Amma's Opinions

[Guest guest]

At Rhode Island this summer, someone asked Amma to tell her thoughts

about abortion. The recent side discussion about Islam and the death

penalty reminds me that we should be asking Amma, when we have those

question and answer periods with her, for comment on some

excruciating issues of the day. I had thought of the death penalty

as something about which to ask for her comment.

 

aikya

[Guest guest]

I had thought of

> the death penalty

> as something about which to ask for her comment.

>

 

The death penalty is still on the books in India,

though I don't think anyone has been executed since

the Indira Gandhi era.

 

Gandhi (Mahatma, not Indira) forgave his assassin,

Nathuran Godse, but they hung him anyway.

 

Keval

 

 

 

Finance - Get real-time stock quotes

http://finance.

[Guest guest]

Maharishi Mahesh Yogi was interviewed by Larry King (well-known American TV

interviewer) a few months ago and made an interesting comment about the

implications of killing someone (by whatever means). He said that the reason

it¹s such a sin is that each person has tremendous potential and by cutting

short their life, you deprive them of the possibility of unfolding that

potential (at least in that life).

--

 

> I had thought of

>> > the death penalty

>> > as something about which to ask for her comment.

>> >

>

> The death penalty is still on the books in India,

> though I don't think anyone has been executed since

> the Indira Gandhi era.

>

> Gandhi (Mahatma, not Indira) forgave his assassin,

> Nathuran Godse, but they hung him anyway.

>

Keval

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

I find these quotes (on the topic of killing) from

the 14th Dali Lama (Tenzin Gyatso)

interesting, and maybe relevant to this ideas exchange.

 

There are two sections in this post.

 

---------------------------

 

In general, death is something none of us wants, in fact it is

something we don't even like to think about. When death takes place

naturally, it is a process beyond our control to stop, but where death

is willfully and deliberately brought about, it is very unfortunate.

Of course, within our legal systems there are said to be certain

reasons and purposes for employing the death penalty. It is used to

punish offenders, to prevent them ever repeating their misdeed and to

deter others. However, if we examine the situation more carefully, we

will find that these are not the real solutions.

 

Harmful actions and their tragic consequences all have their origin in

disturbing emotions and negative thoughts, and these are a state of

mind, whose potential we find within all human beings. From this point

of view, every one of us has the potential to commit crimes, because

we are all subject to negative disturbing emotions and negative mental

qualities. And we will not overcome these by executing other people.

 

What is deemed criminal can vary greatly from country to country. In

some countries, for example, speaking out for human rights is

considered criminal, whereas in other countries preventing free speech

is a crime. The punishments for crimes are also very different, but

usually include various forms of imprisonment or hardship, financial

penalties and, in a number of countries, physical pain. In some

countries, crimes that the government considers very serious are

punished by executing the person who committed the crime.

 

The death penalty fulfills a preventive function, but it is also very

clearly a form of revenge. It is an especially severe form of

punishment because it is so final. The human life is ended and the

executed person is deprived of the opportunity to change, to restore

the harm done or compensate for it. Before advocating execution we

should consider whether criminals are intrinsically negative and

harmful people or whether they will remain perpetually in the same

state of mind in which they committed their crime or not. The answer,

I believe, is definitely not. However horrible the act they have

committed, I believe that everyone has the potential to improve and

correct themselves. Therefore, I am optimistic that it remains

possible to deter criminal activity, and prevent such harmful

consequences of such acts in society, without having to resort to the

death penalty.

 

My overriding belief is that it is always possible for criminals to

improve and that by its very finality the death penalty contradicts

this. Therefore, I support those organizations and individuals who are

trying to bring an end to the use of the death penalty.

 

Today, in many societies very little importance is placed on education

or the development of human values through social programs and

entertainment. In fact, if we take television programming as an

example, violence, including killing, is regarded as having a high

entertainment value. This is indicative of how misguided we have

become.

 

I believe human beings are not violent by nature. Unlike lions and

tigers, we are not naturally equipped to kill with sharp teeth and

claws. From a Buddhist viewpoint, I believe that the basic nature of

every sentient being is pure, that the deeper nature of mind is

something pure. Human beings become violent because of negative

thoughts which arise as a result of their environment and

circumstances.

 

I wholeheartedly support an appeal to those countries who at present

employ the death penalty to observe an unconditional moratorium. At

the same time we should give more support to education and encourage a

greater sense of universal responsibility. We need to explain the

importance of the practice of love and compassion for our own survival

and to try to minimize those conditions which foster murderous

tendencies, such as the proliferation of weapons in our societies.

These are things even private individuals can work towards.

 

--------------------------

 

===========================================================

These next quotes are from an interview.

===========================================================

 

Did you say that killing is sometimes acceptable?

 

Comparatively. In human society, some people do get killed, for a

variety of reasons. However, when you have an established army, and

countries with those armies go to war, the casualties are immense.

It's not one or two casualties, it's thousands. And with nuclear

weapons, it's millions. For that reason, the arms trade is really

irresponsible. Irresponsible! Global demilitarization is essential.

 

-------------

I understand that you were very angry during the 1990 Gulf War, as

angry as you've ever been.

 

Angry? No. But one thing when people started blaming Saddam Hussein,

then my heart went out to him.

 

To Saddam Hussein?

 

Yes. Because this blaming everything on him it's unfair. He may be a

bad man, but without his army, he cannot act as aggressively as he

does. And his army, without weapons, cannot do anything. And these

weapons were not produced in Iraq itself. Who supplied them? Western

nations! So one day something happened and they blamed everything on

him without acknowledging their own contributions. That's wrong. The

Gulf crisis also clearly demonstrated the serious implications of the

arms trade.

 

War without an army, killing as few people as possible is acceptable.

But the suffering of large numbers of people due to a military

mission, that is sad.

-----------------------

[Guest guest]

Namaste

 

Ammachi, "aikya" <aikya> wrote:

> At Rhode Island this summer, someone asked Amma to tell her thoughts

> about abortion.

 

Please, may we know Ammachi's thoughts about

abortion? Eager to hear, for am sure it will be

very apt and touching.

 

Namah Shivaya.

[Guest guest]

I got interrupted in wirting the original message here. my purpose

was not to begin a discussion of the death penalty or assay where it

is legal but to suggest that we use the question and answer periods

with Amma to ask her about the key ethical issues about which

religions and religious leaders often have stands. It would be good

to know HER thoughts. I've only been around for about a year but so

far I am impressed by how sensible she seems to be about weighty

matters. Death penalty would be one issue but also --

 

organ transplantation

stem cell research

access for the disabled

marriage between people of different religions or races

responsibility of wealthy to those in need

land redistribution (perhaps extreme example, being done in Africa

now where they are taking land from white landowners and giving it

to blacks)

"terrorism" -- what does she think it is and what would be a good

response by individuals, by parents talking to children, by

nations

 

It's good to ask personal questions but it would be good to ask about

those issues that concern many people today.

 

Aikya

 

 

 

 

Ammachi, Mike Brooker <patria1818> wrote:

> I had thought of

> > the death penalty

> > as something about which to ask for her comment.

> >

>

> The death penalty is still on the books in India,

> though I don't think anyone has been executed since

> the Indira Gandhi era.

>

> Gandhi (Mahatma, not Indira) forgave his assassin,

> Nathuran Godse, but they hung him anyway.

>

> Keval

>

>

>

> Finance - Get real-time stock quotes

> http://finance.

[Guest guest]

I'm sure each of us has an opinion about hot topics like the death

penalty. I'm sure nearly every religious leader has been asked about

it and has answers. It would be nice to hear what Amma has to say on

this issue and others. I would encourage people to ask such

questions of Amma when she comes in November and again in the

summer. Let's not limit ourselves always to personal questions

important though they are. Many of us will not ask anything because

we don't have any burning issues. But there are burning issues we

know about from the newspaper, from discussions with friends and

coworkers. Why not ask Amma about these things so we will know how

she thinks these tough things through.

 

Aikya

 

Aikya

 

Ammachi, "rastanaga" <rastanaga> wrote:

> I find these quotes (on the topic of killing) from

> the 14th Dali Lama (Tenzin Gyatso)

> interesting, and maybe relevant to this ideas exchange.

>

> There are two sections in this post.

>

> ---------------------------

>

> In general, death is something none of us wants, in fact it is

> something we don't even like to think about. When death takes place

> naturally, it is a process beyond our control to stop, but where

death

> is willfully and deliberately brought about, it is very unfortunate.

> Of course, within our legal systems there are said to be certain

> reasons and purposes for employing the death penalty. It is used to

> punish offenders, to prevent them ever repeating their misdeed and

to

> deter others. However, if we examine the situation more carefully,

we

> will find that these are not the real solutions.

>

> Harmful actions and their tragic consequences all have their origin

in

> disturbing emotions and negative thoughts, and these are a state of

> mind, whose potential we find within all human beings. From this

point

> of view, every one of us has the potential to commit crimes, because

> we are all subject to negative disturbing emotions and negative

mental

> qualities. And we will not overcome these by executing other people.

>

> What is deemed criminal can vary greatly from country to country. In

> some countries, for example, speaking out for human rights is

> considered criminal, whereas in other countries preventing free

speech

> is a crime. The punishments for crimes are also very different, but

> usually include various forms of imprisonment or hardship, financial

> penalties and, in a number of countries, physical pain. In some

> countries, crimes that the government considers very serious are

> punished by executing the person who committed the crime.

>

> The death penalty fulfills a preventive function, but it is also

very

> clearly a form of revenge. It is an especially severe form of

> punishment because it is so final. The human life is ended and the

> executed person is deprived of the opportunity to change, to restore

> the harm done or compensate for it. Before advocating execution we

> should consider whether criminals are intrinsically negative and

> harmful people or whether they will remain perpetually in the same

> state of mind in which they committed their crime or not. The

answer,

> I believe, is definitely not. However horrible the act they have

> committed, I believe that everyone has the potential to improve and

> correct themselves. Therefore, I am optimistic that it remains

> possible to deter criminal activity, and prevent such harmful

> consequences of such acts in society, without having to resort to

the

> death penalty.

>

> My overriding belief is that it is always possible for criminals to

> improve and that by its very finality the death penalty contradicts

> this. Therefore, I support those organizations and individuals who

are

> trying to bring an end to the use of the death penalty.

>

> Today, in many societies very little importance is placed on

education

> or the development of human values through social programs and

> entertainment. In fact, if we take television programming as an

> example, violence, including killing, is regarded as having a high

> entertainment value. This is indicative of how misguided we have

> become.

>

> I believe human beings are not violent by nature. Unlike lions and

> tigers, we are not naturally equipped to kill with sharp teeth and

> claws. From a Buddhist viewpoint, I believe that the basic nature of

> every sentient being is pure, that the deeper nature of mind is

> something pure. Human beings become violent because of negative

> thoughts which arise as a result of their environment and

> circumstances.

>

> I wholeheartedly support an appeal to those countries who at present

> employ the death penalty to observe an unconditional moratorium. At

> the same time we should give more support to education and

encourage a

> greater sense of universal responsibility. We need to explain the

> importance of the practice of love and compassion for our own

survival

> and to try to minimize those conditions which foster murderous

> tendencies, such as the proliferation of weapons in our societies.

> These are things even private individuals can work towards.

>

> --------------------------

>

> ===========================================================

> These next quotes are from an interview.

> ===========================================================

>

> Did you say that killing is sometimes acceptable?

>

> Comparatively. In human society, some people do get killed, for a

> variety of reasons. However, when you have an established army, and

> countries with those armies go to war, the casualties are immense.

> It's not one or two casualties, it's thousands. And with nuclear

> weapons, it's millions. For that reason, the arms trade is really

> irresponsible. Irresponsible! Global demilitarization is essential.

>

> -------------

> I understand that you were very angry during the 1990 Gulf War, as

> angry as you've ever been.

>

> Angry? No. But one thing when people started blaming Saddam Hussein,

> then my heart went out to him.

>

> To Saddam Hussein?

>

> Yes. Because this blaming everything on him it's unfair. He may be a

> bad man, but without his army, he cannot act as aggressively as he

> does. And his army, without weapons, cannot do anything. And these

> weapons were not produced in Iraq itself. Who supplied them? Western

> nations! So one day something happened and they blamed everything on

> him without acknowledging their own contributions. That's wrong. The

> Gulf crisis also clearly demonstrated the serious implications of

the

> arms trade.

>

> War without an army, killing as few people as possible is

acceptable.

> But the suffering of large numbers of people due to a military

> mission, that is sad.

> -----------------------

[Guest guest]

--- aikya <aikya wrote:

>

> It would be good

> to know HER thoughts. I've only been around for about a year but so

> far I am impressed by how sensible she seems to be about weighty

> matters. Death penalty would be one issue but also --

>

> organ transplantation

> stem cell research

> access for the disabled

> marriage between people of different religions or races

> responsibility of wealthy to those in need

> land redistribution (perhaps extreme example, being done in Africa

> now where they are taking land from white landowners and giving it

> to blacks)

> "terrorism" -- what does she think it is and what would be a good

> response by individuals, by parents talking to children, by

> nations

>

> It's good to ask personal questions but it would be good to ask about

> those issues that concern many people today.

>

> Aikya

 

Here is Amma's response on the process of cloning:

 

"The idea of cloning, though implemented only recently through modern science,

was in the minds of the ancient saints and sages of India. Quite a few relevant

examples can be found in the Vedas and other ancient writings. However, Man's

attempts to change the natural order of things has a long-term potential of

unexpected negative results.

 

Historically, it is impossible and unwise to interfere with the advance of

science. The fuller understanding of cellular and reproductive processes can

enhance the genetic engineering already underway and lead to new treatments for

disease and the relief of suffering. However, because of the ethical issues

involved, this research could be carried out at approved institutions in

conformance with the guidelines of ethical forums and legislative protection.

These forums should be composed of spiritually aware and responsible people who

sincerely desire to serve humanity. These forums can then advise industry and

government as to a prudent course of action. The advance of science can be used

for both good and evil. The powerful forces within the atom can be harnessed to

help mankind or to build weapons of destruction.

 

Many identical suits can be fabricated from the same bolt of cloth, but what

can we say about the wearer of the suit? While science may eventually succeed

in cloning a carbon copy of a physical form, the indwelling consciousness of

that from is still beyond the reach of material science.

 

God Has established a natural order in His creation which contributes to the

spiritual evolution of life. These natural processes, if interfered with, will

ultimately result in sorrow and suffering which is the state of the world

today. By creating a balance between spiritual and material science, we can

certainly improve the quality of life on this planet. This also involves the

understanding of Nature and living in harmony with it."

 

Source:

http://www.himalayanacademy.com/Newspaper/IssuesInFocus/Cloning/LeadersResponse.\

html

 

 

 

Finance - Get real-time stock quotes

http://finance.

[Guest guest]

Ammachi, Manoj Menon <manoj_menon> wrote:

> Historically, it is impossible and unwise to

> interfere with the advance of science. The fuller understanding

> of cellular and reproductive processes can enhance the genetic

> engineering already underway and lead to new treatments for

> disease and the relief of suffering.

 

It looks like the tools of logic and science are useful after all.

Hard to do with out using the "mind" and "questioning" (i.e.

thinking).

 

I wonder if she would rather see a mail list where the only topic is

"her" o a mail list where not only the heart but also the intellect is

stimulated.

 

Hard to do with people that feel that Amma is more important

that the suffering of the world.

 

I think she would rather see her children learning and helping others

(including political awarnes), than people that refuse to see anything

else than her physical body and her verbal teachings.

 

Just a guess, worth 2 cents (maybe).