Reply To: The Buddha defined “morality” based on societal acceptance?

#53559
Lal
Keymaster

Yes. What Yash wrote makes sense.

However, I don’t think the following can happen: “..It’s possible that a Sotapanna can become a pornstar and have sex with multiple partners, ..”

  • The mindset of a Sotapanna is unlikely to make that happen.

______

Regarding the issue of Visaka keeping “slaves.” Those are probably more like “servants.” When thinking of slaves, one may get the idea of “forced labor.” I don’t believe a Sotapanna is capable of that.

  • For example, when I grew up in Sri Lanka, it was common to have servants in the house. We had a couple, and I remember playing with one my age. They were sent to school and treated nicely. Those were mostly children from poor families who could not provide even food for them; the parents voluntarily asked my parents to take care of them. It was not “forced labor.”
  • These are complex issues that must be considered based on the specific situation.
  • There was also a “slave woman” (Kujjuttara, I believe) who became a Sotapanna and taught Dhamma to others. Thus, she was obviously free to listen to the Buddha’s discourses.
2 users thanked author for this post.