The solution to the problem is something that some people attempt to address when dealing with human rights. It's basically suggested that everyone and anyone should be entitled to the most basic of rights, although different countries do have different belief systems and laws. You could thereby imply that if there was a hierarchical model, that the basic foremost rights would be applied before any deviations. In the case of "If" something was to exist beyond, then we'd all be basically entitled to it. The only thing that would change between belief system is how we go about accepting it.
Now, do you want a theist reply or an atheist reply? Since I am an atheist Hindu, my reply would be different from that of most Hindus. 1. Theist reply: Whichever God they worship, have they done good deeds or bad? They will spend time in heaven and hell in generally in proportion to their good or bad deeds and reincarnate. Yes, if they have done more bad deeds then they could be born as a chicken and be eaten. One reason why you may prefer a vegetarian diet. The cycle goes on till the soul gets the grace of one of the Gods or Goddesses giving it wisdom to get out of the cycle. 2. Atheist reply: Buried or cremated, the molecules which make their body will disperse in the environment in atmosphere and in soil. These will form new association with millions of new living and non-living entities. The cycle goes on for ever.
Another great post adham. If God was dying since his creation, why and how could he be unhappy about it. However if his demise was inevitable perhaps he was miserable with the knowledge that he was the one condeming "the universe" to nothing, forever. But we are forgetting that life cannot exist without death. He did not exist until his sleep. Again, its a paradox. Someone who does not exist cannot do anything, because they do not exist, never mind falling asleep. Im sure well figure it out someday (although im not expecting anything.) Good luck on your quest.
Can I ask a personal question adhams, how old are you? I love your question by the way and will answer it based on your age.
IMO, Amar is a very well adjusted human. His words are few, but worthy of consideratiom. I am not sure if this balance is innate or a result of his Buddhist teachings. Amar, you have my respect.
I do not mind your calling me a buddhist, because Buddha is an avatara of Lord Vishnu in Hinduism; and Buddha is one of my gurus. The other being Sankaracharya of the non-dualist 'advaita' philosophy. I am a non-dualist orthodox atheist Hindu (if you can make out what this is). Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
No, it does not. Any honest consideration of the right to die at a time of one's own choosing carries this very question as its premise. By its very nature, it cannot be considered without due consideration of the backdrop to that question. Any belief in God is inclusive of the fact that that there is an afterlife. The nature of that afterlife, therefore, is determined by outside forces. I'll leave it to you to conceive of those possible results of suicide in a religion which does not condone such action, and yet provides an afterlife within which that doctrine acknowledges such an act, and has determined a punishment in for it. An atheist, by contrast, is confronted with the belief that there is no afterlife. There is no "Hell, they're going to miss me now." There is no "Hell, that'll show them". There is no "Jealous of God". There is nothing. One cannot even take refuge in the fact that their family and friends will miss them, because if family and friends do miss them, they'll never know. There is no vantage point from which one might observe the results of their actions. The concept of zero is implicit in all discussions on suicide. There is only one question. Do I want to stop feeling, forever. And when I do, I will not know that I have.
