Violent right action?

[Guest guest]

> >Vigorous even violent right-action might prevent

> >further violence.

>

> So vigorous violent action is ok as long as it

> is done for the right cause ?

>

> Amanda.

 

 

It just so happens that Osho speaks to this

very question in a book of his I'm reading

today

 

In his book, 'Krishna, The Man and His

Philosophy', there is a question asked of

Osho regarding Krishna's seeming lack

of tolerance....when Krishna put up with

999 'invectives hurled on him' by King

Shishupal. With the last invective, Krishna

killed Shishupal.

 

The questioner asked if that did not show

that Krishna was deep down 'intolerant'.

 

Osho responds, in part:

 

"It can appear so, because we all have only

skin deep tolerance. If I lose my temper on

the fourth foul word hurled at me, it means I

had lost it with the very first one, but somehow

I put up with the three of them, and appeared

in my true colors as soon as the fourth one came.

But the contrary can also happen, and Krishna is

that contrary; he is not like us. There is every

possibility that he was an exception to this

generality

 

It is not that Krishna's tolerance could take only

999 invectives. Do you think 999 are not enough?

And that one who can bear this huge number of

abuses cannot bear one more? It is really hard to

believe......"

 

"Krishna kills Shishupal not because his patience has

come to an end; his patience is unending. But we are

apt to think otherwise, because of our own tolerance

is very brittle. Krishna does not lack tolerance, but

he also knows that it is dangerous to put up with

unrighteousness beyond a certain limit; it amounts to

encouraging it. Tolerance is good just because intolerance

is evil. There is no other reason for praising patience

except that impatience is ugly. But does it mean that I

should care for my own patience and let the impatience

of another run riot and ruin him? This is not compassion;

it is really cruelty to the other. A point comes when I have

to stop evil from going too far. This is how I see it.

 

Looking at the whole life of Krishna, it does not seem that

anything can exhaust his patience, but it is equally difficult

for him to encourage evil. So he has to find a golden mean

between the two extremes - his own patience and the impatience

of another".

 

 

Melody:

 

For me, violence in and of itself is not evil.

 

It is the intent behind the violence that may or may

not be evil.

 

If I respond violently because someone has

pushed one of my buttons....you could call that evil.

 

If I respond similarly because that same triggering

action could harm others....it may or may not be.

 

If I am as a 'flute'....allowing God to sing thru me...

a violent action, for whatever reason....is not evil,

no matter how ugly.

 

The problem we face so often is that people

(and countries.....and religions) are apt

to try to pass off a response triggered

by 'button pushing', or fear, as if it were a

'song of God'.

 

Melody