The Concept of Killing

[Jainarayan]

Suicide, etymologically means "killing oneself"

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
~~~~~~

namast�


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
~~~~~~

namast�

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