The Concept of Killing

[Tikkun Olam]

This has been especially on my mind recently. I want to ask about it here...

There are many kinds of killing; murder, self-defense, suicide, abortion, and so on. How do you make the distinction between them?

I think we can all agree that murder is wrong, and killing in self-defense is acceptable, but...

Would you support abortion?

Would you help someone commit suicide if they're old and in pain? Is suicide ever okay?

Are their any references in Hindu scriptures that people use to support these things?

[Kismet]

This has been especially on my mind recently. I want to ask about it here...

There are many kinds of killing; murder, self-defense, suicide, abortion, and so on. How do you make the distinction between them?

I think we can all agree that murder is wrong, and killing in self-defense is acceptable, but...

Would you support abortion?

Would you help someone commit suicide if they're old and in pain? Is suicide ever okay?

Are their any references in Hindu scriptures that people use to support these things?

Excellent questions and topics:

Personally, I see killing as more detrimental to the person doing the deed than the victim. Not that suffering is good, but we must all face it sooner or later, and in many ways it is part of God's grace that we do suffer, so that we may see this world as it really is, and return to our true home.

That said, to kill, to be in the mode of "I am the killer" is a total sense of doership and illusion. Probably nowhere is this sense as keenly felt as when one murders, for it feels as if one really is doing "something." But really, you are not doing anything, only serving as the instrument for God to dispense the fruits of a person's actions.

So severity in my eyes consists in how grievous this sense of doership is. I am doing this terrible thing. Is aborting a fetus a terrible thing? If the sense that it is terrible is there, you are guilty of a grievous sin. But really, there is no sin and one is only that much more embroiled in his illusion by thinking in such a way. To be in this mode of malefic thought is far worse, and the only sin, than any possible outcome.

[Jainarayan]

Would you support abortion?

Would you help someone commit suicide if they're old and in pain? Is suicide ever okay?



I am personally against abortion. I am not against suicide. In both cases the person has to account for their actions and reap whatever karma is attached. Not that I am judging those are right or wrong; they have karma attached, as any action does.

I don't have any scriptural references, but I read commentaries pro and con on abortion and suicide. As far as suicide, some see it as "declaring bankruptcy" to start all over again. But eventually one's karmic debts have to be paid.

[Kismet]

As far as suicide, some see it as "declaring bankruptcy" to start all over again. But eventually one's karmic debts have to be paid.

That's a pretty novel way of putting it! I am against suicide. And in fact I don't think anyone really commits to suicide; something else happens in the person which forces him to it. The strength to BE in creatures is, I think, so strong, that it takes something which is literally out of your power in order to really commit yourself to the act. It is not you who is in control anymore, even if it seems that way.

[devotee]

This has been especially on my mind recently. I want to ask about it here...

There are many kinds of killing; murder, self-defense, suicide, abortion, and so on. How do you make the distinction between them?

I think we can all agree that murder is wrong, and killing in self-defense is acceptable, but...

Would you support abortion?

Would you help someone commit suicide if they're old and in pain? Is suicide ever okay?

Are their any references in Hindu scriptures that people use to support these things?

Bhagwad Gita tells us that "No one can be killed and No one kill anyone". There is no action which is bad ... it is the intention with which an action is performed makes it wrong or right. Hurting anyone without a valid cause & unselfish cause is wrong. So, just ask yourself ... what is the real motive behind such an act ? Is it for a greater cause ? What is your dharma in such a situation ? ... why is it essential ? ... etc. I think you will always find the correct answer if you are not biased and not cheating.

OM

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakkam: Who are you? What is killing? The eternal soul and Self cannot be killed. That is who we are.

I am against killing, because whomever does it isn't progressing on the path. If someone else does it, that's fine, but I wouldn't personally, because I know better. Perhaps the other person just doesn't know better, is still in the Kindergarten class. Still it would be a setback on the path.

Aum Namasivaya

[Friend from the West]

Hari Om,

At the lower level, think in almost all circumstances, abortion is "wrong."
It all causes harm (to more than one). At the higher level, ultimately I agree with others.

The one I struggle with is Tikkun Olam's suicide scenarios. Before I go further, for any reader, on this subject on forum, see this as a searching exercise and not one in judgment. Know too many hurting portions of the Divine involved in T.O.s scenarios and what TTBL intimates. Do not wish to offend or to cause more harm.

My opinion only, think that in these scenarios has to be done done in accordance with all the Divine has offered us. It should not be violent (pills, fire, firearm, drowning, etc). Going to intent, should be knowledgable one near or in consulation with, to "test" motivation of all involved and give guidance (if possible), attempt to be peaceful and focused on breath, focus on the Supreme being in any form.

I worked many years in prisons, and on many occasions (none like T.O.s scenarios) had people who wanted to take this lifetime away and were determined to do so. The only manner I witnessed on a handful of occasions that would fit to the above, was starvation. So lastly, think above occuring added with not consuming food. Also, I would so much hope and pray, this person to be surrounded by lots of love.

Om Shanti.

FFTW

[kallol]

The merit of the killing action cannot be determined by the action alone. As Devoteeji has put, it is the higher level purpose.

To uphold dharma, if killing is required, so be it. To uphold the dharmic benefit of the society and the country, if killing is required so be it.

Indian epic give enough examples of all types of "ending of lives" - killing for dharma, killing for motive, suicide, etc.

So the higher purpose needs to be seen. Whether the killing was to leading to establishment of dharma and benefits the society and country.

[Pietro Impagliazzo]

http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=4868

[Jainarayan]

The strength to BE in creatures is, I think, so strong, that it takes something which is literally out of your power in order to really commit yourself to the act. It is not you who is in control anymore, even if it seems that way.

Oh absolutely! Something short circuits the instinct to survive. I've heard people say it's cowardly to commit suicide, but I disagree. It's not courage, cowardice or any other emotion other than intolerable physical and/or emotional pain.

[devotee]

Oh absolutely! Something short circuits the instinct to survive. I've heard people say it's cowardly to commit suicide, but I disagree. It's not courage, cowardice or any other emotion other than intolerable physical and/or emotional pain.

If killing myself can save a million people, will it still be deplorable ? :?:

OM

[Spiritualseeker]

Namaste,

I would not look down upon Monks and Nuns in traditions who have burned themselves alive in protest of war and oppression.

Om Namah Sivaya

[Kismet]

If killing myself can save a million people, will it still be deplorable ? :?:

OM

Sacrifice is not suicide, imo. Suicide is done out of despair. I say, to despair to such a degree that one kills himself, is something out of the person's control.

[Kismet]

Namaste,

I would not look down upon Monks and Nuns in traditions who have burned themselves alive in protest of war and oppression.

Om Namah Sivaya

Again this is not suicide in the sense of killing yourself simply due to emotional pain. In the space of reasons, this is something different. One is still operating under the assumption of preservation, not destruction. To preserve the purity of one's own convictions is not the same as to surrender to despair.

[Jainarayan]

If killing myself can save a million people, will it still be deplorable ? :?:

OM

I didn't say anything about it being deplorable. :dunno: I said it's a short-circuit of the instinct to survive. I don't believe that giving up your life for the sake of others is suicide. A firefighter who goes into a burning building knows very well he may not come out alive, but he makes that sacrifice.

[devotee]

Sacrifice is not suicide, imo. Suicide is done out of despair. I say, to despair to such a degree that one kills himself, is something out of the person's control.

I don't believe that giving up your life for the sake of others is suicide. A firefighter who goes into a burning building knows very well he may not come out alive, but he makes that sacrifice.

So, you are redefining suicide because the "cause behind the killing has changed". Suicide, etymologically means "killing oneself". Why do we give it different name in different situations ... because the reason/the cause behind the act is different.

And that is what Lord Krishna says in BG : "The One who sees action in inaction and inaction in action is the wise among men" ===> How and why ?

OM

[Eastern Mind]

I didn't say anything about it being deplorable. :dunno: I said it's a short-circuit of the instinct to survive. I don't believe that giving up your life for the sake of others is suicide. A firefighter who goes into a burning building knows very well he may not come out alive, but he makes that sacrifice.

Vannakkam: so what's the difference then between this sacrifice, and the sacrifice the 'terrorists' did at 9-11. They gave up their life for the sake of others. (according to them, not according to me) Aum Namasivaya

[Kismet]

So, you are redefining suicide because the "cause behind the killing has changed". Suicide, etymologically means "killing oneself". Why do we give it different name in different situations ... because the reason/the cause behind the act is different.

And that is what Lord Krishna says in BG : "The One who sees action in inaction and inaction in action is the wise among men" ===> How and why ?

OM

Suicide is a concept, not a word. One can see that the concept at play in terms of killing onself in some sets of situations is far different than that in others. But this is, admittedly, a broad and difficult subject I'm not sure I want to go into right now.

[Kismet]

Vannakkam: so what's the difference then between this sacrifice, and the sacrifice the 'terrorists' did at 9-11. They gave up their life for the sake of others. (according to them, not according to me) Aum Namasivaya

I suppose there is no difference. What sets these instances apart from mundane instances of suicide, is that these have convictions/ideals underlying them. And so one is intentionally acting out his wishes and hence is relatively in control, imo.

[Pietro Impagliazzo]

So, you are redefining suicide because the "cause behind the killing has changed". Suicide, etymologically means "killing oneself". Why do we give it different name in different situations ... because the reason/the cause behind the act is different.

And that is what Lord Krishna says in BG : "The One who sees action in inaction and inaction in action is the wise among men" ===> How and why ?

OM

Krishna surely knew his thing... :)

[Jainarayan]

Suicide, etymologically means "killing oneself"

Suicide http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/suicide (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/suicide)

1. the intentional taking of one's own life.
2. destruction of one's own interests or prospects: Buying that house was financial suicide.
3. a person who intentionally takes his or her own life.

Sacrifice http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sacrifice

3. the surrender or destruction of something prized or desirable for the sake of something considered as having a higher or more pressing claim.

That's not suicide by definition. A firefighter knows he may not come out alive, but it's not his intention to die. It's his intention to save a life, knowing he may die, because it's his duty.

And that is what Lord Krishna says in BG : "The One who sees action in inaction and inaction in action is the wise among men" ===> How and why ?

OM

And does He not also say that one is entitled, has a right to action but not to its fruits? Does that not mean one is entitled, has a right to perform an action but not consider the outcome? In my view that includes selfless actions; the firefighter knows he may die, but in the service of others and without reward.

[Jainarayan]

They gave up their life for the sake of others.

No, they didn't. It was not for others, except in their deluded thinking. They did not put themselves in harms way for anyone. It was for a political and ideological statement. A firefighter who goes into a burning building to (attempt) to save someone, or a police officer who gets in the line of fire to save another person is not making a political statement.

[Eastern Mind]

No, they didn't. It was not for others, except in their deluded thinking. They did not put themselves in harms way for anyone. It was for a political and ideological statement. A firefighter who goes into a burning building to (attempt) to save someone, or a police officer who gets in the line of fire to save another person is not making a political
statement.

Vannakkam: I agree with you. I was just pointing out there there are always two sides to the coin. From their point of view, we're the ones that are deluded. From that POV, however deluded you or I may think it is, they are protecting their world from the depravity of the western world, or American influence eroding their Islamic culture. The guys we called Islamic extremist terrorists are heroes to somebody, somewhere. Not in my mind, but in somebody's.

Aum Namasivaya

[Jainarayan]

Namaste EM.

Yes, it's said there is a fine line between a terrorist and a freedom fighter. Or rather, it depends on your pov.

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté


to give up one's life ( in suicide) is actions of a thief. You are giving away something that does not belong to you.

praṇām

[Friend from the West]

Hari Om,
VajvanJi, T.O.s original scenarios are ones that I do wonder about. Do you think same holds true in those instances?

Thank you.

FFTW

[Tikkun Olam]

I will add that from my point of view, abortion is similar to murder, and not okay. There can be some gray areas though, which is where it gets tricky. Some people think it's only okay if the baby might come out mentally or physically handicapped. That's still not a good enough in my opinion. They argue "quality of life", yet children born with say, Down Syndrome, almost always say they are happy with their lives (and if they have siblings, they usually say that they are better people because of having a brother or sister with Down Syndrome). I think this is why it's a bit hasty to claim we know it's "better" for a child to not live than to live.


I also think suicide is wrong- I don't think people who try to kill themselves are in a mentally stable position to make such a strong decision. Suicide is a permanent solution to a temporary problem, is what I say.

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté

T.O.s original scenarios are ones that I do wonder about. Do you think same holds true in those instances?
Thank you.

These questions (from the original post) are what people struggle with in society. How often do we hear in the śāstra-s where one walks into the fire (mahābhārata, rāmāyaṇa) or a saint just drops the body. It all depends on one's level of knowledge and experience.

What use is the body if one knows and experiences themselves as the Divine Self. Yet what of the same body that clings to it each second, thinking I am this body alone and nothing else. Our conversation must depend on the frame of reference we are choosing. What then are the choices ? Ignorance and one fully blossomed in Reality.

praṇām

[Friend from the West]

Namaste,

YajvanJi, if you would entertain one more post to see if I am even close it would be much appreciated.
It would than depend on where that portion is in the path, and what their intent is? With this, it would than be improper to comment on a couple of scenarios where assumptions must be made?

Thank you.

FFTW

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté


Namaste,

YajvanJi, if you would entertain one more post to see if I am even close it would be much appreciated.
It would than depend on where that portion is in the path, and what their intent is? With this, it would than be improper to comment on a couple of scenarios where assumptions must be made?
Thank you. FFTW
If we are ~on the path~ it suggests we have not arrived. Various rules apply for brahmaṇa-s , kṣatriya-s , vaiśya-s , śudra-s. For the saṁnyāsin ( renunciate ) the rules are different too, no ? There are common rules and there are specific rules. They all come under dharma. This dharma is there to lift one up to the highest level possible.

So what of this killing ? to the kṣatriya it becomes part of his duty to protect, and this may involve killing. Yet to the saṁnyāsin who is aligned to yama and niyama is this action permissable ?


The more the individual is aligned to the sense of 'me' , 'mine' then one thinks I can do as I please with this body or unborn child as it is 'mine' - I am the owner no one else is. This is Ignorance.


Yet what of the person of perfect vision , steeped in Reality. Bodies coming and going all day long; Stars exploding, tigers eating their pray, cats eat mice. This occurs every minute of the day, yet the realized being knows this as completely seperate from him/herself and the play and display of the Universe. To the person steeped in ignorance they say how can God let this happen ?


For every level of creation there are laws that apply to that level ( says my teacher); When we see the whole picture it all makes sense. Like the person standing on top of the mountain . He can see all the paths, all the villages below. Yet to the person on the path he sees only what is surrounding him, no ? Hence the wise say knowledge is different in differnt states of consciousness.

To a child the most important thing is their toy or doll. To the parent , they see this and chuckle. When we truely grow our vision expands to understand the unity of everything in diversity. The cause of death is life , this there is no doubt and Kṛṣṇa-ji says why should one grieve knowing this ? It is when we crack the code on who is the true Self we transcend this cycle.


Yet the pickle is when one brings grief to another - this can inhibit one's dharma. The killing of another inhibits one's forward progress of that person who is killed. For the fully realized being, if he is killed nothing happened as they do not associate with the body and alls well. But for the ignornant, their forward progress has been curtailed.


I am of the firm belief if you want to kill something, then lets kill the ego:
A man should always be in revolt against himself, for the ego, like a crooked mirror narrows down and distorts. It is the worst of all tyrants, it dominates you absolutely ... śrī nisarga-datta maharāj

Then one can rejoice in that death.

praṇām

[Friend from the West]

Hari Om,

YajvanJi, as always, much knowledge and wisdom you share in these posts.

Thank you for this.

Om Shanti

FFTW

[Tikkun Olam]

Vannakkam: I agree with you. I was just pointing out there there are always two sides to the coin. From their point of view, we're the ones that are deluded. From that POV, however deluded you or I may think it is, they are protecting their world from the depravity of the western world, or American influence eroding their Islamic culture. The guys we called Islamic extremist terrorists are heroes to somebody, somewhere. Not in my mind, but in somebody's.

Aum Namasivaya

I don't agree with this. Suicide bombing is never okay. It's one thing to let someone take your life if you don't want to give in to them. But it's not the same to purposely take your own life just to hurt others- that's never the answer. No matter how much you disagree with someone, this doesn't change minds, only inflicts unneeded pain on both you and them.

I like to think of holding on to an idea in the way Max Planck once said, “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”

[Tikkun Olam]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2011-11-23/scientist-assisted-suicide/51376254/1?csp=Dailybriefing

Real world example;

The Otago Daily Times newspaper reports that 50-year-old Sean Davison, a South Africa-based microbiologist, wrote a book in which he describes how his 85-year-old mother Patricia, who lived in New Zealand (http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Places,+Geography/Countries/New+Zealand), was in pain in 2006 during the last few months of her life.
In the book, he notes that at his mother's request, he gave her crushed morphine tablets in a glass of water. The admission led to charges last year, and on Thursday he pleaded guilty to helping his mother commit suicide.
Davison's lawyer described his client's actions as an "act of love."
A judge said she accepted that Davisson's actions were driven by compassion and described his offense as at the lower end of the scale.


Is this the same as suicide? If a dog is sick and in pain, you give it morphine. If we think this is "helping", why not give morphine to a sick person? If you accept this, then there might also be a problem with other people (i.e. severely depressed) who claim their pain is enough to end it.