Puppet in jail, Dehiwala Puppet Museum
Not by me, I don’t need a hangman. The Sri Lankan Prisons Department has started interviewing 176 male applicants for the position of hangman. No one has been executed since 1976 and there are 480 people potentially on death row. I don’t agree with the death penalty, it’s perfect justice from an imperfect system. Other people call for it in cases of rape or child abuse, I think out of vengeance rather than a thought to its effects. Shramantha Jayamaha was recently sentenced to death for the Royal Park murders. There are others sentenced for drug trafficking.
Being a hangman in a Buddhist country is a very dubious proposition. Even fishermen are considered to be somewhat lacking in merit. Not killing is the first precept and most people try to keep it (though almost everyone eats meat or fish). Killing other people is another thing altogether. Of course, they could get someone from another or no religion. And it’s quite possible the hangman would have no work at all. And yes, the sentence would be hanging, not lethal injection or the electric chair.
In Sri Lanka, the British first introduced the death penalty in 1815, for murder and rebellion (Wikipedia). After Sri Lankan gained Independence, SWRD Bandaranaike abolished it in 1956. After his assassination it was reintroduced in 1959. Then, in the 1978 Constitution, the death penalty was kept but made unlikely since the judge, Attorney General, Minister Of Justice and President all had to agree on the sentence. In practice, most sentences were commuted to life in prison. Despite public protest, SWRD’s daughter Chandrika Bandaranaike tried to reinstate the death penalty, effectively pushing it through after the murder of High Court judge Sarath Ambepitiya.
The sentence still hasn’t been carried out, however. Largely because there weren’t any hangmen. But soon, it seems, there will be.
In your second paragraph you talk about hangmen needed from other religions or atheists, I’ll take it that you didn’t really put much thought into what you were saying because it seems like you’re saying that Buddhists are better than people of other religions. That people of other religions (or even atheists) have no problems in dealing death. Pray tell then Indi is the SL armed forces run by non-Buddhists?
I know you most likely made a mistake but this casual view that Buddhists are superior is what’s causing so much grief in this country. Not only for people of other religions but Buddhists themselves.
Isn’t the President and his brothers Buddhists? Are they not responsible for the deaths of thousands and the proctection of rapists and thugs? What about Mervyn Silva? Isn’t he Buddhist? And doesn’t he protect the underworld and threaten to kill media personnel on a a regular basis? What about Sarath Fonseka the so called great hero, isn’t he Buddhist and didn’t he order the deaths of so many on both sides?
I don’t know what fairy tale land you live in it but it seems that Buddhists are quite capable of being stone cold killers. The sad thing I see a system of Buddhists extolling their religion when it suits them and then tossing it out at other times- selective religion let’s call it. Isn’t this dangerous? Isn’t this the path of the extremist like madmen representing other religions?
And if a person of your standing can think that and then pen it and put it out there for the world to see, then where is the hope for a brighter future?
The pen is mightier than the sword- be careful how you wield your weapon.
Sorry, I wasn’t implying that Buddhists wouldn’t take the job, I’m sure many have applied. Humans all seem to kill in pretty equal numbers, except perhaps for Jains.
What I meant was not that Buddhists don’t kill, but that the social proscriptions would be higher, but I guess that’s not right. Every religion has a precept against killing. Sorry, that bit was ill advised.
“ . . how, venerable Nagasena, is a robber to be subdued?”
“Thus, great king: if deserving rebuke let him be rebuked. If deserving a fine let him be fined, if deserving banishment let him be banished, if deserving death let him be put to death.”
“Is then, Nagasena, the execution of robbers a part of the doctrine laid down by the Tathagata?”
“Certainly not, O king. Whosoever may be put to death, he does not suffer execution by reason of the opinion put forward by the Tathagata. He suffers by reason of what he himself has done.” (Bhikkhu Pesala, The debate of King Milinda. New Delhi, 1991, p. 56.)
Oh I don’t know, it seems to me that most, if not all countries that espouse a strong religious or ideological identity are quite into killing.
The Ten Commandments demand, ‘thou shalt not kill’, but then the Old Testament is pretty full of justification for slaughter, as is the Koran. Countries where the Abrahamic faiths dominate government thinking and policy are usually quick to ignore this fundamental principle, Buddhist countries seem no different.
The thing is all religions pretty much have the same message- be kind, compassionate, humble. But when religion and state mix that’s a recipe for disaster, example the dark ages.
It’s pointless for people to specify religions and say with a grand stroke they’re bad. I mean people are bad but that doesn’t mean we say all X are bad or all Y are bad. Anyway, my opinion is that having faith in something more is good (doesn’t have to be organized religion, could be your own philosophy) but forcing people to adhere to your opinion is bad.
I mean seriously I have friends from other religions and we get along just fine and I’m sure it’s the same for most people following this blog, so if we can all get along why is it that politicians/religious leaders try to separate us? Food for thought…
Execute a few criminals and I bet there will be a sudden reduction in crime in Sri Lanka.
‘The fool says in his heart there is no God’. There is, however, another type of fool, more dangerous and sure of himself, who says in his heart and proclaims to all the world, ‘There is no God but mine.’ – Joseph Campbell