I understood your argument, but I simply disagree with your rigid thinking.DrWho wrote: ↑Sun Nov 15, 2020 11:57 amThis was answered in the context of the asked question. Which was:Bristollad wrote: ↑Sun Nov 15, 2020 11:13 amThis actually sounds like we shouldn't treat any illness, since doing so may delay the onset of death. No one can take away our last moments - they will always be the last moments (of this life).DrWho wrote: ↑Sat Nov 14, 2020 6:36 pm Leaving the animal alone is the best course of action. We only die once. Death may be an experience we all fear, and yet when death actually occurs it may be an experience that is important to have. If only because it's the last few fleeting moments of existence. We should not take those moments away from something or someone without full consent.
Your presumption that there is only one conclusion that can be reached in all circumstances is too rigid for me. Situations are complicated, our ignorance and our own suffering get in the way but we should still make the best decision we can, at that moment, and accept that until we're enlightened, we will be acting without full knowledge.No-where in the question did anybody ask about medical intervention. So most would assume this specifically is asking about someone who has just ran across an animal that is dying, and the person in question having no medical knowledge, and being no where near a vet.Did the Buddha teach against killing a being quickly out of mercy?
If you find a hurt animal, and you can treat it medically then yes. If you have the means/ability to take it to a vet then yes, take it.
My answer was simply: Do not kill an animal to "put it out of it's misery", for the reasons I listed above.
This whole argument reads as pretty spurious.You certainly can. You can rapidly end it's life thus killing the animal. Reducing the time it would have had if you had not intervened.No one can take away our last moments - they will always be the last moments (of this life).
Did the Buddha teach against killing a being quickly out of mercy?
-
- Posts: 1121
- Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2015 11:39 am
Re: Did the Buddha teach against killing a being quickly out of mercy?
The antidote—to be free from the suffering of samsara—you need to be free from delusion and karma; you need to be free from ignorance, the root of samsara. So you need to meditate on emptiness. That is what you need. Lama Zopa Rinpoche
Re: Did the Buddha teach against killing a being quickly out of mercy?
My thinking boils down to, what is the most ethical action, and how would you like to be treated in the same situation? Nothing more, nothing less. It's not all that rigid.Bristollad wrote: ↑Sun Nov 15, 2020 5:29 pmI understood your argument, but I simply disagree with your rigid thinking.DrWho wrote: ↑Sun Nov 15, 2020 11:57 amThis was answered in the context of the asked question. Which was:Bristollad wrote: ↑Sun Nov 15, 2020 11:13 am
This actually sounds like we shouldn't treat any illness, since doing so may delay the onset of death. No one can take away our last moments - they will always be the last moments (of this life).
Your presumption that there is only one conclusion that can be reached in all circumstances is too rigid for me. Situations are complicated, our ignorance and our own suffering get in the way but we should still make the best decision we can, at that moment, and accept that until we're enlightened, we will be acting without full knowledge.No-where in the question did anybody ask about medical intervention. So most would assume this specifically is asking about someone who has just ran across an animal that is dying, and the person in question having no medical knowledge, and being no where near a vet.Did the Buddha teach against killing a being quickly out of mercy?
If you find a hurt animal, and you can treat it medically then yes. If you have the means/ability to take it to a vet then yes, take it.
My answer was simply: Do not kill an animal to "put it out of it's misery", for the reasons I listed above.
This whole argument reads as pretty spurious.You certainly can. You can rapidly end it's life thus killing the animal. Reducing the time it would have had if you had not intervened.No one can take away our last moments - they will always be the last moments (of this life).
You on the other hand, not only took my words out of context, but you also put words in my mouth.
Last edited by DrWho on Sun Nov 15, 2020 8:31 pm, edited 4 times in total.
Re: Did the Buddha teach against killing a being quickly out of mercy?
I agree that life is generally too complex to make a lot of cut and dry decisions. There are many factors that come into play in making any decision. For example, it is easy to say that abortion should be outlawed completely, but if you look carefully at the issue and examine all viewpoints, it is easy to understand how, in certain circumstances, abortion is understandable. There are few simple answers in life. Life is full of complex problems that usually do not have simple solutions.
"Please call me by my true names so I can wake up; so the door of my heart can be left open: the door of compassion." -Thich Nhat Hanh
"Ask: what's needed of you" -Akong Rinpoche
"Love never claims, it ever gives. Love ever suffers, never resents, never revenges itself." -Gandhi
"Ask: what's needed of you" -Akong Rinpoche
"Love never claims, it ever gives. Love ever suffers, never resents, never revenges itself." -Gandhi
Re: Did the Buddha teach against killing a being quickly out of mercy?
From what i know, it is an offense for monastics and a mixed karma for lay followers.
The cleverest defenders of faith are its greatest enemies: for their subtleties engender doubt and stimulate the mind. -- Will Durant