Once upon a time, there was a monk who recited scriptures every day. There is a butcher who kills pigs every day. The two are close friends and good friends. But both of them like to sleep late, often oversleep, and are reprimanded by the abbot and boss. So, the two made an agreement. The butcher gets up early every day to ask the monk to chant Buddhist scripture, and the monk gets up early every day to ask the butcher to kill the pig. Later, the monk died and went to hell, and the butcher went to heaven. Because monks call butchers to kill pigs every day, it is an indirect killing, which is a crime according to Buddhist canon; The butcher told the monk to recite the scriptures every day, because he knew how to repent, which is what Buddhists call turning back to the shore, so he was well rewarded.

Obviously, the person who invented this story wanted to tell people a simple truth: being a man is not afraid of making mistakes, as long as he knows how to repent, he can be forgiven and get good results.

However, if we look at it from another angle, things will be different.

The monk's duty is to meditate and chant Buddhist scriptures and practice hard; The butcher's duty is to kill pigs for meat and serve all beings. Although Buddhism has a set of commandments, it is invalid for butchers anyway; The butcher gets up early to call the monk to chant Buddhist scripture, probably just for the sake of friends, and has little to do with fulfilling the duty of "killing".

Besides, monks get up early every day and ask butchers to kill pigs, which is also a friendly move. The motive is to urge the butcher to finish his work well and get rich rewards in order to live a good life. Imagine, if a butcher doesn't kill pigs, how can he live and support his family? Monks chanting, of course, have the guarantee of temple logistics. Although they also go abroad for alms, they are not worried about bringing home the bacon.

In addition, it has not been clear since ancient times. Who decides whether to go to heaven or hell after death?

If the decision is made by the Buddha, the ending in the story is necessary, because it is natural for the Buddha to maintain his prestige.

If it is up to God to make a decision, people will question it, because God does not prohibit eating meat or killing. Isn't there a famous saying that "whoever God wants to perish, let him be crazy first"? Isn't "extinction" killing people?

It would be even more ridiculous if the decision was made by the prince of Yan, because the reputation of "the palace of Yan" has always been very smelly, and it can't enforce the law fairly at all, and it often wrongs good people!

To put it bluntly, in my opinion, it is people who can decide their own destiny after death. Open-minded, kind and upright, strict with self-discipline, tolerant of others, calm down, smile at life, take every step well, do everything well, do not indulge too much desire, do not expect too much wealth, and be an ordinary person. Happiness to the old, happiness to drive a crane westward, of course, you will ascend to heaven.

Criminals who embezzle and accept bribes, rob and steal, and commit evil crimes always want to get something for nothing, and even bad guys who rob wealth and undermine social order are bound to be punished to a certain extent. Of course, unrepentant people will be sent to eighteen levels of hell and be imprisoned forever.