i still feel inspired from the new years retreat i took over at the forest hermitage under your guidance a few years ago. You and Luang Por are the most inspiring persons i met in my life so far. Just like a beacon near a coast, you are bringing the light of Dhamma to guide people out of their suffering. Saddhu Ajahn!

I’m sad to hear you have gone to ThaiLan. Hope you will be able to write on this blog. Best wishes to you.

Mai

Many thanks for taking the time to draft such a thoughtful response to my question. I have been a bit upset on hearing about the programme and on reading your post. You have helped me to gain much greater clarity around this isssue and to reflect on it more fully.

There are so many aspects to this that require further meditation and reflection. Ultimately life is a struggle we know we will lose and so it is a highly personal question for all of us. I can see it occupying my thoughts for some time to come. Once again thank you for taking the time to share your views on this matter.

Best wishes,

Andrew

It’s a very different issue.

The 3rd Parajika rule for a monk is to not kill a human being. If he does so then he ‘is no longer in communion.’ – i.e. immediately no longer a monk. However, if a monk were to see, for instance, someone drowning he would incur no offence if he didn’t intervene, even if he could easily save that person. Of course, we should certainly try to help if we are safely able, but there is no offence if we do not.

I think the same principle applies for intervening with terminal illnesses. If we didn’t seek treatment for, say, liver cancer, that would not be tantamount to suicide. We are not ending our life, we are simply not trying to (you could say unnaturally) preserve it.

Now of course there are many reasons why we may or may not seek treatment, and behind these reasons will lie various intentions. As ‘intention is kamma’ it is to intention that we must look if we wish to know if the action is skillful or not, i.e. is it rooted in greed, aversion and delusion, or their opposites.

We may see that in treating the liver cancer we would undergo an extraordinary amount of suffering for very little benefit, i.e. we might live only another six months at most, and so we might decide to opt out. If a life could be slightly extended but its quality dramatically reduced, then many people would not see the point in seeking treatment. For the most part, I don’t think people deciding to opt out in these sorts of cases would be acting upon unwholesome intentions.

On the other hand, somebody may seek treatment at whatever cost because they are desperately afraid of death. I don’t think we’d class these motives as wholesome.

If we were to catch a tumor early and our chances of recovery are practically assured, but we choose to leave it to develop so that it will eventually kill us, then I think that would be quite different to the first example. It would not be classed as suicide, but what are our intentions and why do we wish to leave it to develop? If it is out of self-hate and strong forms of aversion then obviously it’s an unskillful act. But still, I wouldn’t call it suicide, though I might be wrong.

One of the contemporary problems with this issue is that we are living longer lives (and so are more prone to illness) and medicine is very advanced. It leaves us with a host of tough questions: Should we turn off the life support machine? Should I seek treatment for this, that and the other? These are questions that were just never asked in the past. If you caught a cold, you said your prayers!

I’m much grateful for your response and advice.

I will think of her when I do any thing good.

Again, thank you.

Mai

An interesting and unusual case.

Her suicide seems very different from most in that her main concern was not to end her life/misery, but to help her brother and father.

But still she killed herself, so I’m not quite sure what to make of it.

I don’t think the karmic consequences will be as severe as with most cases of suicide, though.

Ajahn Manapo

PS – It would be a good idea to share metta and the merit of your good deeds with her

Yesterday I just screamed after I read this article
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-07-04/india/29735331_1_kidney-transplant-eye-surgery-girl-ends-life

I intend to ask any monks to explain for me whether this girl action could produce a wholesome karma (?)then I read your essay above.
Even though I sense (after I read your essay) that this India little girl won’t get any good karma as my understand. Please confirm and explain for me when you get a chance.

Thanks.

Mai