killing with good intention

General discussion of issues related to Theravada Training of Sila, the Five Precepts (Pañcasikkhāpada), and Eightfold Ethical Conduct (Aṭṭhasīla).

killing with good intention

Postby hove » Tue Jan 22, 2013 5:38 pm

KILLING WITH GOOD INTENTION

hi all

in order to understand the laws of Kamma , a little deeper,
i have devised here a hypothetical question :

suppose there is a man with cruel intention, who is about to push the button and launch a Hydrogen bomb, over a big city, creating mass destruction and mass suffering.


examining the situation , i see clearly that the only way to stop him is to `pull the trigger`, and take his life.

examining my mind, i make sure that along with lots metta-karuna for the big city dwellers,
i also have metta-karuna for the that man, and only slight ill-will towards him .


realizing that i am about to break sila and suffer the kammic fruit for it,
i pull the trigger ,without hesitation

MY QUESTIONS

1) what are the kammic consequences of breaking this sila, with `good` intentions, and that much ("some") level of sati-panna (as described), in such an extreme (hypothetical) situation ?

2) can you say that this action is "in line with Dhamma" ?
3) can you say that it is "against Dhamma"?


(my confusion is regarding the merit-de-merit ratio in Kammic fruits, regarding parameters such as : intention, , and wisdom/ignorance, (and also "phisical kamma").

4) Is the Intention factor much more dominant , in determening the Kammic fruit, than the Wisdom Factor
or is it not ?

i know that Kamma is an extremely complicated subject, but i am hoping that maybe some of you, have some insight on the subject, and perhaps came across some relevant Pali sources

much metta

hove
hove
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 5:18 pm

Re: killing with good intention

Postby perkele » Tue Jan 22, 2013 6:41 pm

The king asked: "Venerable Nagasena, for whom is the greater demerit, one who knowingly does evil, or one who does evil unknowingly?"
The elder replied: "Indeed, your majesty, for him who does evil not knowing is the greater demerit."
"In that case, venerable Nagasena, would we doubly punish one who is our prince or king's chief minister who not knowing does evil?"
"What do you think, your majesty, who would get burned more, one who knowing picks up a hot iron ball, ablaze and glowing, or one who not knowing picks it up?"
"Indeed, venerable sir, he who not knowing picks it up would get burned more."
"Indeed, your majesty, in the same way the greater demerit is for him who does evil not knowing."
"You are clever, venerable Nagasena."


So, to be exact, the merit-demerit ratio here is 79/5, the wisdom factor in your case, I would estimate to be around 3.1415, roundabout, your intention sounds quite noble, so I'd give you 5.3 on that. Given that this is just speculation, you incur a penalty of -13. So the end result is (79/5)*3.1415+5.3-13 = 41,9357. So roughly 42, the answer to all questions.
:jumping:
perkele
 
Posts: 345
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 2:37 pm

Re: killing with good intention

Postby marc108 » Tue Jan 22, 2013 6:58 pm

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/study/kamma.html
"These four imponderables are not to be speculated about. Whoever speculates about them would go mad & experience vexation. Which four? The Buddha-range of the Buddhas [i.e., the range of powers a Buddha develops as a result of becoming a Buddha]... The jhana-range of one absorbed in jhana [i.e., the range of powers that one may obtain while absorbed in jhana]... The results of kamma... Speculation about [the first moment, purpose, etc., of] the cosmos is an imponderable that is not to be speculated about. Whoever speculates about these things would go mad & experience vexation."
"It's easy for us to connect with what's wrong with us... and not so easy to feel into, or to allow us, to connect with what's right and what's good in us."
User avatar
marc108
 
Posts: 464
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 10:10 pm

Re: killing with good intention

Postby David N. Snyder » Tue Jan 22, 2013 7:18 pm

hove wrote:examining the situation , i see clearly that the only way to stop him is to `pull the trigger`, and take his life.


See also: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=8528&start=0
User avatar
David N. Snyder
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7916
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada

Re: killing with good intention

Postby Cittasanto » Tue Jan 22, 2013 7:49 pm

You are mixing up intention with motivation here.
motivation is the why you do something and intention in the desire to do it (to simplify it)

the intention is to kill the reason why you kill may alter the consequenses to some degree but the intention to kill and then the act of killing would bring the same results kammically.
there is always other options, you could restrain him somehow, which wouldn't lead to consequenses kammically because the intention is not to hurt but to preserve life. you could also reason with him.... there are always other options.

so to answer your questions
1- hell
2- no
3- yes
4- intention is the dominant factor (imo) and wisdom can guide to some degree. or to use archery as an example. the intention dictates the target area, motivation the accuracy of the aim to that target.
This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!
With Metta
Upāsaka Cittasanto
Blog, - Some Suttas Translated, Ajahn Chah.
"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."
User avatar
Cittasanto
 
Posts: 5686
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin

Re: killing with good intention

Postby barcsimalsi » Thu Jan 24, 2013 12:15 pm

Nice topic.

What about those executioners and hangmans who pull the level to ensure final justice is made?
What about the Judge who sentenced a druglord to be hang?
What about the enforcers who kill the bandits to keep the community safe?
What about the government healthcare servants who are responsible for clearing out those cute mosquito larva?

Imagine if all these people mentioned above are Buddhist who insist on not breaking any precepts, what is gonna happen to the world? Will it creates a better world? :thinking:
barcsimalsi
 
Posts: 366
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 7:33 am

Re: killing with good intention

Postby corrine » Tue Feb 05, 2013 8:54 pm

This is a very old argument. Back in the fifties the subject of 'would you kill the young Hitler if you had the chance, knowing what evil he would do?' was a very popular topic in ethical discussions. This was even a topic for scholastic debates. It is always presented as doing a greater good - i.e. killing to prevent more killing. This argument is often also made for going to war.

What it comes down to is a personal choice. Do you believe that it is always wrong to kill, or not. There will always be those who could be stopped from doing evil, by killing them. How many will you kill? Will there ever be a point at which you have killed enough bad people, or will there always be more 'needing to be stopped' by killing.

For me, there are some absolutes. I would consider giving my life to prevent the evil such as stepping in front of someone to protect them. I would not kill them. Because for me killing is not an option. Not for evil people and not for food and not for convenience. For me, it is a very slippery slope to more killing. Once we rationalize the act of taking the life of another sentient being, how many others will we kill. All for very good reasons.

I believe that all life is impermanent. It is not up to me to 'save' one life by taking another. This is not my right. If we start seeing ourselves as the ultimate deciders in the question of who should and who should not live, we are affecting not only what happens in this situation but what might happen in the future.

As to executioners etc. - I believe that this is not right occupation. I believe that the death penalty is wrong. Killing begets killing. It always has and it always will.

corrine
corrine
 
Posts: 63
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2011 7:33 pm

Re: killing with good intention

Postby appicchato » Tue Feb 05, 2013 9:20 pm

Pāṇātipātā veramaṇī sikkhāpadaṃ samādiyāmi. I undertake the training rule to abstain from taking life.

Number one on the list...easy peasy...
User avatar
appicchato
 
Posts: 1558
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:47 am
Location: Bridge on the River Kwae

Re: killing with good intention

Postby polarbuddha101 » Tue Feb 05, 2013 9:25 pm

appicchato wrote:Pāṇātipātā veramaṇī sikkhāpadaṃ samādiyāmi. I undertake the training rule to abstain from taking life.

Number one on the list...easy peasy...


:sage: :bow:
"I don't envision a single thing that, when developed & cultivated, leads to such great benefit as the mind. The mind, when developed & cultivated, leads to great benefit."

"I don't envision a single thing that, when undeveloped & uncultivated, brings about such suffering & stress as the mind. The mind, when undeveloped & uncultivated, brings about suffering & stress."
User avatar
polarbuddha101
 
Posts: 814
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 7:39 am
Location: California

Re: killing with good intention

Postby santa100 » Tue Feb 05, 2013 9:33 pm

hove wrote:
examining the situation , i see clearly that the only way to stop him is to `pull the trigger`, and take his life


From the given information, I'll assume you're a gun owner. And if you're a gun owner, then you'd better train very hard to become a sharpshooter (like those on history channel where they throw a penny up into the air and shoot thru it). That way, in such situation, you don't have to kill the guy. You could just comfortably and accurately aim for his arm and disable him after all negotiations have failed..
santa100
 
Posts: 1491
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: killing with good intention

Postby manas » Tue Feb 05, 2013 10:43 pm

Beings will always be born and die regardless; what is more rare is for wisdom to be cultivated, and it doesn't seem wise to me, to save someone else from becoming a murderer, by becoming one oneself.
The greatest warrior of all time turned out to be the most peaceful one.
User avatar
manas
 
Posts: 2098
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: killing with good intention

Postby Kamran » Wed Feb 06, 2013 2:23 am

The intention of Buddhist morality to calm the body and mind; to reduce tension as a precondition for psychological work.

Mental peace is crucial to the path, so which ever action would be less likely to disturb your mental peace would be the skillful choice in my opinion.

Its all about the meditation practice :)
When this concentration is thus developed, thus well developed by you, then wherever you go, you will go in comfort. Wherever you stand, you will stand in comfort. Wherever you sit, you will sit in comfort. Wherever you lie down, you will lie down in comfort.
User avatar
Kamran
 
Posts: 188
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 3:14 am

Re: killing with good intention

Postby buddhismfordudes » Mon Nov 25, 2013 9:13 pm

Let's get real. Would a Buddhist kill a rabid dog that's about to bite his daughter? That is the dimension of this issue, not guys with their finger on the bomb button, young Hitlers, and mosquito larvae. Good grief! What would be the better thing - protecting a few people with your body during a shooting rampage, and getting killed for the effort, or shooting the shooter? There are people in this world who protect others, because that is their temperament and because they are trained to do so. Through my blog "Buddhism for Tough Guys" I have an expanded network of former policemen and military men who are Buddhist and are willing to take a bullet for anybody under any circumstances. They embody the real meaning of anatta by always putting the safety of others before their own. And guess what? They carry concealed firearms. As a Zen monk once put it to me when I asked him what he would do if he was attacked: "I would fight back. We're Buddhists, not stupid." I think that intellectual hair-splitting in western Buddhism puts off a lot of good, decent people such as those I have described. They are quite literally willing to sacrifice their lives and their karmas to preserve the lives of others. Some of us see our Buddhist practice as a way of becoming mentally tough to face a challenging world. I can think of no act of compassion greater than ignoring one's own safety in order to save another's life.
Gerry Stribling
Author of "Buddhism for Dudes"
Blog "Buddhism for Tough Guys" at buddhismfordudes.blog.com
User avatar
buddhismfordudes
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 5:40 pm
Location: Louisville, Kentucky USA

Re: killing with good intention

Postby kmath » Mon Nov 25, 2013 9:26 pm

Kamran wrote:The intention of Buddhist morality to calm the body and mind; to reduce tension as a precondition for psychological work.

Mental peace is crucial to the path, so which ever action would be less likely to disturb your mental peace would be the skillful choice in my opinion.

Its all about the meditation practice :)


This can't be right. Just because an action is less disturbing, it doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.
Last edited by kmath on Mon Nov 25, 2013 9:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
kmath
 
Posts: 257
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 6:44 pm

Re: killing with good intention

Postby kmath » Mon Nov 25, 2013 9:31 pm

hove wrote:
suppose there is a man with cruel intention, who is about to push the button and launch a Hydrogen bomb, over a big city, creating mass destruction and mass suffering.

examining the situation , i see clearly that the only way to stop him is to `pull the trigger`, and take his life.



If that's really the only way, I would accept the karmic consequences of killing the cruel man.
User avatar
kmath
 
Posts: 257
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 6:44 pm

Re: killing with good intention

Postby greenjuice » Tue Nov 26, 2013 6:14 pm

The first precept is explained in the Tipitaka as the Vinaya rule Parajika 3.

No matter what the motivation is, if you intentionally cause someone's death, it's a breach of the first precept. In intentional killing, the motivation is irrelevant. Even if someone is dying and is in pain, and motivated by compassion and desiring that he doesn't experience pain, someone would to advise him to fast to death, if he were to do that, the former would have broken the first precept. If one uninentionally kills someone, the first precept is not broken.

Here is the rendering of the rule: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... 4.html#Pr3

Another rule that relates to this is the rule Pacittiya 74 that forbids hitting someone out of anger. This means any violence, done to another out of anger, that doesn't include intention to kill, being that such violence is under the Pj 3 rule. In doing violence like this, without intention to kill, motivation is a factor. If one does such violence out of anger, that is unwolesome. If one does such violence in self-defense, it is not an offense, even if anger arises in one's mind.

Rendering of the rule: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... .html#Pc74

Presumably, there is also no offense in defending others, having in mind Buddha's words that one should protect one's family and friends (that he gives e.g. in the Sigalovada Sutta). So, to adress your concrete example, there would be nothing unwholesome in "pulling the trigger" and shooting him in the arm, so he can't push the button.

Having all this in mind, if you would to see someone going to push the button and kill beings, and then taking a weapon and pulling the trigger to shoot him in the arm in order to stop him, with no intention to kill him, with the primary motivation to protect beings from him, there would be nothing wrong with that, even if you unintentionally kill him, or if your motivation becomes mixed with anger.
User avatar
greenjuice
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 11:56 pm

Re: killing with good intention

Postby zamotcr » Fri Nov 29, 2013 3:11 pm

Cittasanto wrote:the intention is to kill the reason why you kill may alter the consequenses to some degree but the intention to kill and then the act of killing would bring the same results kammically.
there is always other options, you could restrain him somehow, which wouldn't lead to consequenses kammically because the intention is not to hurt but to preserve life. you could also reason with him.... there are always other options.


As far as I know, kamma is volitional.

In Volition: An Intro of the Law of Kamma, Sayadaw U Silananda said:

What is kamma? The Buddha said: “Oh monks, it is volition that I call kamma.” The popular meaning of kamma is action or doing, but as a technical term, kamma means volition or will. When you do something, there is volition behind it, and that volition, that mental effort, is called kamma.


So, technically, the act itself is not kamma. If you are walking down the street and without noticing it, you kill a bug, you are not doing any bad, you are not creating kamma, because you didn't wanted to kill the bug.
Even a story is given in the Tipitaka, of a monk unintentionally sitting over a small child and the child died. It is said that the first precept has not been broken, that the monk is not guilty of killing.

So, the problem is the intention, to kill, not the act itself.

Equally, police or soldiers who protect people or nation, if they have to kill someone in order to protect the good people, this isn't bad kamma. I even think that those people who protect others are doing good kamma, because they are in danger in order to protect others.
zamotcr
 
Posts: 71
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2012 3:11 am

Re: killing with good intention

Postby seeker242 » Fri Nov 29, 2013 3:54 pm

Solution: shoot him in the shoulder so he can't push the button. :woohoo:
User avatar
seeker242
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 3:01 am

Re: killing with good intention

Postby dagon » Fri Nov 29, 2013 5:30 pm

hove wrote: KILLING WITH GOOD INTENTION

hi all

in order to understand the laws of Kamma , a little deeper,
i have devised here a hypothetical question :

suppose there is a man with cruel intention, who is about to push the button and launch a Hydrogen bomb, over a big city, creating mass destruction and mass suffering.


examining the situation , i see clearly that the only way to stop him is to `pull the trigger`, and take his life.

examining my mind, i make sure that along with lots metta-karuna for the big city dwellers,
i also have metta-karuna for the that man, and only slight ill-will towards him .


realizing that i am about to break sila and suffer the kammic fruit for it,
i pull the trigger ,without hesitation

MY QUESTIONS

1) what are the kammic consequences of breaking this sila, with `good` intentions, and that much ("some") level of sati-panna (as described), in such an extreme (hypothetical) situation ?

2) can you say that this action is "in line with Dhamma" ?
3) can you say that it is "against Dhamma"?


(my confusion is regarding the merit-de-merit ratio in Kammic fruits, regarding parameters such as : intention, , and wisdom/ignorance, (and also "phisical kamma").

4) Is the Intention factor much more dominant , in determening the Kammic fruit, than the Wisdom Factor
or is it not ?

i know that Kamma is an extremely complicated subject, but i am hoping that maybe some of you, have some insight on the subject, and perhaps came across some relevant Pali sources

much metta

hove


Hi hove

In this situation …. What is the situation here – the actual situation here is that we are speculating on the outcome of an action in the context of kamma. Is thinking about what you would do devoid of kamma?

If we more from speculation to what is certain; we all will die at some point, the Dhamma teaches us that we should always be striving to address the issues of the 4NT and the 8 Fold Path through practice. So we have to take the best opportunities of the life that we have. Not only does this help to prepare us for the certain outcome (of death) but it should also ensure that if we are faced in extreme decisions that we are more likely to respond in accordance with the Dhamma.

Of course we need to be aware of kamma and our responsibility for our own actions and intentions to ensure that we develop right view in the context of the path. However beyond that we need to be very much in the present and in that context i think that consideration of the 'wholesomeness' of what we are about to do, are doing or have just done is a practical and constructive contribution to our practice.

If we follow the 5 precepts we avoid most negative kamma, if we combine the precepts with the sublime states then we generally incur positive kamma. The Buddha did draw the parallels between kammas, salt put in a glass or a river - positive karma is a good back up plan; but the goal of the path is enlightenment.

Did the Buddha teach that it was useful to speculate on the kamma outcomes, or the kamma from past that influenced our present sitution?

metta
paul
dagon
 
Posts: 297
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 12:45 am

Re: killing with good intention

Postby buddhismfordudes » Fri Nov 29, 2013 10:32 pm

Great replies!! Thank you. However, unless the "bad guy" is standing right in front of you, you may intend to wound him in the arm, but it ain't that easy. Hand a handgun to a novice and he literally cannot hit a door at twenty feet. It's not like TV.
Gerry Stribling
Author of "Buddhism for Dudes"
Blog "Buddhism for Tough Guys" at buddhismfordudes.blog.com
User avatar
buddhismfordudes
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 5:40 pm
Location: Louisville, Kentucky USA

Next

Return to Ethical Conduct

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Mr Man, waterchan and 3 guests