08 July 1998, 987 words
If you are a religious person, you need not feel guilty about convicted killers being hanged by the neck until they are dead. Whether you are Christian, Hindu or Muslim, you can rest assured that your God approves of hanging. Indeed, God wants you to kill other human beings.
You may be surprised to learn this. After all, Christianity describes itself as a religion of forgiveness, Hinduism as a religion of non-violence, and Islam as a religion of peace. But this is just good public relations, based on careful selection of scriptures from the Bible, the Bhagavadgita and the Qu'ran.
Islam, which for good reasons has a reputation as the most barbaric world religion, is scripturally the most civilized. Between the three books, the Qu'ran has the fewest number of texts which approve of killing. There are only two verses in the Qu'ran which support execution for murderers, and both are equivocal. One says, "Retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered: the freeman for the freeman, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female." (Suurah 2, Verse 178), and the other, "We did reveal the Torah...And we prescribed therein: The life for the life...But who foregoes it in the way of charity, it shall be expiation for him." (5: 44-45). According to the second verse, Muslims can forgive murderers and gain spiritual benefit from doing so. Luckily, the Qu'ran also says, "There is no compulsion in religion"(2: 256), so no Muslim need follow this recommendation. It also seems that this last verse doesn't apply to Muslim women, Salman Rushdie, and the ordinary citizens of Iran, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. To my mind there's something of a contradiction here, but no doubt this is because my mind isn't spiritual enough.
No such confusion exists with the Bhagavadgita, however, which begins with over 50 texts explaining why violence, killing and war are justified. The Hindu view of killing is plainly stated: "One who is not motivated by false ego, whose intelligence is not entangled, though he kills men in this world, does not kill. Nor is he bound by his actions." (Chapter 18, Text 18). So the Hindu view is that death is only an illusion, although I suspect Dole Chadee derives no comfort from this. The Manu-samhita recommends that a murderer be condemned to death so won't have to suffer, karmically speaking, for the sin he has committed. And Vedic injunctions say it is okay to kill poisoners, arsonists, attackers who use deadly weapons, those who steal from the wealthy, squatters, and wife-stealers. The Manava-dharma-shastra even imposes severe punishments for hunting small game and cutting trees. (English aristocrats and Chinese lords also used to severely punish peasants for poaching deer and collecting firewood, but you must remember that these rulers didn't have Sri-Bhagavan's divine sanction as the brahmins do.)
Still, all this might seem to sit rather uneasily with the Hindu concept of ahimsa or non-violence. The Vedas state categorically, "Never commit violence to anyone" and ahimsa requires one not to end the progressive life of any creature. You might therefore think that devout Hindus are constrained to support life imprisonment instead of the death penalty, but it turns out, according to Hindu sages and scholars, that hanging a murderer isn't really a violent act. Exactly what kind of act it might be puzzles me, but no doubt this is because I am not spiritual enough.
Then there is the God of the Bible, Jehovah, who really loves capital punishment. "Thou shalt not kill" says the commandment, but it is the sixth one, worshipping Jehovah taking up the first four. Ironically, Jehovah first lays down the punishment for murder - "He that sheds the blood of a man by that man shall his blood be shed ( (Genesis 9:6) - right after having killed every living thing on Earth Himself. But Jehovah considers death to be the right punishment for several sins, from blasphemy (Leviticus 24:16) to adultery (Lev. 20:10) to fornication (Deuteronomy 22:21) to coitus interruptus (Genesis 38:9). I myself view the fact that such transgressions are no longer punishable by death as a sign of moral progress, but this just reflects my lack of true spiritual understanding.
For example, it confuses me when Christians argue that the New Testament made these injunctions null and void. Why didn't God just write down the right thing in the first place? In any case, Jesus himself said, "Do not suppose I have come to abolish the Law...as long as Heaven and Earth endure, not a letter, not a stroke, will disappear...(Matthew 5:17-18)
It is true that Jesus also boofed the Pharisees for placing the letter of the law above its spirit: "You have made God's law null and void out of respect for your tradition" (Matt.15: 6-7), which seems to contradict his previous statement. But it is also true that the Bible says, "Every person must submit to the supreme authorities." (Romans 13:1), which means that every good Christian has to obey the UNC regime, whether it wants to execute murderers, ban free speech or reinstate Vasant Bharath. Yet the Bible also says, "Do not repay wrong with wrong" (1Peter 3: 9,14), which might seem to suggest that every good Christian should oppose capital punishment.
It is no doubt surprising that the Word of God should have contradictions like these but, as the faithful always explain, we are not meant to understand God's mysterious ways. Presumably, then, common sense and sympathy are the Devil's tools. It also seems to me that people don't quote scripture to show how obedient they are, but to justify what they already believe and do. Thus, I have to conclude that the scriptures an individual favours are a reflection of his true nature. But I could be wrong: I'm probably just not spiritual enough to understand these things.
Copyright ©1998 Kevin Baldeosingh