What is Ahimsa?

[Guest guest]

Thanks all, for comments on the Hitler/Terezin threads. I'm changing the

subject of my post to "What is ahimsa?" because that is the question having

meaning for me.

 

TG makes a good point:

> Forgiveness is an interesting subject. Many, including myself

occasionally

> still, seem to be under the impression we are responsible to forgive the

> 'wrongs' or 'evildoing' of every Hitler, serial killer, etc. We have

> usurped the place of God. Seems to me that you nor I have any right,

> religiously or morally, to forgive these murderers -- only the victims do.

 

Projecting a mood of forgiveness seems subtly violent in itself. It would be

taking our internal agenda and using this mood to obscure what is. That's

not ahimsa.

 

Mark wrote:

>I am not really all that interested

>in the outside so much as the inside, so when I suggest forgiving fear,

>I mean that quite literally and directly. When fear arises, we tend to

>defend ourselves, which we think lessens the fear, but I think it does

>just the opposite, it strengthens it. If we can welcome the fear in and

>experience it, in my experience, it turns out not to have been fear

>after all, but to have been love, which we in some deeply instinctive

>survival way, turned inside out and used to defend our "self". This

>transformation of fear back into love is forgiveness. It's freeing up

>the energy that was used to defend and making it available to give.

 

Thanks Mark for your inspiring comments. Regarding "not interested in the

outside so much as the inside". Is the outside a reflection of what is

within?

 

Mark:

>My original mistake of

>using the freely given love to erect defenses is just that; a mistake.

>Ask me if this can work in a world where madmen rape and murder?

>Can I

>sit and watch my mother get raped and murdered with a sense of

>equanimity, knowing it to be a mad dream, a mirage?

 

Your clarity regarding forgiveness shines through Mark. The details of your

fantasy are not entirely clear to me, but, why not take appropriate action,

if possible, to prevent the terrible injustice? If you sit and watch idly

and avoid the opportunity for action, then to me, this in-action might be

passive complicity with violence.

 

As Antoine mentions:

> Or in another way, in the words of Morehi Uyeshiba at:

> http://www.sentient.org/amber/uyeshiba.htm

>

>"When an enemy tries to fight with me, the universe itself, he has to

>break the harmony of the universe. Hence at the moment he has the mind

>to fight with me, he is already defeated. There exists no measure of

>time -- fast or slow."

 

Mark, why not allow the harmony of the universe to act through you, if

appropriate. Pick up a flower pot and conk the madman on the head? To allow

the madman to rape & murder might be seen as an injustice not only to the

victim, but also to the madman.

 

Roger

[Guest guest]

Hi Roger,

 

Roger Isaacs wrote:

 

TG makes a good point:

> > Forgiveness is an interesting subject. Many, including myself

> occasionally

> > still, seem to be under the impression we are responsible to forgive

> the

> > 'wrongs' or 'evildoing' of every Hitler, serial killer, etc. We

> have

> > usurped the place of God. Seems to me that you nor I have any

> right,

> > religiously or morally, to forgive these murderers -- only the

> victims do.

 

My take on it is that forgiveness is more for the forgiver (for the

giver of it...) than the forgiven one. When I hold a grudge, I am

poisoning myself. When I act on the grudge by seeking revenge, I also

poison the other. The first poison seems to me to lead to the second,

and of course the second causes the other to feel grudging, and so it

goes... I suggest forgiving past insults, no matter how deep to cleanse

oneself.

>

>

> Projecting a mood of forgiveness seems subtly violent in itself. It

> would be

> taking our internal agenda and using this mood to obscure what is.

> That's

> not ahimsa.

 

projecting a mood of nonforgiveness is better? I'm trying to stop

projecting entirely.

>

>

> Mark wrote:

> >I am not really all that interested

> >in the outside so much as the inside, so when I suggest forgiving

> fear,

> >I mean that quite literally and directly. When fear arises, we tend

> to

> >defend ourselves, which we think lessens the fear, but I think it

> does

> >just the opposite, it strengthens it. If we can welcome the fear in

> and

> >experience it, in my experience, it turns out not to have been fear

> >after all, but to have been love, which we in some deeply instinctive

>

> >survival way, turned inside out and used to defend our "self". This

> >transformation of fear back into love is forgiveness. It's freeing

> up

> >the energy that was used to defend and making it available to give.

>

> Thanks Mark for your inspiring comments. Regarding "not interested in

> the

> outside so much as the inside". Is the outside a reflection of what is

>

> within?

 

Yes, I think it does go in that direction more than the reverse. I

think we try to cure the reflection rather than the thing being

reflected when we try to fix the outside. The idea that the outside is

a reflection of the inside is multifaceted. One part is that what we

think we see when we look at the world may not be accurate. It may be

strongly filtered by our inside state of mind. I think that is the part

that I am trying to change in myself. Another part is that we actually

create the outside, and it is created in the image of our insides. I

believe that if we don't tackle the inside perceptions, the outside will

always be difficult. As we clarify the insides, the outsides will

change (albeit with a time lag, and subject to the consensus insides).

>

>

> Mark:

> >My original mistake of

> >using the freely given love to erect defenses is just that; a

> mistake.

> >Ask me if this can work in a world where madmen rape and murder?

> >Can I

> >sit and watch my mother get raped and murdered with a sense of

> >equanimity, knowing it to be a mad dream, a mirage?

>

> Your clarity regarding forgiveness shines through Mark. The details of

> your

> fantasy are not entirely clear to me, but, why not take appropriate

> action,

> if possible, to prevent the terrible injustice? If you sit and watch

> idly

> and avoid the opportunity for action, then to me, this in-action might

> be

> passive complicity with violence.

>

> As Antoine mentions:

> > Or in another way, in the words of Morehi Uyeshiba at:

> > http://www.sentient.org/amber/uyeshiba.htm

> >

> >"When an enemy tries to fight with me, the universe itself, he has to

>

> >break the harmony of the universe. Hence at the moment he has the

> mind

> >to fight with me, he is already defeated. There exists no measure of

> >time -- fast or slow."

>

> Mark, why not allow the harmony of the universe to act through you, if

>

> appropriate. Pick up a flower pot and conk the madman on the head? To

> allow

> the madman to rape & murder might be seen as an injustice not only to

> the

> victim, but also to the madman.

 

Yes, if push should come to shove, I would brain the bastard without

stopping to think about it. The game I'm playing here is trying to

dismantle the expectations and the assumptions which in my opinion

support my habits of defense and fear. I think my biggest problem is

the defensive structures I've created and the habitual knee jerk

reactions that they give rise to. I see that strong ideas and

exploration of painful areas bring these reactions up strongly, so that

they are easy to see (if one doesn't just ride them). I think the

subtle ones are the harder ones to dismantle, because we are so

proficient at looking the other way. (again, I speak solely for myself -

I don't experience your situation, and can only guess on the basis of

mine, which is that very projection I wish to question.)

> Roger

 

Love, Mark