Dharma- Patience or Justice

[Soul of Light]

Namaste all!
Due to pure devotion we are able to eliminate our anger, and stay calm in any circumstances but one question always strikes in my mind that without our any mistake if someone scold us, talking rudely or even attack us then what should we do-
1. Simply not responded to their rude behaviour knowing that we all are one (by soul conciousness), and it happens only b'coz our destiny or god's will, it's not soul talking to us but it's only sanskar (habit) that soul gain in this material world, god will give us and him our karma's fruit and we should give him love althought he is giving us pain and follow ahimsa (not to harm), love and sacrifice... Or
2. We have to stop him b'coz its not rightful and against justice, we should follow shyatham prati shyaathyam (tick for tack) and answer him in our protest because who permit person to do wrong is more sinful than that person..
It's always confussion for me since there are five supports of dharma- knowledge, love, justice, patience and sacrifice (samarpan).. What we should do when we have to choice between love and justice or patience and justice and others..
Thank you for reading with patience...
I hope I'll gain great insight from you all..
Regards

[Webimpulse]

Namaste Soul of Light,

I'm not claiming to be an expert on karma, but I think this general rule is a good one to follow in most cases:


Hope this helps.

[Aanandinii]

Namaste Light,

Namaste all!
Due to pure devotion we are able to eliminate our anger, and stay calm in any circumstances but one question always strikes in my mind that without our any mistake if someone scold us, talking rudely or even attack us then what should we do...

First, I hope you don't mind the truncated name, if so please say.

Second, like WebImpulse above I claim no mastery either so take my reply as you will. I would like to add, I love that macro he posted. LOL

It is my understanding, based on the school I have been studying, that Devotion is what leads us to learn to control and eliminate anger and other base, instinctive emotional responses which arise from Ego, and that Devotion is also the grace that brings us success in our efforts as Devotion is Love. Through application of devotion and learning we progress in this with practice.

My method is similar to your choice number 1 in most cases. That's not to say I am always successful, but I am getting better.
This is how I try to think of and apply the five supports in any response or action.

In Knowledge I try to see where this person's action is arising from and understand it. I try to find a lesson in the interaction regardless of how negative it may seem. God is always speaking to us through the actions of others.

In Love, I know that God is always present in all beings, all things, and all action. So I look for the lesson as stated above and I try to remember to look at the person confronting me and see not only the lesson but God in that person, and greet Great Sri Siva in that form with Love and gratefulness for appearing before me in that form, even if I cannot immediately understand the purpose or lesson.

In Justice I strive to remember that there is a purpose for everything, even if we may not ever see it after long contemplation. Everything has a reason and a greater purpose. Remembering this, I seek what would be my own purpose if I should reply. Would it serve to be helpful or would it escalate negativity? Would it advance my own Dharma or goals, would it protect others who need protection and/or who I am bound to protect? If the answer to these is no, then justice is not served through reaction, so I strive to not react. I am not always successful.
If I respond anyway, or feel there is justice in response, I try to do so in a calm and reasoned manner, trying to not escalate the interaction but to guide it towards mutual productivity. I try to act for the greater good, as best as I can understand what that might be, and neither do harm (ahimsa) nor propagate harm/negativity being projected by the aggressor. Again, I am not always successful. With time and practice, I do get better though.
Regardless of whether I take action or not, I again try to remember to thank Sri Siva for appearing to me in this form and try to contemplate the lesson He offered.

I try to have Patience with the aggressor, applying the above, even if their actions continue and even become escalated. Also, I try to have Patience with myself and my own struggle with my Ego in such situations - especially when my own attempts at control and understanding are less than successful. I apply Love and Understanding to my disappointment in myself, (and the other person(s)), and again thank God for appearing in this way to teach me further patience, humility and control.

In seeking to do all of the above and react calmly and with presence in the moment, I seek to Sacrifice my Ego. If I seek to act for Justice within my Dharma, I also seek to sacrifice Ego so that I may be sure my actions are indeed selfless and for the greater good, or helping one who needs it. In Loving the aggressor, Understanding him/her, accepting their anger or provocations, and seeing God in him/her, (and also Understanding, Loving and Accepting myself in these same ways), I Sacrifice my Ego again, finding Humility and Gratitude rather than self-righteous pride and anger.

This is only my personal take on it. I am a novice myself, I do not profess to have a full grasp of the school I study or of the scriptures. I simply try to see with love and empathy where I am missing knowledge. I hope it is a useful response.

~Pranam

[saswathy]

Dear friend ,
There is a thing known as righteous anger and righteous pride .Where some injustice is meted out to you , without any provocation or reason , you can give an answer justifying your action . No where karma theory tells you to keep quiet for an adharma stand. There is a subtle difference between dharma and dharmasookshma. Where it is needed if right action is not taken it amounts to doing adharma only. Now how to distinguish between the two is a valid question . There are certain things which are stamped as adharma , for which there is no explanation or clarification is needed .
rgds

[Soul of Light]

Namste Webimpulse,
I too really like that macro, indeed protection of our family and all beings is our duty and we have to do our duties properly, there is very thin line between Dharma and Adharma hence we have to take every step carefully, as in this era of kali we have to flow against the flow of this adharmic world (there are many sweet and dharmic people but still majority of adharma is more), thanks for reply.

Namaste Anandinii,
no I don't mind, your knowledge, experience and views are more imp for me than from which name your calling me!
Thanx for explaining and Illustrating about your knowledge, I like the way you used the five supports of Dharma, knowing the reason behind action, seeing god in each creature, about justice, having patience and love and sacrificing ego all this suggestions are very helpful and I'll try to follow them.. Thanx for posting and give time to reply my thread..

Hello Saswathy,
yes, you are too right.. Karma theory does not tell us to keep quite... I think what we should do is only depends upon time and situations, at right moment right path must taken.. I think in most cases, first choice must follow and in some cases there is necessity to follow 2nd choice... Thanks for your reply
Pranam

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
namasté

I am quite interested in hearing the source for the karma theory so many refer to above. Can someone point this śāstra to me so I may review it?



iti śivaṁ

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
namasté

Every one ~seems~ to understand karma when the conditions are simple...
say I drop a rubber ball and it bounces back up. Not 100% back up as some energy is transferred to the ground, but it bounces back. There is an action and reaction. But what of this, when its not so simple:
http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=8360

A key principle is karman is unfathomable. Who says so ? Kṛṣṇa-jī informs us of this in the bhāgavad gītā chapt 4, 17 śloka.

iti śivaṁ

[Believer]

Namaste,

A little pragmatism and common sense is needed here, in addition to whatever 'karma' means to you.

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” ― Edmund Burke

When you don't respond to evil, you are failing your duty as a human being. Why should you become 'karma' only when your family is harmed? You should become 'karma' when you or anyone around you is harmed in any way. Maybe it is the Punjabi hot blood in me speaking, but there is no need to tolerate any injustice or malice directed at me, or my family, or anyone else. Anything short of that is a cop out. I should become 'karma' incarnate in such situations and do what I can to stop whatever offense is being committed.

Pranam.

PS, As you can see from the quote above, women are excepted from being pro-active in hitting back.
-

[ShivaFan]

Namaste Believer

All glories to hot Punjabi blood!

... (though for some reason, I always thought you were a Bengali - not sure why)

Om Namah Sivaya

[Amrut]

Namaste SOL

I would agree with Saswathy and hot blooded Believer ji. (I think he must be spekaing from his experience and must have verified it in shastra-s - right na believer ji )

See, no one is 100 % spiritual. What I have observed is that if rules applicable to renunciates and advances yOgi-s are applied to common man, then there will be mess.

For what reason dharma smriti-s are created?

For laymen, it is said that cook food by chanting god's name and self cooked food is best. While for a parivrajAka saint, this rule is not applicable. A saint will stand in front of a door and beg for alms. does he know that only sattvik food is made, no non-veg food is made in that house nad is food made by chanting god's name. Does a saint know that the owner of house is good person or not?

He will have to depend upon his own faith that once he surrenders to God, food will become sattvik and his penance will overpower any negativity in the food.

So rules like staying neutral in adverse situations, etc are not for laymen. Again, there is no need to hit back if the issue is not very serious. But if someone is trying to piss you, then you gotta protect yourself.

hinsA is that which is done with the intention of hurting innocent people. fighting for our own right, against injustce is not a crime. All gods have weapons in their hands, be it Rama, Krishna, Parashurama, Shiva, Skanda, Ganapati, and even Maa Durga and Maa Kali.

Let me quote you some rules for king in manu smriti chapter 8

344. A king who desires to gain the throne of Indra and imperishable eternal fame, shall not, even for a moment, neglect (to punish) the man who commits violence.

345. He who commits violence must be considered as the worst offender, (more wicked) than a defamer, than a thief, and than he who injures (another) with a staff.

346. But that king who pardons the perpetrator of violence quickly perishes and incurs hatred.

347. Neither for friendship's sake, nor for the sake of great lucre, must a king let go perpetrators of violence, who cause terror to all creatures.

348. Twice-born men may take up arms when (they are) hindered (in the fulfilment of their duties, when destruction (threatens) the twice-born castes (varna) in (evil) times,

349. In their own defence, in a strife for the fees of officiating priests, and in order to protect women and Brahmanas; he who (under such circumstances) kills in the cause of right, commits no sin.

350. One may slay without hesitation an assassin who approaches (with murderous intent), whether (he be one's) teacher, a child or an aged man, or a Brahmana deeply versed in the Vedas.

351. By killing an assassin the slayer incurs no guilt, whether (he does it) publicly or secretly; in that case fury recoils upon fury.

352. Men who commit adultery with the wives of others, the king shall cause to be marked by punishments which cause terror, and afterwards banish.

353. For by (adultery) is caused a mixture of the castes (varna) among men; thence (follows) sin, which cuts up even the roots and causes the destruction of everything.

354. A man formerly accused of (such) offences, who secretly converses with another man's wife, shall pay the first (or lowest) amercement.

355. But a man, not before accused, who (thus) speaks with (a woman) for some (reasonable) cause, shall not incur any guilt, since in him there is no transgression.

Hari OM