2007-02-08 02:24:45 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
bruno i asked only about buddha
not about buddhaist
2007-02-08 02:43:46 · update #1
1000% agree.
2007-02-08 02:44:07 · answer #1 · answered by Anger eating demon 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is one book by Dave Hunt, "Beyond Seduction" where some explanation was given as to the possibility of the practitioners of Buddhism become violent. There then it is not the fault of religion but the believers who have twisted the message to permit violence. Well, Buddha teaches every living life even an ant must not be killed. However, when in violence life may be lost and so, the answer to the question is none will disagree with Buddha, being the symbol of non-violence.
2007-02-08 02:40:10 · answer #2 · answered by Ptuan 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I disagree because there are several people who have become symbols for non violence. Like Ghandi and Nelson Mandella, I do agree that according to everything written about Buddha he seems like a very enlightened man, and had a very good approach to life.
2007-02-08 02:34:28 · answer #3 · answered by ɹɐǝɟsuɐs Blessed Cheese Maker 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree that he is a non-violent symbol but not the "very symbol of non-violence" since he isn't primarily known for preaching non-violence. If I had to choose "the" symbol I would go with Gandhi.
2007-02-08 02:27:37 · answer #4 · answered by hot carl sagan: ninja for hire 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is kind of like the Islamic religion saying they are all about peace and love.
What country's are Buddhist? Viet Nam, talk to a veteran about Buddhist religion?
Cambodia and indo china, where they sell little girls into prostitution. The Camarough was Buddhist and about the most vicious killer on the planet. What they teach is not what they do.
read their history it is worst than Islamic forces.
From burning people alive in the street in protest to torture of people who don't believe the way they do.
Read the history of the places that are Buddist> real eye opener.
2007-02-08 02:32:06 · answer #5 · answered by Steven 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If you read his teachings you realise that he desired only peace for humanity but was realistic enough to accept that confronting tyrrany with force is sometimes necessary to prevent harm occuring to others. The righteous warrior who fights for a just cause creates more good karma than the pacifist who refuses to stand up to wickedness.
2007-02-08 02:31:47 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I have met buddhist monks asking me for spare change and that is rude and makes me want to thump him
2007-02-08 02:27:51 · answer #7 · answered by sahara_springs 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋