Thus, mettaa, friendship has nothing to do
with attachment.
Nina.

Op 25-dec-2007, om 6:30 heeft boaz amichay het volgende geschreven:

> The word metta comes from the sanskrit word mitra. Mitra means a
> "friend" or a "companion". It comes from the root mith which means
> "to unite" "to couple" "to meet".

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




Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

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