Provision #651: Do Not Kill
by Bob Tschannen-Moran
Laser Provision
I am old enough to have caught the tail end of the Vietnam War, during which time
I felt called to register for the draft as a conscientious objector. I was
willing to serve, I was just not willing to kill. Since that time, I have spent
a lifetime trying to figure out how best to live my life so as to do no harm.
It's not always easy and it's not always clear how best to do that. Especially
in the face of violent threats such as those that make the headlines on a daily
basis. Killing is all too common in our world, and it has only gotten worse with
the advent of modern weaponry and destructive devices. For all their complexity,
however, I am glad to live with the questions and I hope this Provision invites you into the conversation, at least for a time.
LifeTrek Provision
Happy New Year! We're back with a
full-fledged Provision this week in our continuing series on
Guidelines for Living. This started, you may remember, by my review of
various lists of "Ten Commandments" that come down to us from different
religions, time periods, and cultures. The notion that we should avoid killing
runs through them all, but it's interesting to note the nuances that come
through with each of the different formulations. Here they are, one right after
another:
- Do not kill.
- Do not murder.
- Do not kill unjustly.
- The right to life.
- Strive to cause no harm.
- Show great consideration for your fellow beings.
Can't you just see the authors and translators trying to create some
wiggle room around such a basic injunction as, "Do not kill"? The
complexities of life come through in these different formulations. Let's
consider each in turn.
- Do not kill. This can be viewed as the most sweeping and also
the most difficult of all the formulations. It does not limit the focus
to human beings and, as such, it represents the dictum of many vegans
who exclude the use of animals for food, clothing, or any other purpose.
It also represents the dictum of those who oppose killing on both ends
of the spectrum of life (abortion, infanticide, and euthanasia) as well
as all the way through (including murder, capital punishment, political
violence, and war). Taken at face value, this is actually the easiest
guideline to understand. Notwithstanding the issue of killing plants and
fungi, everything else is pretty straightforward. If it's an animal and
if it's alive, then don't kill it.
- Do not murder. This version of what was originally the sixth
commandment narrows the focus considerably. It clearly focuses on human
beings, rather than all animals, and it introduces a huge caveat: what
constitutes life? Those who view human beings as living, breathing, and
sentient creatures who move and create on the face of the earth do not, for example, view abortion as murder. In the
case of slavery, other considerations led to the same conclusion. Then
there are the issues of intent and cause. Whereas a prohibition of
killing excludes even accidental deaths, a prohibition of murder
introduces other factors including the state of mind of the aggressor
and the circumstances of the attack. Since it's not always obvious when
killing is murder, courts frequently have to get involved to sort things
out.
- Do not kill unjustly. This version makes the question of
killing a wide open question. What would George Washington have been
called by England if the United States had lost its war of independence?
Probably the equivalent of an "enemy combatant" or even a "terrorist."
History is written by the victors and questions of justice are always
seen through that lens. Although there have been plenty of despots,
pirates, and terrorists throughout the ages who care nothing about
justice, many a conflict has people killing on both sides with a sense
of "righteous indignation" and even "divine right."
On occasion, as Abraham
Lincoln noted, both sides are praying to the same God at the same time. That said,
the question of justice raises important questions of value, fairness,
rationality, equity, and right relationship. It is certainly wrong to
violate such principles by killing or other practices.
- The right to life. This version of the guideline comes from the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), a declaration adopted by the United
Nations General Assembly on December 10, 1948 at the Palais de Chaillot
in Paris. It introduces a new concept into the mix when it comes to
killing, namely the notion of certain inalienable rights. In 1776 the
United Sates Declaration of Independence asserted this right for all
people, along with the right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
The UDHR puts it this way: "Every human being has the inherent right to
life. This right shall be protected by law. No one shall be arbitrarily
deprived of his life." With the inclusion of the words "law" and
"arbitrary," the UDHR is making clear the responsibility of society to
protect human life. That's a good thing because, as we know, it doesn't
come easy.
- Strive to cause no harm. This version kicks things up a notch
when it comes to killing. It's a little like what Jesus had to say in
the Sermon on the Mount: "You're familiar with the command to the
ancients, 'Do not murder.' I'm telling you that anyone who is so much as
angry with a brother or sister is guilty of murder. Carelessly call a
brother 'idiot!' and you just might find yourself hauled into court.
Thoughtlessly yell 'stupid!' at a sister and you are on the brink of
hellfire. The simple moral fact is that words kill." (Matthew 5:21-22,
The Message Version). "Causing no harm" is part of the Hippocratic Oath
taken by medical doctors, when they start their practice: "I will
prescribe regimens for the good of my patients according to my ability
and my judgment and never do harm to anyone." Instead of being angry,
spiteful, vengeful, and hurtful, it's best to avoid killing even the
spirits of others.
- Show great consideration for your fellow beings. This version
kicks things up two notches when it comes to killing. Not only are we
called to do no harm; here we are called to do good to our fellow human
beings. Although some might view killing as a necessary evil, few would
say that it's actually a good thing to do. How do we show consideration
for people who are, themselves, being inconsiderate, let alone violent
or deadly? We seek first to understand their feelings and needs.
Marshall Rosenberg, of the Center for
Nonviolent Communication, puts it this way: "All attacks and
criticisms are tragic expressions of unmet needs." They are tragic
because they make it less likely that needs will be met. Yet they do
serve as clues as to what may be going on under the surface, for those
who have ears to hear. By seeking to understand those unmet needs, we
show our fellow human beings consideration and do them good.
In his delightful book, The Wise Heart: A Guide to the Universal Teachings
of Buddhist Psychology, Jack Kornfield writes, "Compassion is not foolish.
It doesn't just go along with what others want so they don't feel bad. There is
a yes in compassion, and there is also a no, said with the same courage of
heart. No to abuse, no to racism, no to violence, both personal and worldwide.
The no is said not out of hate but out of unwavering care. Wherever it is
practiced, compassion brings us back to life."
This is what Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was talking about when he exhorted us
to, "Never succumb to the temptation of becoming bitter. As you press for
justice, be sure to move with dignity and discipline, using only the instruments
of love."
In other words, the admonition "Do Not Kill" does not call us to be a meek and
mild pushover in the face of violence and death. Marshall Rosenberg himself
distinguishes between the protective use of force, in which he sees value, and
the punitive use of force, which he argues against because of the ways it
aggravates the spiral of violence. "Do Not Kill" rather calls us to be a strong
and courageous catalyst for justice and nonviolent change. When we come to
embody these values in our life and work, that's when life becomes more
wonderful for one and all.
Coaching Inquiries: How do you make sense of the guideline to avoid killing? Do
you avoid killing at all costs? What exceptions, if any, do you make? How can
you become more peaceable in your relations with others and with yourself?
To reply to this Provision, use our
Feedback Form. To
talk with us about coaching or consulting services for yourself or your organization,
Email Us
or use our
Contact Form
to arrange a complimentary conversation. To learn more about LifeTrek Coaching programs,
Click Here.
Top
LifeTrek Readers' Forum (selected feedback
from the past week)
Editor's Note: The LifeTrek Readers' Forum contains selections from the comments
and materials sent in each week by the readers of LifeTrek Provisions. They do
not necessarily reflect the perspective of LifeTrek Coaching International. To
submit your comment, use our Feedback Form or
Email Bob.
Your poem and Provision,
Seeing You,
is well said. I really enjoyed it and shared it with my wife. Wishing you
and your family all the best in 2010.
"Seeing You"
is such a beautiful, meaningful poem. It calls for more than just one
reading.
I also enjoyed the movie Avatar and your poem "Seeing you" is not only
beautiful but certainly my wish for 2010 for humanity. Thank you for another
wonderful year that caused me to think and rethink my thoughts and therefore
my actions.
Love it - I see you! Top
May you be filled with goodness, peace, and joy.
Bob Tschannen-Moran, President
LifeTrek Coaching International
121 Will Scarlet Lane
Williamsburg, VA 23185-5043
Email: Coach@LifeTrekCoaching.com
Phone: (757) 345-3452 Fax: (772) 382-3258
Twitter: LifeTrekBob
Web: www.LifeTrekCoaching.com
Mobile: www.LifeTrekMobile.com
Coach Training: www.EvocativeCoaching.com Subscribe/Unsubscribe: Subscriber Services
» Top |