Mkoll wrote:I'm not sure what you mean. Can you elaborate?
That one cannot just unilaterally decide about the meanings of words, especialy not when they are about specific relationships with other people.
E.g. If I were to claim I am your boss, that wouldn't be right, nor would it be right for you to claim you are my employee.
Goofaholix wrote:I find that an odd view, I don't see why what one calls oneself should be so significant and I don't see why what ones actually does should not be significant.
False dichotomy; nobody suggested that "what one actually does should not be significant".
It's action and intention that is important, not mere words.
Would you think of yourself or tell anyone that you are, say, Barack Obama's private consultant? You probably wouldn't. Although you might think on occasion that you have a lot of advice that you could give him.
Any relationship exists only as long as there is a mutual
agreement about it.
One cannot rightly say one is another's teacher unless that person has accepted one as a teacher. One cannot rightly say one is another's student unless one has been accepted by that person as a student.
Anyway this thread is about who is a disciple of a Buddha, not who declares himself.
Put up or shut up time, lets see a quote of the scripture you are referring to so we can discuss it properly.
This was the OP's request:
binocular wrote:I recall a sutta where the Buddha states who may rightfully consider themselves to be a disciple of the Buddha.
I've tried to find it myself, but to no avail.
Does anyone know in which sutta this is the topic?