DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**pinawinekolad** · 07-31-2011, 01:44 AM

In my reading of the Sutta Pitaka, there are no instances in which violent extremism is ever justified, so those who act in such ways in the name of Buddhism are not fundamentalists. This is made clear by the article. However, since fundamentalism seems to be equated with literal interpretation of scripture, I think Buddhist fundamentalists might take the various cosmologies of Avici, Tushita, Sukhavati, devas, asuras, and pretas literally. Does that make sense?

07-31-2011, 01:44 AM	#2
pinawinekolad Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 377 Senior Member	In my reading of the Sutta Pitaka, there are no instances in which violent extremism is ever justified, so those who act in such ways in the name of Buddhism are not fundamentalists. This is made clear by the article. However, since fundamentalism seems to be equated with literal interpretation of scripture, I think Buddhist fundamentalists might take the various cosmologies of Avici, Tushita, Sukhavati, devas, asuras, and pretas literally. Does that make sense?
	Quote