The Buddhist view on Killing for Self Protection & Mercy
Killing
The Buddha has advised everyone to abstain from killing. If
everybody accepts this advice, human beings would not kill each other. In the
case where a person's life is threatened, the Buddha says even then it is not
advisable to kill out of self-protection. The weapon for self-protection is
loving-kindness. One who practises this kindness very seldom comes across such
misfortune. However, man loves his life so much that he is not prepared to
surrender himself to others; in actual practice, most people would struggle for
self-protection. It is natural and every living being struggles and kills
others for self-protection but kammic effect depends on their mental attitude.
During the struggle to protect himself, if he happens to kill his opponent
although he has no intention to kill, then he is not responsible for that
action. On the other hand, if he kills another person under any circumstances
with the intention to kill, then he is not free from the kammic reaction; he
has to face the consequences. We must remember that killing is killing; when we
disapprove of it, we call it 'murder'. When we punish man for murdering, we
call it 'capital punishment'. If our own soldiers are killed by an 'enemy' we
call it 'slaughter'. However, if we approve a killing, we call it 'war'. But if
we remove the emotional content from these words, we can understand that
killing is killing.
According to Buddhism mercy killing too cannot be justified.
Mercy and killing can never go together. Some people kill their pets on the
grounds that they do not like to see the pets suffer. However, if mercy killing
is the correct method to be practised on pets and other animals, then why are
people so reluctant to do the same to their beloved ones?
When some people see their dogs or cats suffer from some
skin disease, they arrange to kill those poor animals. They call this action,
mercy killing. Actually it is not that they have mercy towards those animals,
but they kill them for their own precaution and to get rid of an awful sight.
And even if they do have real mercy towards a suffering animal, they still have
no right to take away its life. No matter how sincere one may be, mercy
killing, is not the correct approach. The consequences of this killing,
however, are different from killing with hatred towards the animal. Buddhists
have no grounds to say that any kind of killing is justified.
Some people try to justify mercy killing with the
misconception that if the motive or reason is good, then the act itself is
good. They then claim that by killing their pet, they have the intention to
relieve the unhappy animal from its suffering and so the action is good. No
doubt their original intention or motive is good. But the evil act of killing
will certainly bring about unwholesome results. The Buddhist religion cannot
justify mercy killing as completely free from bad reaction. However, to kill
out of necessity and without any anger or hatred has less bad reaction than to
kill out of intense anger or jealousy.
On the other hand, a being (man or animal) may suffer owing
to his bad kamma. If By mercy killing, we prevent the working out of one's bad
kamma, the debt will have to be paid in another existence. As Buddhists, all
that we can do is to help to reduce the pain of suffering in others. Buddhism can never accept these arguments
because it is not how the killing occurs that is important, but the fact that a
life of one being is terminated by another. No one has any right to do that for
whatever reason.
May all beings be well and happy & attain the fruits of
Nibbana.
Suranda Weediyage
BA, Tripitakachariya, Dip in Pali/ Buddhism (Pali & Buddhist University of Sri Lanka), HNDBF,
surandalk@gmail.com
http://www.thebuddhadhamma.wordpress.com
No comments:
Post a Comment