Jump to Forum..
- Boddunan.com Updates
- - Announcements
- - Contests & Rewards
- - Group Discussions
- Discussions
- - General Discussions
- - Improving English Writing Skills
- - Q n A - Find answers to your questions
- - Daily Dose
- - Topics of Interest
- - - Current Affairs & Latest News
- - - Education & Learning
- - - Humor & Jokes
- - - Movies & Entertainment
- Your Vote Counts
- - Feedback
- - Suggestion Box
- Shoutbox
- - Introduce Yourself
- - The Lounge
- - Help
- - Testimonials
Like it on Facebook, Tweet it or share this topic on other bookmarking websites.
14 years ago
But If they kill to all Ahinshak then result will be zero if hinsha then they can not kill to all.
Santosh Kumar Singh
http://experienceofknowledge.blogspot.com/
14 years ago
Ahinsha means avoiding not only external physical violence but also internal violence of spirit. You are not only refuse to shoot a man, but you also refuse to hate him,thats why it`s more powerful than Hinsha....
14 years ago
I too feel that ahinsha is not always a solution for some problems as we can take the case of some criminals..with record of murders,rapes and other illegal things. One cannot deal them in ahinsha way as normally done through court proceedings..so such people need hinsha through encounters..this is just one example. Regarding acheving freedom for India both ways were implemented but our freedom fighters but ultimately ahinsha way got us freedom though it was little bit slow.
14 years ago
AS Rajani expressed in all places Ahimsa may not be practicable.
Visit my blogs:
http://abidareacode.blogspot.com
14 years ago
no one can punish you or no one can criticize you more if you tolerate it. At the last time they will accept defeat in front of you.So ahinsa is more powerfull.
14 years ago
no one can punish you or no one can criticize you more if you tolerate it. At the last time they will accept defeat in front of you.So ahinsa is more powerfull.
Tolerating injustice is non violence of cowards according to Gandhi. Thus Gandhi could tolerate British rule. He did not tolerate. He fought through non violent civil diobedience movement, which was a very clever method to use British law and Christian values to our benefit. British also need be comlimentedfor their positive response to Gandhian non violent means. It goes without sayingthat non violence would not work against Nadir Shah. Even today, non violence will not work against terrorists. If it works, better disband armed forces and recruit non violent non cooperative Satyagraha groups to fight not only the terrorists but also external aggression.
G. K. Ajmani Tax consultant
http://gkajmani-mystraythoughts.blogspot.com/
Page 2 of 2
You do not have permissions to reply to this topic.
Related Topics