** This is a collection of comments that I made for the discussion at the following post
https://www.facebook.com/chandima.gomes/posts/798996766777648?comment_id=800683756608949&offset=0&total_comments=42¬if_t=feed_comment
Thought of intervening
into this interesting debate. I think the confusion is caused by the fact that
you are trying to analyze a concept while standing within two different frames
of reference. For an example Buddhism & law are separated from the beginning
while Islam and law are integrated. This is where we get into domain
incompatibility.
Neranjaka, if you read Buddhism, you
will find that Lord Buddha has preached Dasa Raja Dhramaya for kings where he
clearly stated that the law should be fair and equal to all. Other than that
Buddhism does not define what punishment should be given to what crime. If you
look at the Sri Lankan history you will understand that the punishment system and
methods our kings practiced were extremely inhuman (check Dethis (32) wada bandhana)
in the present day frame of reference (among these punishments cutting the throat with a blade may be the
most human method of killing, compared to others).
Even
for laughing at the wrong time in the presence of the king was a reason for getting the capital
punishment (and the way of execution was beyond the present day imagination). I am sure that you
know what Sri Wickrama Rajasinghe did to Ahalepola family. Those are not Sri
Wikrama's laws or laws imported from elsewhere. They are the well accepted (and
even documented) laws practiced for many dynasties in the country. Note that
there was no Sanghayawahanse opposed or preached against these punishments.
Simply because Buddhism does not facilitate such intervention into the legal
system (unless the king goes beyond the law unfairly).
Now I come back to the issue
that you were raising. "The execution of a Muslim for betraying
Islam". OK, let me remind you again that Islam and Law are integrated. In
the frame of reference of Islam the punishment for such betrayal is capital
punishment. Within their frame of reference it is correct as it is their legal
system. We think it is wrong ‘cause we think that we don't do that.
Now I come to the last point.
Just two hundred years ago in Sri Lanka, a whole family was put into painful
death just because the husband betrayed the king's rule (there may be many
other cases unreported). And Buddhism didn't try to stop that. Do you know that
according to the SL law, still the punishment for betrayal to the government is death sentence? Just a few years ago Gen. SF was put into jail for using
few words that the legal system defined as betrayal to the country (some people
shouted against the legal procedure followed but not the law itself).
Now think, what has changed Sri
Lanka from brutally mascaraing the entire family (just 200 years ago) to few years of imprisonment at present (that is also only to the relevant person) for betrayal to the state. Was it
Buddhism that made this change......? Not for sure. Two reasons. First is that Buddhism provide no
provisions for changing the legal system. Other is that if Buddhism could do
such why didn't it happen for 2000 years?..... What made this change is the
change of the frame of reference of our thinking pattern induced by the 20th
Century western world. .... May be some Islamic frames of reference (note the
plural) will take little more time than some Buddhist frames of reference to
be compatible with the modern western frame of reference....Anyway the things are
changing for sure.... as you may see going from Saudi, via Pakistan to Malaysia....
