Piya Tan dharmafarer@... [Pali] wrote thus at 10:50 AM 27-09-14:

>One possible explanation is that
>abyapada·sankappa simply remains as thought,
>while avihimsa·sankappa is a thought that is behind the action itself.Â

Mmm... That don't sound convincing to me... Thanks though.

>My experience with the suttas is that there is
>always a good reason that the words or terms are
>there. Figuring them our is very interesting and zest-inducing. Sadhu.
>
>Fortunately there the suttas are still with us.
>The Chinese Mahayana are very strong here and
>trying to promote Mahayana the superior vehicle,
>and that there is no such thing as "early Buddhism."
>
>PMT is also planning a "Lotus Sutra Fellowship"
>especially promoting "Chinese Mahayana." When I
>openly questioned what if western or
>English-speaking Buddhists come to learn, do we
>teach them "Chinese" Buddhism, or just Buddhism.
>A number of voices responded in the meeting, but none that is really coherent.

:-) I just leave them alone. That not how I used to be though!

>They are really missing all the peace and joy of
>early Buddhism. or, maybe I am just being
>"fundamentalist." Buddhist fundamentals are
>vital, anyway. Moment like this, the radiant
>image of the lone Buddha under the Bodhi tree is inspiring and meaningful.

I'm 'fundamentalist' too. And do my thing, and let others do theirs.


with mettâ,
Kumâra Bhikkhu