You won't find this in the Pali Suttas.
Metta,
Paul.
You won't find this in the Pali Suttas.
But you will find this:
More on the topic, though, there is this interesting passage here:“Someone with four qualities is cast down to hell. … They’re faithless, unethical, shameless, and imprudent. … Someone with four qualities is raised up to heaven. … They’re faithful, ethical, conscientious, and prudent. …”
“If, sir, Venerable Mahāmoggallāna can guarantee me three things—wealth, life, and faith—then let Suppavāsā make seven meals, afterwards I shall make mine.” “I can guarantee you two things—wealth and life. But as for faith, you alone are the guarantor.”
Or maybe murdering the faithless infidels / apostates!
As I understand it, Radix seemed more focused on the "social shaming" angle.
Yes. I have seen the same thing. Even in Mahayana circles, where the idea is to take care of others, there is so much struggle that there is nothing left over to give.
Doctrinal tenet? I cannot find such a tenet anywhere in the Pali suttas with agama parallels.it wouldn't surprise to see a doctrinal tenet stating that those who lack faith need to be judged severely (and then some).
Has no agama parallel.But you will find this:
https://suttacentral.net/an4.219/en/sujato
“Someone with four qualities is cast down to hell. … They’re faithless, unethical, shameless, and imprudent. … Someone with four qualities is raised up to heaven. … They’re faithful, ethical, conscientious, and prudent. …”
No, but on the responsibility that practitioners have or might have toward one another.retrofuturist wrote: ↑Tue Nov 08, 2022 3:36 amAs I understand it, Radix seemed more focused on the "social shaming" angle.
I'm not sure how one practitioner could be responsible for another practitioners faith. A teachers job is to promote faith, among other things, but isn't responsible for how his/her students respond to that.
By not betraying the Triple Gem.Goofaholix wrote: ↑Sun Nov 13, 2022 9:27 pmI'm not sure how one practitioner could be responsible for another practitioners faith.
Buddhism is for ordinary worldly people who are often jerks, and one's personal salvation is more important than what other people think.Radix wrote: ↑Mon Nov 14, 2022 8:49 pmBy not betraying the Triple Gem.Goofaholix wrote: ↑Sun Nov 13, 2022 9:27 pmI'm not sure how one practitioner could be responsible for another practitioners faith.
When people claim to be Buddhists but behave just like ordinary, worldly people, or like just plain jerks, this has an effect on how other people will perceive Buddhism.
Are you assuming there's some requirement for lay people to promote the Dhamma or Buddhism?
Buddhism is not for ordinary people
I consider myself an ordinary person (well, relatively ordinary!) who practices Buddhism. So where am I getting it wrong? Am I not practising Buddhism, or am I a sage without knowing it?cappuccino wrote: ↑Mon Nov 14, 2022 9:00 pmBuddhism is not for ordinary people
It’s the incredible insight of a lone Sage…
Meant for other sages