Buddhism encourages non-violence, it's not strictly enforced, but there will be consequences when they die.
Then again, just because some people's doctrine does not encourage violence doesn't give others a free ticket to bash on them for doing so.
Then again, just because some people's doctrine does not encourage violence doesn't give others a free ticket to bash on them for doing so.
The "let's go back to origins" approach is not a Western invention, the existence of Chan/Zen proves it quite clearly.
> A. K. Warder notes that the Mahāyāna Sūtras are highly unlikely to have come from the teachings of the historical Buddha, since the language and style of every extant Mahāyāna Sūtra is comparable more to later Indian texts than to texts that could have circulated in the Buddha's putative lifetime. Warder also notes that the Tibetan historian Tāranātha (1575–1634) proclaimed that after the Buddha taught the sutras, they disappeared from the human world and circulated only in the world of the nagas. In Warder's view, "this is as good as an admission that no such texts existed until the 2nd century A.D."
I certainly do regard the actual expressions of faith by its many communities, but not all are correct, and one need look no further than to compare the actual root texts to the monstrous actions of people determined to burn the world down in its name. You are invited to do so for yourself, as the Buddha has always done, and compare the words to the actions of those who claim lineage.
> na haneyya na ghātaye
There is the Pali in a handful of words. Now you have the tools to discern for yourself: what does it tell us to do or not to do?