[Trotoleterm]

For example killing a mosquito that keep on biting you and torturing you when trying to sleep is not the same as killing another human being!! so which is better, staying whole night awake suffering from bites and annoying noise, or killing the bloody mosquito?

The five precepts are useful for not only others, but also the ones who hold them. In fact, the five precepts are mainly to protect ourselves from thinking, saying and doing bad. Before we will kill a mosquito, we need to feel angry, annoying or other bad feeling/desires firstly. After that we kill it to satisfy such bad desires. So, another question for this example should be ‘which is better between satisfying our bad desires or not satisfying them?’. If we keep satisfying our bad desire, who we will be in the future?

For beginners whose Dhamma strength is less, they would answer your question by choosing to kill the mosquito which is easy. But for those who have more Dhamma strength, they would choose the other or another way/alternative. This is why we have to do learning/training/practicing (Sikkha). Higher morality (Abhisila-Sikkha) cannot be achieved by only thinking or understanding, but has to be achieved by training and real doing/practicing.

Again, as beginners cannot do/understand as the advanced people do/understand, it is somehow not useful to spend time discussing on Dhamma which is much higher than our own level. For the advanced people, they would view and feel that killing a mosquito is easy, but it could help to avoid only minor annoying for a short term. But such minor annoying means nothing comparing to other great sufferings in this wheel of rebirth. So, they prefer to ignore such minor thing and keep Sila which is greater and much more useful to them in longer term.

If you do not believe this, you have to test by practicing yourself to the advanced level and you will know by yourself whether I am right or wrong.

When you talk about sexual misconduct, the woman does not have to be my neighbor’s wife!!! she could be a single beautiful woman that i meet in the club and we can spend good time together without anyone gets hurt!! how about masturbation? is it a sexual misconduct?

(Need to define “spend good time together” firstly. Is it sexual affair or just talking and dinner?) How can we truly know that she is single as we just meet her that night? What if she lie, and in fact she has a husband?

For masturbation, it depends on what we think in our mind during the activity. If we are thinking about other people’s wife, we are in breach to the percept by thinking. If you think about your wife, it is not in breach to the precept. In any case, such activity supports to increase desire in us.

please have a look at the following story and let me know what you think:
http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index....2,3456,0,0,1,0

This is just a story of a monk who did not understand Buddhism. In many countries, there are so many Buddhists by birth who do not study and practice. So, they do not know Buddhism.

In relation to the second question, i knew that the Buddha was Prince Siddhartha, but the whole point is that Buddhism can be used by some as escapism and denial. Personally, i dont want to become a buddhism for the wrong reasons if you understand what i mean!

I understand what you mean. But, this depends how we use Buddhism. We have our own choice. How other people use Buddhism does not affect us. The more important thing is whether or not we use Buddhism correctly, properly and usefully.

Finally, regarding the third question, i thought that a baby is porn as a white page (egoless)!! I ve read articles describe the ego as "the voice in your head" or as "a by product of living with others" or as "an accumulated phenomenon"

Would you ‘believe’ in those articles? Let’s skip this issue as no easy way for us to prove it here, and this is also not relevant to our practicing.

I respectfully disagree with you here, the three groups are not the same!!

I appreciate other different views. However, in my comment no. 22, I did not say that the three groups are the same. I said that ‘none of these three groups is wrong’.

Moreover, I said that they ‘use xxx to lead the path’. I did not say that they ‘use only xxx to walk on the path’. So, the first group also have to use reason/wisdom but they just use belief/faith much more. The second group also have to belief/faith, but they just use reason/wisdom much more.

It would not be practical for the learners if they would use only and purely reason/wisdom without belief at all (even for a little). Otherwise, you may not say that the statements in your comment no. 24 is belonging to the Buddha until you can prove it. How could you test it definitely and clearly? You have to rely on text books. How could you rely or believe in those books? I appreciate the Sutta which you raise in comment no. 24 and, in Ajahn Buddhadasa’s view, it is one of the most important Suttas. However, this does not mean that we are restricted to use belief at all. Otherwise, it would be messy. For example, how could children believe that their parents are dad and mom. Do they need to do DNA test to prove so?

Cheers