karmic consequences for suicide?

[Kapalika]

What are they and in what scriptures (if any), and where in them is this stated?

In what instances, if any, is suicide permissible or at least not incurring karma or at least less of it? For example, if one is living with no one they are called to be responsible for, is it less impact to one's karmic debt?

 

[ajay0]

What are they and in what scriptures (if any), and where in them is this stated?

In what instances, if any, is suicide permissible or at least not incurring karma or at least less of it? For example, if one is living with no one they are called to be responsible for, is it less impact to one's karmic debt?

I have heard of Hindu scholars and saints talking about suicide being a great sin, and that only the body is destroyed, not the soul. The soul with its causal and subtle body, remains intact. In fact, the soul is exposed to greater misery and suffering, upon suicide, and physical death is seen to have not brought about any sort of eternal peace or tranquility it sought. The ego is strengthened and becomes more unconscious. So it is not considered a wise or intelligent option.

There is a case of self-termination called Santhara or Sallekhana which does not incur karma as long as it is not based on escapism, and involves issues of terminal illness or extreme senility. There are conditions that it should be undertaken under the guidance of a Jain monk.

This is termed as Prayopavesa in Hinduism.

In what instances, if any, is suicide permissible or at least not incurring karma or at least less of it? For example, if one is living with no one they are called to be responsible for, is it less impact to one's karmic debt?

Having no relatives or friends is not an option for Prayopavesa/Santhara. That would be escapism which would incur karma.

The goal of human existence is enlightenment or Self-realisation, and one ought to endeavor diligently and bravely, till one realises this state, whether with relatives and friends, or alone in solitude.

 

[Kapalika]

I remember years ago being told about, by the one who initiated me, about individuals who had believed that they had attained Moksha in life could through sheer willpower die on the spot as they no longer needed the body. I don't recall perfectly, I feel as if I was told they might of also ate less after the realization or generally acted with little concern for safety for the body... but I do know for sure on that detail, only that he said they could will themselves to die and tended to a few weeks or months afterwards? Something like that.

Anyone know what I'm talking about?

I know it is contested if one can reach Moksha in life or not, but I think it's a relevant question as if it's not possible such a thing might be considered suicide.

Also, if one acts without concern for their safety, and does so hoping that an accident kills them, is that considered suicide? I would think it might be, since the intent is hoping they die to such an accident by not taking normal precautions, but wold the karmic consequences be the same as something direct?

 

[Aupmanyav]

For example, if one is living with no one they are called to be responsible for, is it less impact to one's karmic debt?

There is no one who has no responsibility. For those who do not have a family, it is society, the nation, the world.

For an advaitist, there is no living, no birth and no death, all illusions at the absolute level. What we do is not registered there The world is a lower grade reality. IMHO, 'moksha', this understanding, is possible in life and not very difficult. We unnecessarily embroil ourselves in false beliefs and get bewildered.

 

[Kapalika]

There is no one who has no responsibility. For those who do not have a family, it is society, the nation, the world.

True, those Dharmas slipped my mind when I asked, but, as I should of asked, what if one is a burden to society, nation and world through inability to contribute, and otherwise in great suffering? Not necessarily from something terminal but from something that just makes their life unfulfilling, painful and not able to meaningfully help others?

 

[SalixIncendium]

For an advaitist, there is no living, no birth and no death, all illusions at the absolute level. What we do is not registered there The world is a lower grade reality. IMHO, 'moksha', this understanding, is possible in life and not very difficult. We unnecessarily embroil ourselves in false beliefs and get bewildered.

While I understand the illusory nature of empirical reality, and that actions in that reality are not "registered" in Absolute reality, Advaita Vedanta still subscribes to the concept of causality. I would have to conclude that causal action, while not held in Absolute reality and present in empirical reality, is registered somewhere in between for causality to be held true. If this is the case, then where?

 

[ajay0]

I remember years ago being told about, by the one who initiated me, about individuals who had believed that they had attained Moksha in life could through sheer willpower die on the spot as they no longer needed the body. I don't recall perfectly, I feel as if I was told they might of also ate less after the realization or generally acted with little concern for safety for the body... but I do know for sure on that detail, only that he said they could will themselves to die and tended to a few weeks or months afterwards? Something like that.

The enlightened or Self-realized one's can give up the body at will, and no karma is incurred due to this.
Even some advanced yogis, though not enlightened, can also give up the body at will.

It is said that Yogananda and Vivekananda had given up their bodies at will.

There are also instances of old yogis shedding their old bodies, and taking up young bodies of people who had died. They apparently do this to save time and energy involved in the reincarnation process, being reborn as a baby, growing up and so on.

Anyone know what I'm talking about?

I know it is contested if one can reach Moksha in life or not, but I think it's a relevant question as if it's not possible such a thing might be considered suicide.

One can indeed reach Moksha while alive. The cases of Ramana, Buddha, Eckhart Tolle, Rajini Menon are examples. Moksha or enlightenment can be termed as termination of the false self or ego for a higher identity of the Self. There is no suicide involved in it.

Also, if one acts without concern for their safety, and does so hoping that an accident kills them, is that considered suicide? I would think it might be, since the intent is hoping they die to such an accident by not taking normal precautions, but wold the karmic consequences be the same as something direct?

Yeah, it would come across as suicide because the body should be taken care of, as it is a vital instrument for enlightenment. The intent in such a case is that of suicide or despair which is obviously unhealthy and incurs karma.

Karma is involved but it may not be intense as that of direct suicide. This is because the person is encountering danger and the virtue of courage is involved which nullifies karma in proportion.

To the extent despair and escapism is motivating such daredevilry, karma is created.

The intent and attitude of the mind is important in this regard.

 

[Vinayaka]

What are they and in what scriptures (if any), and where in them is this stated?

In what instances, if any, is suicide permissible or at least not incurring karma or at least less of it? For example, if one is living with no one they are called to be responsible for, is it less impact to one's karmic debt?

Tough question. I don't know anything for sure. Certainly suicide isn't recommended, and there is great variance. My gut tells me each situation has it's own unique karma attached. No one size (dictum) fits all.

 

[Viraja]

As for the question on willfully leaving the body - Swami Vivekananda did it, Swami Nirmalananda (Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev narrates the incident) has done it, and many others who are in various samadhis all over India.

In Swami Vivekananda's case, for example, he is known to have stated about leaving his body about 5 or 6 years before his death at age 39, because in his words, "His soul had become too large for the body to contain anymore...". I'm not sure what this implies.

I'm guessing that Swami Vivekananda practiced a version of Kriya yoga, which makes the individual soul connect with the ultimate OM and gives many experiences to the native, such as being able to see through walls, foresee things in visions, that happen miles away, etc. In such cases, the individual soul cannot incur any karma, per logic, because they have no choice but to leave their body, *if* their soul only outgrew what the body can hold.

 

[Aupmanyav]

True, those Dharmas slipped my mind when I asked, but, as I should of asked, what if one is a burden to society, nation and world through inability to contribute, and otherwise in great suffering? Not necessarily from something terminal but from something that just makes their life unfulfilling, painful and not able to meaningfully help others?

Then it is the duty of other people, society, nation and the world to make that person feel wanted and support him/her. Yeah, some people will take 'dharma' as burden, but that is not the correct view. May be I do it, may be I do it not, but that is the technically correct position.

 

[Aupmanyav]

While I understand the illusory nature of empirical reality, and that actions in that reality are not "registered" in Absolute reality, Advaita Vedanta still subscribes to the concept of causality. I would have to conclude that causal action, while not held in Absolute reality and present in empirical reality, is registered somewhere in between for causality to be held true. If this is the case, then where?

Casuality exists only in the lower level of reality, Vyavahrika. It does not exist in Paramarthika, since Brahman does nothing. It is not even bound the human concepts of existence and non-existence. Sometimes it exists (as we find it), sometimes it does not (as we find before the Big Bang which is at the lower level of reality). It is like writing on a slate, erased and re-written again as on a computer hard disk. You format and there is nothing else but the MBR. My view of it.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Casuality exists only in the lower level of reality, Vyavahrika. It does not exist in Paramarthika, since Brahman does nothing. It is not even bound the human concepts of existence and non-existence. Sometimes it exists (as we find it), sometimes it does not (as we find before the Big Bang which is at the lower level of reality). It is like writing on a slate, erased and re-written again as on a computer hard disk. You format and there is nothing else but the MBR. My view of it.

I have a hard time swallowing that causality does not at all exist above Vyavaharika. While I have no foundation to back this up with scripture, there is something inside of me that instinctively tells me that is something that survives temporal existence to determine into what circumstance or in what form one is reborn into.

But in the interest of not derailing this thread, I'll start another on the subject.

 

[Aupmanyav]

.. there is something inside of me that instinctively tells me that is something that survives temporal existence to determine into what circumstance or in what form one is reborn into.

You are welcome to your views. I never expect that people will readily accept my (maverick) views, but kindly read Buddha's Kalama Sutta in Wikipedia.

 

[Shantanu]

What are they and in what scriptures (if any), and where in them is this stated?

In what instances, if any, is suicide permissible or at least not incurring karma or at least less of it? For example, if one is living with no one they are called to be responsible for, is it less impact to one's karmic debt?

Suicide is never permissible because God lives within us and it totally disrespectful to God to terminate His existence within us prematurely. Of course if you are an atheist, there is nothing stopping you from commiting suicide to end your own biological life if you are fed up with living.