Guest guest Posted September 16, 2001 Report Share Posted September 16, 2001 Namsate All, A couple of months ago there was a lot of activity regarding a solution to the Kashmir problem. This is a message that I had posted then on another list. I thought it might apply to the current events as well ..... If there is someone wondering, is there anything that we can do at the level of mental plane to help bring about peace and harmony, here are a few thoughts. Let us not forget the basic principles of Vedanta and their application to tackle issues that pertain to Vyavahara. Warmest regards Shrinivas --------------------------- Kashmir problem will not be solved overnight. There is goodwill on both the sides and it can drive the emergence of the solution. Following Patanjali, may I suggest that Samayama on the problem will lead to its solution. Contemplate on the problems, violence, bloodshed .... This will stir a storm of emotions, let the storm blow, only when this storm has exhausted its energy can pleasant breeze flow. Harmony is a quality of the Self, it will come on its own. There is no need to strive for harmony. We only need to identify obstacles that block harmony > > namaste. > > The recent happenings in the U.S. and the immediate general > thinking of the populace suggest a dominating feeling of > anger and revenge. In vyavahArika day-to-day life, these feelings > are understandable. I am posting this to enquire the origin of > this particular feeling of revenge. > .... > > When the anger subsides, the feeling of revenge also subsides. > Anger and revenge are two very transient and fleeting emotions. > If they propel human to action which cause a more long-lasating > damage to relations, to happiness, to propsperity, then, isn't > there a necessity of a more calm approach or reason to act after > the anger subsides? > > Regards > Gummuluru Murthy > -- ---- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 17, 2001 Report Share Posted September 17, 2001 Recently I heard a rabbi on CNN distinguish punishment from revenge. He said...true Punishment is dominated by a sense of justice that needs to prevail in a certain situation ; whereas revenge is dominated by a sense of pleasure in how, when and where we will vanquish our foes. His definition seems very apt. What do hindu scriptures say about the distinction between punishment and revenge ? > > Gummuluru Murthy [sMTP:gmurthy] > Sunday, September 16, 2001 11:59 AM > advaitin > anger, revenge > > > namaste. > > The recent happenings in the U.S. and the immediate general > thinking of the populace suggest a dominating feeling of > anger and revenge. In vyavahArika day-to-day life, these feelings > are understandable. I am posting this to enquire the origin of > this particular feeling of revenge. > > What I understand of revenge is as follows: revenge is a > bye-product of anger. Anger itself is a feeling that comes > about when a desire is not satisfied. shri shankara's bhAShya > (BhagavadgItA, 2nd chapter) says: if a desire is not satisfied > and if the ego thinks that it is capable of satisfying it, > then the unsatisfied desire manifests itself as anger. pratIkAram > (I think that is the proper translation of the word revenge) is > a feeling that comes out when that anger propels an action. > > This is true not only here but in many actions and reactions > in many volatile regions of the world. We hear of a suicide- > bomber setting up a bomb in a busy town square. We hear of > immediate retaliation in another region. Revenge is the emotion > that drives both the original action and the reaction. > > We are not here to give any advice to any Governments. The > Governments in democracies are elected to act according to the > wishes of the people and they do. Ishwara takes appropriate > actions through the various Governments and nothing can be done > without Ishwara's approval. > > When the anger subsides, the feeling of revenge also subsides. > Anger and revenge are two very transient and fleeting emotions. > If they propel human to action which cause a more long-lasating > damage to relations, to happiness, to propsperity, then, isn't > there a necessity of a more calm approach or reason to act after > the anger subsides? > > Regards > Gummuluru Murthy > ------ > > > Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of > Atman and Brahman. > Advaitin List Archives available at: > http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ > To Post a message send an email to : advaitin > Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages > > > > Your use of is subject to > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 17, 2001 Report Share Posted September 17, 2001 Namaste, The web-site of the Amnesty International has this to say: http://members.magnet.at/ai.dornbirn/rel-dp.htm#hindu Hinduism Hindus believe in the idea of one Supreme Spirit, this is everywhere, including in themselves and every creature, formless and everlasting. The teachings are not ascribed to one primary teacher but are derived from ancient Sanskrit scriptures, principally the "Upanishads", spiritual treatises (the earliest of which dates from about 800 BC). Codes of behaviour for living a good human life are derived from the great epics, which were written later, notably the Bhagavad Gita which forms part of the great epic, the "Mahabharata". Sanskrit literature also contains explicit rules of behaviour of the "Laws of Manu". Hindus do not believe that the revelation of the will of the Supreme Spirit has come to an end and is contained only in scriptures from the past. Hindu sages through the ages even included the 20th century have added to this body of teaching. Hinduism is not a congregational religion and everyone is free to see and worship the Supreme Spirit in any form or in any way they choose. In Hinduism it is behaviour which is considered important, not what you say you do or do not believe. The idea of correct behaviour, of living properly, of social order, law and morality, is summed up in the concept of "dharma". Every human being is expected to follow the dharma to the best of their ability; that is, to perform their duties to their family, community and society as a whole. Thus the emphasis is on duty, rather than rights, because if everyone performs their duties towards others, all needs will be met and all the benefits and protections which can be described as rights will come to you as others fulfil their duty. But someone who breaks or refuses to follow the dharma sets themselves outside the criminal as well as the religious law. Consequently if duties are no longer owed to the criminal or sinner and if the religious concept of rights, such as the right to life, is not part of the Hindu moral code, what should be done with someone who has committed a terrible crime, like murder? Is the death penalty allowed and prescribed? Ancient Hindu civilization had a highly developed system of religious, civil and criminal law. The "Dharmasasbras" and "Arthasastras" are the most detailed commentaries on these laws. The Dharmasasbras describes many crimes and their punishments and calls for the death penalty, even for crimes not resulting in death of another human being. But there are aspects of Hindu teaching which can be invoked to prevent the use of the death penalty. First of all the Mahabharata itself contains passages arguing against the use of the death penalty in all cases. This is a relevant example: The Mahabharata argues against the use of the death penalty is a dialogue between King Dyumatsena and his son Prince Satyavan (Chapter 257 of the Santiparva). In this scene a number of men had been brought out for execution a the command of the King. Prince Satyavan then says "Sometimes virtue assumes the form of sin and sin assumes the form of virtue. It is not possible that the destruction of individuals can ever be virtuous". King Dyumatsena replies: "If the spring of those who should be killed be virtuous, if robbers be spared, Satyavan, all distinction between virtue and vice will disappear". Satyavan responds: "Without destroying the body of the offender, the king should punish him as ordained by the scriptures. The king should not act otherwise, neglecting to reflect upon the character of the offence and upon the science of morality. By killing the wrongdoer the King kills a large number of his innocent men. Behold by killing a single robber, his wife, mother, father and children, all are killed. When injured by wicked persons, the king should therefore think seriously on the question of punishment. Sometimes a wicked person is seen to imbibe good conduct from a pious man. It is seen that good children spring from wicked persons. The wicked should not therefore be exterminated. The extermination of the wicked is not in consonance with the eternal law." The Hindu notion of punishment is not based on revenge. Rather, punishment in the Hindu scheme of things should be aimed at restoring the proper social order, restoring the dharma and protecting the innocent. The punishment has to be administered in accordance with other important Hindu values. It must not be a punishment that would itself be a further offence or unjust. The Dharmasasbras describes the duties which must be observed in administering punishment. It is stressed that the innocent should not be punished. Punishment should be impartial and the nature of the punishment should not be decided in anger if it is to be just. The gravity of the punishment must be carefully considered, taking into account the capacity of the criminal to undergo the hardship, their age, their level of education and possibly the fact that they may be the family breadwinner. A further factor inhibiting the use of the death penalty, though it is not explicitly described in the Dharmasasbras, is the duty to act in a spirit of ahimsa. Punishment, like all action, must be in accord with this concept. "Ahimsa", which was particularly stressed by Mahatma Gandhi, means non-violence, the belief that it is wrong to hurt any living being. Finally, Hindu teaching has always stressed the idea of expiation of guilt. As a rule, criminals are not only liable to punishment, but they have to expiate their guilt too if they are to be restored to society and continue in their own path of dharma. Without proper expiation of guilt, punishment is only half the remedy. Expiation is a sort of self-cure form crime and sin based on repentance and resolve not to repeat the crime. It is primarily a mental or psychological process, available only of course to those with faith in the scriptures. But it is also a social rite. The important aspect for the question of death penalty is that proper expiation can be used to modify the seriousness of the punishment it is to accompany. It has been argued that the availability of expiation renders the most severe punishment, the death penalty, unnecessary, excessive, and that indeed it must, if the death penalty itself is not to be the cause of further offence against dharma. Thus the "Mahabharata" (see above) says "the extermination of the root (of existence) (namely of man) is not to be countenanced; that by no means constitutes the eternal dharma. Indeed proper expiation can be made without killing." This ancient counsel against the death penalty finds its echo through the ages down to the twentieth century. Other useful references: http://www.unification.net/ws/theme157.htm http://www.unification.net/ws/theme152.htm http://origin.org/ws/theme144.cfm#17 Regards, sunder advaitin, "Thommandra, Rama K." <Rama.Thommandra@a...> wrote: > > Recently I heard a rabbi on CNN distinguish punishment from revenge. > > He said...true Punishment is dominated by a sense of justice that needs to > prevail in a certain situation ; whereas revenge is dominated by a sense of > pleasure in how, when and where we will vanquish our foes. > > His definition seems very apt. > > What do hindu scriptures say about the distinction between punishment and > revenge ? > > > > > Gummuluru Murthy [sMTP:gmurthy@m...] > > Sunday, September 16, 2001 11:59 AM > > advaitin > > anger, revenge > > > > > > namaste. > > > > The recent happenings in the U.S. and the immediate general > > thinking of the populace suggest a dominating feeling of > > anger and revenge. In vyavahArika day-to-day life, these feelings > > are understandable. I am posting this to enquire the origin of > > this particular feeling of revenge. > > > > What I understand of revenge is as follows: revenge is a > > bye-product of anger. Anger itself is a feeling that comes > > about when a desire is not satisfied. shri shankara's bhAShya > > (BhagavadgItA, 2nd chapter) says: if a desire is not satisfied > > and if the ego thinks that it is capable of satisfying it, > > then the unsatisfied desire manifests itself as anger. pratIkAram > > (I think that is the proper translation of the word revenge) is > > a feeling that comes out when that anger propels an action. > > > > This is true not only here but in many actions and reactions > > in many volatile regions of the world. We hear of a suicide- > > bomber setting up a bomb in a busy town square. We hear of > > immediate retaliation in another region. Revenge is the emotion > > that drives both the original action and the reaction. > > > > We are not here to give any advice to any Governments. The > > Governments in democracies are elected to act according to the > > wishes of the people and they do. Ishwara takes appropriate > > actions through the various Governments and nothing can be done > > without Ishwara's approval. > > > > When the anger subsides, the feeling of revenge also subsides. > > Anger and revenge are two very transient and fleeting emotions. > > If they propel human to action which cause a more long-lasating > > damage to relations, to happiness, to propsperity, then, isn't > > there a necessity of a more calm approach or reason to act after > > the anger subsides? > > > > Regards > > Gummuluru Murthy > > ---- -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of > > Atman and Brahman. > > Advaitin List Archives available at: > > http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ > > To Post a message send an email to : advaitin > > Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages > > > > > > > > Your use of is subject to > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.