Posted in


How can Human Cruelty be described?

SESSION 24/ JUN/2009

Medium: Jorge Raul Olguin

Entity that came to talk: Master Ruanel

Interlocutor: Master Ruanel?
Ruanel: How are you?
Interlocutor: How are you, Master? How have you been?
Ruanel: Fine.
Interlocutor: Today we are going to talk about a very interesting topic, right?
Ruanel: Yes.
Interlocutor: Since you already know the questions, obviously you also know the answers. Is there unanimity in the spiritual world with regard to the answers you will give to the questions I’m going to ask you or are there some subtleties?
Ruanel: As the dear Johnakan said once, the spoken language is very poor compared to the spiritual concept, then, through this mental decoder I will find a way to be understood. There is unanimity in the sense of saying, "This thing is like that,” or "That thing cannot be," but within this unanimity there are different opinions, something that cannot be understood in the spoken language, because what is unanimous is never different.
In order to have a clearer concept let’s speak about a grand jury that reaches a verdict.
In order to have a verdict this one must be unanimous, but maybe even if there is unanimity, there are different points of view within the jury with regard to what kind of guilt a convicted person might have.
Interlocutor: Okay. Master, but let’s not inquire first because I have the question written for the record and secondly, I want to make my idea clear for you, and then you can comment if it’s right or wrong, Do you agree?
Ruanel: Correct. This was a preamble then. Perfect.
Interlocutor: It's a bit long, but I think it’s worth it. First of all I want to make clear that it’s difficulty to describe what I want to express because the human language is very poor to express many concepts.
The first topic can be summarized as follows: In my opinion, any aberrated act is necessarily committed by someone who is aberrated (aberree).
Corollary 1: An aberrated act cannot be committed by someone who is not somehow aberrated.
Corollary 2: If someone who is not aberrated commits an aberrated act, it would be an exceptional case and therefore it couldn’t be taken into account, but only considered as an exceptional case.
Corollary 3: If someone aberrated (aberree) commits an aberrated act one cannot judge him as if he were not aberrated.
All of this is related to the case of men who rape women a topic that raises interesting debate.
I believe that my intention was misunderstood. Because I wanted to suggest that, as the Master Jesus said, we should not judge and we won’t be judged. We know that the Master Jesus meant that we should not condemn without knowing. That is, he was speaking about prejudice.
I wrote an article because the people usually judge easily and simplistically: A rapist is a monster and he should be skinned alive and the victim is the only one worthy of compassion because she is totally innocent. No one doubts of the wickedness of the act itself, in this case the rape, but I'm reluctant to prosecute the rapist without knowing the reason why he acted in that way, I presume that if he raped is because he is aberrated, otherwise he wouldn’t have done such thing.
Also, in order not to point a finger at him, I think that maybe I would have done the same aberration had I been in the same circumstances. Do not Judge or you will too be judged.
I state that I’m not referring to the rape, which is a condemnable act, but to the mental status of the rapist. I'm reluctant to prosecute the rapist without knowing how things happened.
I must say that modern justice considers that the punishment to the transgressor is not a punishment, but a way to separate him from society until he can be reinstated. Also I keep in mind the fact that the victim of rape may be learning a karmic lesson, as in the case of a girl, who in a previous life did the same thing what the rapists did to her, they tortured her humiliated her, raped her.
I must say that I know that karma has nothing to do with the law of retaliation or lex talionis .
The premise of the article I wrote is that a rapist is someone aberrated, because I believe that only someone aberrated can do such thing. When I speak about someone aberrated I also mean someone who has the irresistible compulsion to do so.
And if someone is aberrated is because someone is caused that aberration. I can’t imagine that anyone could do that without being an aberree somehow. In any case, if someone rapes without being aberrated it would be an exceptional case that cannot be considered. It would be the same as saying that humans have three, four feet by the fact that there are some people who are born with three or four feet.
Well, Master, I wait for your answers and perhaps this issue is quite complicated, huh?
Ruanel: I'll take a phrase of yours, you’ve said, in other words that what matters is the concept, when you talked about the rapists.
Nobody denies that rape is an act of cruelty. So, we are saying that everyone who commits an act of cruelty is a cruel person. That on one hand, and all the Masters of Light agree with that.
Now, we also agree that even in the least hostile act there is aberration. Therefore, a non-aberrated person, whose reactive mind is controlled because the person is 100% analytical and whose roles of ego don’t manipulate that person, it’s almost impossible that he/she commits a hostile act knowing the difference between good and evil, and knowing the consequences of committing an aberrant act.
However, in both, the spiritual or angelic world, as well as in the physical plane there are thousands of shades of gray, thousands of shades of gray. Then, as well as the majority of the people don’t have the spiritual strength to overcome the engramic impulses, the roles of ego and lesser things, for example, a couple that squabbles and suddenly the young woman slaps the man’s face, but he has enough spiritual strength, to call it somehow, to know how to control himself and not commit more serious acts.
This is perhaps an ironic example, but I think that it’s easy to explain and understand, in your legal jargon there is something called "excessive self-defense" which is condemnable. This means, If a person receives a slap on his face, he pulls out a gun and shots her aggressor four times. That's excessive self-defense, it’s not even considered a homicide because it would absurd to call it excessive self-defense
Interlocutor: Sorry Master, before you continue, the excessive self-defense may also be caused by a clouded mind, overwhelmed by engrams or whatever.
Ruanel: Of course, but I want to get right to the point. There are plenty shades of gray, but although the vast majority of the people embodied on Sun 3 are in the plane 3, and I repeat: although the vast majority of incarnated beings on Sun 3 or in other worlds are in the plane 3, this doesn’t mean that their aberration degree will completely cloud their minds.
That is, they may have a lack of self-control in small things, but when things get worse, generally they know how to control their emotions and they usually will not react excessively in front of certain facts.
Now, those people who coldly, in a premeditated way, they calculated their aggression, and this must be well understood, they plot a robbery like in one of your films, with plans, schedules, those movies in which they say: "Well, we’ll deactivate the laser alarms, cameras etc,"obviously there is a percentage of analysis of more than 95% and a reactive percentage less than 5%.
So that you understand, there is never a 0% of reactivity; there is some percentage of reactivity. Therefore, when saying reactivity it means that there is some degree of aberration, but that aberration is minimal in those cases, there is a great percentage of analysis. I'm talking about those examples related in your books or your movies where thieves steal paintings in museums or they steal millions of dollars or Euros from bank safes, deposit boxes, etc.
Interlocutor: It’s clear.
Ruanel: Well. In the same way, and bridging the gap, and want you to be completely objective and not subjective, don’t be on neither of the parts, whether the victim or the transgressor, but be totally objective, in the same way when the rapist stalks his alleged victim, obviously he will have tachycardia, despair, sexual desires and the reactive state will be much greater than he who has planned to steal paintings from a museum. Do we agree here?
This doesn’t mean that the rapist has no control over his emotions because he does, because he knows, perhaps he has spied on her victim previously so he knows at what time the girls gets out, at what she returns, by which streets she walks etc...
The rapist is going to study if there are neighbors on the corner or if there is a nearby place with a lot of pasture where he can take her... therefore, his power of analysis will be higher and there is a simple rule of three that says that if his power of analysis is higher, his reactive power will be lower, so in many of these cases the rapist responds to primal instincts, but obviously with much of his analytical mind.
This doesn’t mean that he is analytical, but rather that he has much of analytical because he has studied the lifestyle of the girl he is planning to rape: At what time she leaves, at what time she returns, if it’s going to be dark or if it’s wintertime, if there are no neighbors in the area, he is going to plan everything.
A person who analyzes means that he is analytical, not reactive; this doesn’t mean that he is not reactive at all, because the fact that he has tachycardia, sexual desires is because of the primal instincts. Do you understand that?
Interlocutor: Yes, but look Master, and this is what we know about a case in which a woman was raped, filmed, etc., we know the whole thing, one of the rapists who disembodied due to heart problems unrelated to the rape – He didn’t go to the Eighth Sphere, the plane -2, but strangely he went to the plane 2, which means that somehow there was an attenuating circumstance, otherwise, he would have gone directly to the plane -2, because what he did was very serious.
Ruanel: The attenuating circumstance is the minimum or higher percentage of reactive mind. And here we are talking about the spiritual planes.
In the spiritual plane - and I want to clarify very well to those who do not yet know what the spiritual world or angelic world is- in the spiritual planes there are no value judgments. In the spiritual planes there are no value judgments of any kind because one ascends or descends according to the level of vibration, according to the “weight” so-to-speak or the “density” of the ego that each spirit has, and according to the hostiles acts the spirit committed.
Interlocutor: Hold on, Master, you said something very important to highlight. This means- and this concerns me because when I incarnated as Nero- who made the outrages we know and went to the Eighth Sphere or plane -2 in spite of his engrams because he was highly analytical and for that reason he went to the plane -2...
Ruanel: Correct.
Interlocutor: So, he wasn’t 100% reactive, right?
Ruanel: It’s not that I'm trying to take you to my ground because that would be manipulation and I would descend from plane if I tried to manipulate a dialogue, because manipulating a dialogue equals to manipulating a person directly or indirectly. However, since the spoken language is very poor I can say that I'm taking you to my ground, as you say.
Interlocutor: But I’m giving you the reason, Master, with my example I’m going to your ground.
Ruanel: Correct. For that reason we are talking that if there is a higher percentage of analysis, the higher percentage of analysis will densify the intention. I want you to understand that. The hostile act will be denser in front of more analysis, and I don’t say dismissed because a hostile act is never dismissed, but it will somehow- I’m trying to give a word of this example to the vessel’s decoder and it’s difficult for vessel’s decoder to decode it- but somehow there is a sort of apology, an excuse if there is more reactive mind in the person who has committed a hostile act. Yes?
Interlocutor: Yes.
Ruanel: Well. There is no 100% reactive mind and there is no 100% analytical mind. In all cases when a person commits a hostile act there is a percentage of aberration. In other words, I completely agree with what you have given as a preamble at the beginning, in full agreement, but the nuances are missing, the colors are missing. And the colors are, as I said before, if the rapist was driven by his primal instincts = reactive mind, I repeat, if the rapist was driven by primal instincts = reactive mind and he schemes a plot calculating the victim’s behavior, her schedule by using his analytical mind.
If the analytical mind outweighs the reactive mind in the act, and in this case it weighs more because the rapist was planning his aggression, schedules and everything, although he fell prey to his emotions; that basic person could calculate and by using analytically his mind in order to plot the rape, he was in the same place that those thieves who stole a painting from a museum were. Therefore, it is reprehensible for the physical world because, I insist in the spiritual planes there is no prosecution because the spirit ascends or descends according to its own gravitational energy. It is important to clarify that. All this controversy, debate, argument or whatever you want to call it has to do with the physical plane. There are people who were wrongfully convicted on the physical plane and they are dwelling in the plane 5 sublevel 6.
Interlocutor: It is clear, Master. Wait a moment because I want to stare a very important issue. Here I also see a factor that we are forgetting, which is the ignorance, because if Nero had not been so ignorant he wouldn’t have done what he did. Then, as I see it, if a wise man puts his hand on fire and burns it or if the ignorant man also burns his hand. That is, there are acts that have the same consequences no matter what. If one is reactive or not, if he has roles of ego...
Ruanel: No, no. The ignorant man will have attenuating circumstances in the spiritual world, perhaps not in the physical world if we consider the laws of the physical plane,  maybe an ignorant person will have the same or similar sentence compared to a wise person who committed the same hostile act.
Let’s say for example: An ignorant man and a wise person agree to kill a man. The wise man does it because he is eager to inherit a fortune and the ignorant man does it because he is just a fool who accompanies him. If both of them pull the trigger of the gun, the two of them will be sentenced in the same way in the physical plane, maybe not in the spiritual plane because there is no judgment, no value judgments of any kind in the spiritual planes and the ignorance will weigh less in the energy density of the spirit that committed that hostile act because it was committed by ignorance.
In addition, in certain regions, and I read your spiritual concept, your mind I read it, I visualize that you both have spoken about it, there are countries where- I don’t say a common factor, because that would be prejudice- There are societies where they have a tradition of massive rapes, a high percentage of rapes compared to other regions. Do you understand?
Interlocutor: Yes
Ruanel: Well. This doesn’t mean that we have to applaud these beings, but maybe when they disembody they will go to the plane 2, or to the plane 3 due to that ignorance. The plane 3 is a plane of error, but it’s a plane where not so cruel people go, it’s a plane where people go due to several circumstances, they don’t decide which way to take, a plane where they are manipulated by their own roles of ego too much, it’s not like the plane 2, which is a plane of extreme cruelty. And regarding to what you said before, if a person who committed a very hostile act doesn’t go to the plane -2, which is the eighth sphere, but goes to the plane 2, well, look, the attenuating circumstance is minimal, because the plane 2 is a plane of excessive of cruelty where the spirit suffers a lot...
Interlocutor: Well, perhaps he got out of the hook by chance.
Ruanel: The spirit doesn’t suffer as much as in the plane -2, which is a plane where every spirit feels- when I talk about feeling I mean that the spirit feels the conceptual pain of millions of spirits there- It's as if you could feel physically a million toothaches, obviously that you would die instantly because you couldn’t resist that pain, however, since the spirit does not "die" as the physical being does, the spirit must continue feeling that pain until the spirit understands that the pain of the other is important.
Well, I do not want to deviate from the topic. Of course that ignorance weighs in favor; that is, if a young man was raised in a district where there are wood houses, metal roofs, where his mother engaged in prostitution in her own house and his father is a drunkard, where the room has seven children and they see men coming in and out and sometimes these children are going to look for a glass of milk while her mother is exercising prostitution on her bed.
The child sees that action as something normal, normal, it’s logical that a child sees rape as something normal, perhaps because his 12-year-old sister was engaged in prostitution as well, Is that clear?
Then, It doesn’t stop being an attenuating circumstance in the spiritual world, but later on when he grows up and as an 18-year-old boy he stalks coldly a young girl using his radar – and here I am being ironic- by plotting the circumstances if the girls passes by a street at a certain hour, if it’s dark, if she walks around the corner and if there is a vacant lot in that place, plotting if he will threaten her with a gun and satisfy his lower instincts, obviously his analytical mind is prevailing over his reactive mind and that must be condemned in the physical plane. Here I am not talking about compassion as the Master Jesus said because I don’t want to deviate the attention from the main subject.
Interlocutor: That is very clear, though.
Ruanel: I don’t want to deviate from the subject, he must be condemned. If he was aberrated, he was very aberrated due to many circumstances such as his upbringing, his birthplace, what he saw, and obviously if he was reactive, but in that moment he did it with premeditation. Then, it’s condemnable.
Interlocutor: Okay, Master, What you say I fully understand and it’s perfectly clear, let's say that it’s not like a "Divine Justice" if one carries a certain amount of lead bars, which are attached to the body and then one jumps to the water, one will sink more quickly according to the number of lead bars attached to the body, I mean, there is a matter of justice, which is not divine justice because we had clarified previously that nobody judges in the superphysical planes, but…
Ruanel: There is no divine justice, there is consequence.
Interlocutor: Well, then it's a fair thing. This analysis...
Ruanel: In this case, in order that the people who follow these sessions understand well, the expression number of lead bars attached to the body is referred to the number of hostile acts committed before a person disembodies.
Interlocutor: Sure. Perfect. In the case of Nero, obviously He went to the Eighth Sphere, the plane -2 because he was not as ignorant as one might think.
Ruanel: Because ignorance is like a lifesaver; that is to say, If you commit many hostile acts due to ignorance, you get many lifesavers...
Interlocutor: Will they allow me to float?
Ruanel: No, no. When you commit hostile acts, you get many lead bars attached to your body, but ignorance can somehow help you to float, perhaps you will not go to the abyss, but you won’t go to the surface either because there is no apology to a hostile act; You will end up between waters- that is, you won’t go to the Eighth Sphere, but you can end up in the plane 2 or the plane 3 according to the gravity of the hostile acts committed.
Interlocutor: Okay. In other words, Nero did not have many lifesavers, then.
Ruanel: Of course not.
Interlocutor: Okay. This is clear. Everything you say is clear, it's perfect. Now ...
Ruanel: I'll go further before finishing this issue, and remember what you are going to tell me, remember it.
From the same example I gave, there are regions where rape is almost a common act, without prejudice to these societies, there are other countries where- and this is a word I dislike very much- terrorism is a common act because, as this vessel, the Professor Jorge said, there are people whose daughter was a terrorist who blew up herself committing suicide and killing other twenty people of their alleged enemies. An analytical person would cry for her life more than if she were his own daughter, but these people will make a party describing their daughter as a martyr.
You will ask me: "And what about her aberration?" And I would say, "But her aberration is bigger than the Himalaya", the aberration is very high, obviously it is, but you would tell me:"Sure, but according to their customs there as an apology." And I would say yes to that.
It doesn’t mean that this entire terrorism environment goes to the Eighth Sphere, because it goes to there, but there is a lot of ignorance, a lot of ignorance. And there is another thing you did not ponder: The religious fanaticism or bigotry as it happened in the world wars.
Interlocutor: Does religious fanaticism have an excuse somehow?
Ruanel: Yes. It exempts...
Interlocutor: As if it were a lifesaver?
Ruanel: Somehow. Minimally, but it exempts. Religious fanaticism exempts. Due to fanaticism, before the middle of the twentieth century, they slaughtered babies and we are talking about aberrant acts of such magnitude that if I were embodied I would throw up.
We're talking about an extreme act of cruelty. However, and so that the words I use through this vessel don’t be misinterpreted, it doesn’t mean that there is exemption, but a small percentage of apology due to their bigotry or religious fanaticism because it is still ignorance. In your dictionary the words, bigotry and ignorance are not synonymous, but there is a higher correlation, if you understand what I mean, there is a correlation.
Interlocutor: Okay. There is no need to continue with this issue because it is clear enough. Now...
Ruanel: It’s not for you. It’s not for you what I said.
Interlocutor: Okay. Now let's go to the practical issue because everything you said is fine, I accept it and who won’t accept it because it is very clear. Now, when I made the website about the rapists I did it from the standpoint of compassion and I don’t know if it would be common sense or so that we don’t judge all the rapists equally because not all rapists are analytical or condemnable...
Ruanel: No, on the physical plane all of them are condemnable because people would misinterpret what we are talking about. On the physical plane each hostile act is condemnable to a greater or lesser extent. I repeat: if you argue with a partner and that partner slaps your face, the sentences for her action would be: if you have ego you will feel offended, if you're reactive you will slap her face as well or you can stand up and leave. That kind of sentences, if you understand what I mean by sentences.
Interlocutor: Yes, obviously, but I expressed it wrongfully. What I meant is not to judge so easily because we don’t know the circumstances of the rapist or transgressor...
Ruanel: No embodied being -and perhaps I’m responding quickly because I’m reading your mental decoder to speed the session up- no embodied being knows the circumstances of another incarnated being. Therefore no one can prejudge. I repeat: No embodied being knows the circumstances of another person, not even the circumstances of his best friend. Therefore, he/she cannot prejudge, but there is a common factor in someone who commits a verifiable hostile act and I, being incarnated, even not knowing the circumstances I would say: "Yes it is a reprehensible act"
For example, an engineer, in his ignorance, edifies a building of many stories and he doesn’t do it to earn more money or to sabotage, but simply due to his ignorance he chooses bad building materials or weaker beams, then, due to his ignorance, not to save money or to sabotage and the building collapses killing fifty workers. That engineer is an ignorant, but spiritually he is responsible of mass casualties and surely he will go to a denser plane of error. The attenuating circumstance will be his ignorance compared to another engineer who did the same just to save money or save building materials. Do you understand the difference?
However, if I were embodied and my name is John Doe, I, Ruanel, being my name John Doe and watching the television what this engineer did by ignorance... Well, I would say: "Damn, it’s reprehensible." That is what I mean.
Interlocutor: Well, Master. When I wrote the article about the rapists, because I am defending the point of view of the article, it’s not in contradiction with what you say, what I meant is that we should not judge because we have no base to judge or we don’t know the circumstances and thinking about that episode of the Master Jesus, who two thousand years ago said. “He who is without sin cast the first stone”
Ruanel: I'm reading you mental decoder and for that reason I say. On the physical world I might disagree, within the unanimity, perhaps I would disagree with the Master Jesus and the sentence “he who is without sin cast the first stone.”
If I were a family man and I were watching TV and I see that in another neighborhood or city or country there was an aberrant act or rape, I will always make common cause with the father of the victim and never with the rapist. And obviously mentally I will condemn even without knowing the circumstances, but I will not do by stupidity or because I don’t know the circumstances, I would do it because there is a primal instinct in every embodied being that says that a hostile act must be condemned. And I’m not talking about prejudice, a hostile act is not prejudged, a hostile act can be seen directly.
Interlocutor: But Master, the article I wrote has nothing to do with that, I'm not saying that the rapist should not be convicted on the physical plane, but I’m considering the situation from the spiritual point of view, in the sense that we do not know all circumstances, although the rapist is condemned on the physical plane because the law says it so...
Ruanel: I read your concept again and I will explain what I want to convey...
The issue is this: I, spiritual being, the Master Jesus, surely Johnakan and also Morganel will feel compassion for the thetan and the 10% who plays the role of the rapist. We feel compassion! Of course we feel compassion because he is an ignorant man! Obviously we feel compassion! But I won’t move a finger to release him from his sentence...
Interlocutor: But I did not say that in the article, Master!
Ruanel: Perfect.
Interlocutor: That was misinterpreted...
Ruanel: Perfect. That’s for the record then. Of course I have compassion. Even for the couple of police murderers you call Garcia. Of course I have compassion. Because they're ignorant. But I won’t move a finger because there is a 70% of analysis against 30% of reactive mind. And I affirm that now. I, Ruanel, am saying that to you.
Interlocutor: But Was the policeman's death totally chance? Because he was there…
Ruanel: Correct, it was chance. Within the causality and during the struggle of the woman, because she was the one who pulled the trigger twice to kill him, there was a percentage of analysis of 70% and 30% of reactivity. In this reactivity there was no treachery. There's a small excuse: There was fear. The fear of being reduced and apprehended there.
Interlocutor: But there was also an act of despair.
Ruanel: Correct. But there was a 70% of analysis as for committing the crime. That's what I mean.
Interlocutor: But the judges didn’t know that.
Ruanel: Anyways, their actions are condemnable.
Interlocutor: Okay. But if you were on the physical plane and knowing what I know...
Ruanel: I would condemn them equally.
Interlocutor: To life imprisonment?
Ruanel: That would have to be evaluated, but I would condemn them. That's what I want to make clear to finish because I have lucubrated so much that I have worn out tremendously the vessel.
Interlocutor: Now let me ask you something. Who inspired me to write the article? Did I concoct it from the beginning to end? Nobody told me anything?
Ruanel: No. Obviously, your own thetan has given you direction...
Interlocutor: Radael? Was he wrong then?
Ruanel: No, not wrong, but you've put a lot of your own ideas. At least 30% of your own.
Interlocutor: Is it wrong that I put 30%?
Ruanel: No, but there was passion, and you cannot deny that to me because, with the permission of your thetan, I'm inside your mind and I know that there was a 30% of passion. And that passion clouded your mind in some way. The page can be published as long as there are no opinions. Opinions about compassion, forgiveness, aggravating or attenuating factors. That is, the page must be absolutely neutral to publish, "This event happened." Neutral.
Interlocutor: Could any doubt be dispelled with this session?
Ruanel: Yes. If you have nothing more to add on this subject I’d like to conclude with a few words and I thank the vessel’s decoder.
Everyone on the spiritual path, and here I omit the word should because there is no need to put it- I directly say: Everyone on the spiritual path has compassion, but also within compassion has sense of justice- and I talk about embodied beings now - then, in front of a hostile act one evaluates, I speak about those who are on the Path- I’m not talking about ordinary judges- they evaluate each situation -where there may be mitigating or aggravating circumstances. However, in all the cases a hostile act is condemnable, in all the cases. And here I’m not speaking about pity or hatred towards the person, first because a person who is on the Path cannot be involved personally because as well as there is impersonal Love there is also impersonal judgment, and I am talking about the physical plane because in the spiritual plane there is no judgment, personal or impersonal or anything at all.
It’s the spirit who by its own gravity pulls down or up. Then, I, hypothetically or figuratively embodied, in front of an event of this nature, I will not hate these people if I'm the one that has to condemn, but obviously I will condemn them and I will condemn with total compassion, but I will condemn them after all.
For that reason I say that within that context we have talked about, it makes no sense the example of the prostitute who was going to be stoned, it makes no sense, it’s another issue. And I don’t want to deviate from the topic. Any negative situation is to be condemned to the appropriate extent.
For that reason I say that we don’t cross to the excessive self-defense: You get a slap, your analytical mind will try to convince the person that she was wrong. If she is still reactive, stand up and leave. You don’t even have to answer with a slap because you would stoop down to her same level. That is what I mean.
Interlocutor: Okay. To conclude the session if you allow me... I’d like to say a last thing, Could it be?
Ruanel: Well.
Interlocutor: The couple who murdered the policeman, I would not have sentenced to life imprisonment; I would have given them at least ten years, maximum fifteen years.
Ruanel: We cannot be like judges and say how much time they have to be in prison. We cannot do it because it’s not the issue. The issue is whether it’s a condemnable act or not. And yes, it’s condemnable.
Do we have to have compassion for these people? Yes, because they are ignorant people. Are there attenuating circumstances? Perhaps a lot of mitigating factors: Ignorance, bigotry, lifestyle... A person who lives in a more democratic region, which is more respectful to the laws, will have maybe a percentage of rape of 1% and that person will never be adapted to living in a country or a region where the percentage is 70%.
Interlocutor: Master, one thing must be clarified otherwise the whole session will not be helpful. You say that it’s condemnable. Yes, but it’s not the same thing to condemn someone to life imprisonment or death penalty or two years of prison.
Ruanel: Of course. We're not talking about that. It’s not in us to speak about it... Besides, death penalty is aberrant. To us, the Spirits of Light, death penalty is aberrant.
Interlocutor: Okay. It was an extreme example. But it must be clear that...
Ruanel: You're repeating,  you're repeating. We have said that. It’s not up to us to give a time of sentence. It’s not up to us.
Interlocutor: But is not the same thing, Master...
Ruanel: Of course it’s not the same. That’s why I gave the example that it’s not the same thing if your partner slaps your face and you stand up and hit her head with a baseball bat.
Interlocutor: Okay. But I'm talking about the sentence, Master…
Ruanel: It's exactly the same thing. Everything must be according to the hostile act.
Interlocutor: When we speak of condemnation, we must see the type of sentence too. That's another story.
Ruanel: Everything must be according to the hostile act. Let’s not repeat it. So long.
Interlocutor: So Long, Master.

This entry was posted at Sunday, January 01, 2012 and is filed under . You can follow any responses to this entry through the .

0 comentarios

Related Posts with Thumbnails