--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradh...@...> wrote: > > > On Jan 12, 2009, at 1:11 PM, enlightened_dawn11 wrote: > > > To be supported by Natural Law is, IMO, wrongly > >> understood by most TMers, because they don't get the source of > > this > >> idea. -snip- > > > > you are off on a tangent here-- i didn't mention the natural law > > angle, nor dharma, nor the laws of manu. all straw men. > > Hey, it's not my fault you didn't understand the origin of the term. > It's been a part of MMY's teaching for quite some time. In fact I > believe it used to be the name of a MMY booklet: "Life Supported by > Natural Law". >
are all Buddhists as evasive as you are?
