Hatred is never appeased by hatred!

I just happen to see the news that Gadafi, the former leader of Lybia has been killed. As I read through the news report on MSN, there were many quotes of celebration and happiness of taking down a brutal man who killed many and hurt many more. I do not disagree with the atrocities that he committed. But as I see the jubiliant quotes and words of happiness of those who hear that he finally died and those who came to see his dead body being paraded through the streets of Lybia, in my opinion, are no better or worse than Gadafi himself. They may have wanted the head of one or three men. But they still wanted someone dead.

I am unsure how cruelty of any kind justifies anyones behaviour no matter what has been committed against one. Because the moment, you take a weapon to take out the person who is holding the weapon you become the other person. No matter whether you call is freedom fighting, justice, call from 'God', self protection, you become the other person, even for a moment.

Let's tone down the situation. Let's take a normal household conflict with a close person; a work situation with a colleague, a school situation with a friend. If someone hurt us with an unkind word or action, what do we do? Are we going to retaliate? Are we going to show the other person what we are made out of? How much gas we have in our tank to take the battle? And then what? We may be fighting Gadafis' in our day to day life in many ways than we see or we wish to see. The fights may not be that cruel, deadly and vicious be they set in motion the similar emotions, anger, frustration, a need to take revenge, perhaps envy, greed for what the other person has and what we would like to have, hate, a need to establish our sense of self. Whatever the case maybe, we enagage in lesser or larger conflicts on a day to day basis in the same fashion and we want to 'WIN' and we want the other person to 'LOSE'. If that loss has public display the better it is.

Does that ever put an end to things? Is Gadafi's death going to bring the much needed peace and happiness to the people of Lybia? I hope so. But I don't believe that it's going the come as quickly and with the ease that they hoped it to. It will take year and perhaps even generation and perhaps there will be more people dead before that comes about.

So, the point is when we wish ill-will and harm on those who harm us, that inherently tends to corrupt us in return. It's like getting into a pile of shit, to squash a bunch of maggots. You are going to stink and probably get sick. That inherent corruption lies in you. It's like a parasite from the pile of shit getting into your skin and then infesting you with a disease. We get infested with anger, hatred and all the negative things we tried to crush in the first place. Then that's what gets spurted out from us as long as we live. People get mentally and physically sick and do weird things because they have been bitten by the parasites called anger, hatred, envy etc and they display symptoms like depression, mental deterioration, unhappiness, agitation, restlessness and many other.

This is, I believe, why the Buddha said that hatred is never appeased by hatred. Hatred is only appeased by forgiveness.

Well, all so easy for someone enlightened to say and do but for us so very hard to do. Because we will all want the other person to put down the gun first (just in case). This fear and the need to assert oneself is the greatest enemy for peace and harmony. I struggle with that so very frequently. But on occassions where I have put the gun down, even when the other person is holding it in my face (metaphorically speaking of course) there I have found harmony. Even is external harmony is difficult to reach, I know for sure I reach immediate internal harmony.

But even with that knowledge I struggle with putting the gun down first. So, I understand why people, want to celebrate the death of someone who has been cruel. I totally get it. I don't blame anyone for wanting it. It's a natural reponse we all have. But ultimately it hurts our own self. That much I know.

So, I hope, that if someone is reading this blog and that if the writings ring true for them, as hard as it might be, they would take the courage to be the one the put the gun down first. Perhaps the other person might fire or they might not. Perhaps there will be external peace and harmony. But gurantee there will be peace within you even if that is your last moment to live.

Without the tags and the lables

Recently my husband and I were watching the turmoil in wall street in the US. The people want their freedom. On the other hand the politicians who have been appointed to represent the people and their issues are fighting the typical party battles. When I saw this I told my husband that we ought to get rid of these party names, tag etc because that's what makes us forget why we are there in the first place. When we don't have a party name, when we are just part of the 'people' we belong to one cause be it 'freedom' or 'justice' or whatever you want to term. But the moment one puts a tag to oneself, the larger cause at hand gets forgotten.

Look at the middle easter crisis. When people were fighting for freedom from Mubarak, it didn't matter whehter they were Arab muslims, or christians, they all fought for the same freedom. Now that the freedom is won, people have forgotten that they are still on the same side. So, they are waging wars against one another. Muslims against christians. Man against woman. What a sad situation is that?

In some ways I see this in a marriage or in friendships or companies. When people get married they are in love and want to be together. But after they get married they forget that belong to one institution. They fight over and sqabbale over who is right and who is wrong, which family is better and whose family is nicer. But at the end of the day, they no longer belong to any of the families because they have joined to create a new family of their own. Wouldn't it be wonderful is people could assume a new married name once they are married instead of wife taking in the husband's name, which would indicate that they from the moment they get marries start a new life and a new instituation. Dropping any attachments to the old families they belong. Perhaps that might reduce some of the conflicts that arise due to the 'perception' that that belong to a group of people.

Why do we do this? I do not see this happening in any other place in nature. Whenever something new starts it continues as that new entity. It does not dig it's heels and refuses to move on because of where it came from. It does not refuses to becomes what it is destined to becomes because of the seed it grew from. But humans on the other hand, dig their heels in and refuses to embrace nature. The very being who was given by nature it's greatest assets refuses to embrace it and instead to wallow in the shackles of society, bars set in by those around them. I am in many ways amused and astonished by this. For I am a humans and I am subject to all of these limitations myself. And unless I watch myself with care and complete mindfulness I will succum to and be restricted by such shackles and bars.

These names, tags are pure man made creations. Not something nature has bestowed upon us. What we have created and be changed. So why are we living as we have no choice? We live under the tag of a man, a woman, a lesbian, a gay, a black man, or a democrat, a republican, a muslim, a buddhist, a christian. But noone has made us do that except us. But one might argue that society requires us to behave in an acceptable ways and to some degree we need to confirm. Perhaps...perhaps.

But that does not mean we need to be like sheep being shephard. When I identify myself as a woman and I live within that identity, I also limit myself in many ways. I limit myself physically...and perhaps there are genuine physical limitations but what of the mental capacities. Who is to say that a woman can or cannot do this and that. Same for a man. If I identify myself as a democrat, I again limit myself with what comes within that term 'democrat'. Aything beyond that that could enhance my thinking and that could benefit myself and the world and society at large is considered not agreeable because of the limitations I have set for myself.

So, as a result should I allow others to sufffer? Should I be someone that causes others limitations and asks others to live under the limited formula within which I have chosen to live? Where is the right of freedom to chose in this kind of thinking?

However, the moement I remove my tag of woman, man, lesbian, musliam I also remove the limitations and boundaries I have surrounded myself in. First and foremost I give myself the right to freedom. A word that is used like a plague in the modern world. But I beg to question from those who use it, whether they understand the essence of what freedom is and whether they themselves have it to begin with. When I rise above these tags, labels then I will be able to see something more than what I WANT to see. Or what I would LIKE to accept. In that could be a glimpse of freedom which should and can only come from being part of all.