Mercy killing and kamma

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths. What can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
Posts: 23043
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Mercy killing and kamma

Post by tiltbillings » Fri Sep 20, 2013 12:45 am

clw_uk wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
clw_uk wrote:

Although a question does arise that if you don't find my posts "edifying" then why post at all ... Strange
Curious to see if you actually had an answer. Nope.

Your reply to my original question must have got lost in cyberspace :/

As I said, answer me and I will answer you. That's how a debate usually goes ...
Final word is yours. I am not wasting any more time with this.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

User avatar
Posts: 4718
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am

Re: Mercy killing and kamma

Post by clw_uk » Fri Sep 20, 2013 12:48 am

Oh please i posted some genuine questions, which you choose to ignore.

Maybe you don't know, which tbh is fine with me

So moving on :focus:
Unbowed, Unbent, Unbroken

User avatar
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: Mercy killing and kamma

Post by beeblebrox » Fri Sep 20, 2013 2:43 am

clw_uk wrote: Just like "do not lie"

If it was ww2 and I was hiding a Jewish child in my basement, would it be moral to tell the SS that they were there when they come knocking, or not? Or is truth relative to circumstance?

Would it be moral to see a child taken off to austiwch, just so I could say I was a good Buddhist and didn't lie?
Hi Clw_UK,

I think it's reasonable if a person didn't want to tell the SS officer that there was a Jewish kid in the house. I don't think that anyone would blame him for that... but it seems to me like you were making a straw man argument if the point was that a "good" Buddhist, if he wanted to keep his precepts, would've just told the officer... and then just left it at that.

I think that'd only make him a very lazy Buddhist, and extremely irresponsible one at that.

What do you think if we looked at the scenario in this following way?

If the person decided to give the officer a chance to do something which is right, do you think that is good or not?

Of course, I'd agree it's probably very unlikely that the officer would do something good just like that, right out of the blue... but what if the person tried to figure out a way to encourage that in the officer? Is that still good, or not?

If a person tried to do something like that I think it would be extremely difficult, of course... but if the person was willing to do it, what kind of benefits do you think that would have on the karma? Not just his, but maybe for everyone involved?

If he managed to convince the officer to do something good, what would you think? If he wasn't successful, would you think that it was a waste? I think he still gets some experience in the process...

Also, if the officer encountered something like that, what kind of effects do you think that would have on his mindset later on?

Of course, all of that is an idealist way of thinking (and very speculative), I will not argue with that... but is making up some straw man arguments really any better?

There are so many possibilities. It's not black and white. I think it's like what the Buddha said: it's impossible for us to work out the karma and all of the effects that it would have later on.

It's not really as simple as not lying (or not killing) and then leaving it just like that... since when does real life work like that? Nothing can be isolated out by itself, and I think that includes actions.


User avatar
Posts: 448
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 2:12 pm

Re: Mercy killing and kamma

Post by mirco » Fri Sep 20, 2013 4:15 pm

Dear clw,
clw_uk wrote:I have no idea, do you? Yet even if, somehow you could prove that a bird experiences fear, it doesn't follow it experiences dukkha. And if you can prove that, you have to prove that it can learn from dukkha and be free from it.
dhukka is more than this intellectual concept. It's simply a word for unpleasant, painful, causing misery. So, pain & fear is dukkha. But, it's not about the bird being or not being able to learn from what your idea of dhukka is.
It's about birds being in pleasant and unpleasant states and about our Kamma.
From being killed, I think, unpleasant feelings arise to a bird.
I am trying to make you understand, that there are better things that can be done to dying animals than killing them.

"An important term for meditative absorption is samadhi. We often translate that as concentration, but that can suggest a certain stiffness. Perhaps unification is a better rendition, as samadhi means to bring together. Deep samadhi isn't at all stiff. It's a process of letting go of other things and coming to a unified experience." - Bhikkhu Anālayo

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 40 guests