[Buddha-l] Re: Texas liberals (death penalty)

[Hugo]

Hello Stefan,

I notice that a lot of your comments imply a sense of self and permanency, like:

On 6/30/05, Stefan Detrez <stefan.detrez at gmail.com> wrote:
> That makes no sense. Justifying an operation doesn't make you a surgeon, by
> analogy. Some governments have a good reputation.

What is a government?

It certainly is not a self, also it is not permanent.

> It's a bit of a populist
> assumption that politicians only want the bad. The Swiss governement, for
> instance.

What is "The Swiss government"?, it is not a self and it is not permanent.


> If you read the Asokavadana (tr. John Strong), you'll notice
> Asoka's punishments were mind-boggling: cooking someone in hot oil, for
> instance (as in the Laws of Manu, pouring hot oil in Dasya's mouths). Such
> punishments were, arguably, common. The Buddha was a pacifist influence
> going counter to such punishments, but he never achieved the goal of having
> no death penalties altogether.

That was not the Buddha's goal, he said something along the lines:

I teach suffering, its origin, cessation and path. That's all I teach.


> I wonder what the vinaya says on the issue of
> the death penalty - as far as we take its answer as a guiding line for our
> discussion. Murderers (Angulimala) were eventually accepted in the sangha,
> to avoid punishment or to lead the holy life or both. 

It is the very first precept for Lay people!!

Angulimala killed people BEFORE ordaining.


> Killing innocents musn't be a side effect. A thorough investigation should
> lead to a verdict. I count on the integrity and honesty of the courts to
> decide on the possible /implementation/ of the death penalty. 

Unless the court is made of arahants, every single one will be lead by
greed, hatred and delusion.

In the Anguttara Nikaya (VI, 44) 
(Page 159, 123. Don't Judge Others! for those with the Anthology by
Bhikkhu Bodhi and Nyanaponika Thera)

there is a story about how a woman asks Ananda:
"Please, venerable sir, how ought one to understand this teaching
taught by the Blessed One: namely, that one who leads the pure,
celibate life and one who does not should both have the very same
status after death?, My father Purana, venerable sir, was (in his
later years) a celibate, living remote from sensuality, abstaining
from the low sexual life; and when my father died, the Blessed One
declared that he had attained to the state of a once-returner and had
been reborn among the Tusita devas."

"But then, venerable sir, there was my father's brother Isidatta who
was not a celibate but lived a contented married life.  When he died
the Blessed One said that he too was a once-returner and had been
reborn among the Tusita devas."


.....Ananda goes to The Buddha and relates the event to him, he replies:

"Who indeed is this female lay disciple Migasala, this foolish,
inexperienced woman wih a woman's wit? And who (in comparison) are
those who have the knowledge of other persons' different qualities?"


Greetings,
-- 
Hugo