All will agree that we should follow path of honesty. But what about peace or violence. It is considered by Gandhian that we should never use violence for attaining our goal. If the other person is very obstinate and does not understand the language of peace, would you adopt tit for tat or follow the noble means of tolerance and non violence towards him.
I feel that even though one should avoid violence as far as possible but sometimes it is necessary to take up violent method to bring a peaceful end.For instance, if a terrorist attack a nation, then it would be stupid to follow the policy of tolerance and non violence.
I agree ! It is also a fact that violence begets more violence and there is no end to it.I feel that communication is far more powerful and can help where other methods fail....
Pay no mind to those who talk behind your back, it simply means that you are two steps ahead !!!
All will agree that we should follow path of honesty. But what about peace or violence. It is considered by Gandhian that we should never use violence for attaining our goal. If the other person is very obstinate and does not understand the language of peace, would you adopt tit for tat or follow the noble means of tolerance and non violence towards him.
I feel that even though one should avoid violence as far as possible but sometimes it is necessary to take up violent method to bring a peaceful end.For instance, if a terrorist attack a nation, then it would be stupid to follow the policy of tolerance and non violence.
I agree ! It is also a fact that violence begets more violence and there is no end to it.I feel that communication is far more powerful and can help where other methods fail....
Settling a dispute by any means but by non violence and persuasion only. It is best to use the path of persuasion, peace and non violence. But you must achieve your goal. For the sake of adhering to golden means, you cannot frustrate your goal. So, if necessary, you must use violence. But violence should be minimum necessary.
Even law allows you to use violence .for protection of life and property. But violence must not be excessive and this should be only minimum necessary on the occasion. That is why the police also are instructed to use minimum force while dispersing a mob- first warning, then tear gas, then lathi charge and firing only if absolutely necessary and that too in air or at legs and not head.
G. K. Ajmani Tax consultant http://gkajmani-mystraythoughts.blogspot.com/
Mahatma Gandhi was right or wrong I don't know. I was born after independence of India. I have heard but never felt the situations of that age. I have never seen the incidence after partition of India and Bengal. It was horrible freedom. Even today also many people who are in power, has made the situation worst. Freedom and democracy is worthless.
All will agree that we should follow path of honesty. But what about peace or violence. It is considered by Gandhian that we should never use violence for attaining our goal. If the other person is very obstinate and does not understand the language of peace, would you adopt tit for tat or follow the noble means of tolerance and non violence towards him.
I feel that even though one should avoid violence as far as possible but sometimes it is necessary to take up violent method to bring a peaceful end.For instance, if a terrorist attack a nation, then it would be stupid to follow the policy of tolerance and non violence.
I agree ! It is also a fact that violence begets more violence and there is no end to it.I feel that communication is far more powerful and can help where other methods fail....
Settling a dispute by any means but by non violence and persuasion only. It is best to use the path of persuasion, peace and non violence. But you must achieve your goal. For the sake of adhering to golden means, you cannot frustrate your goal. So, if necessary, you must use violence. But violence should be minimum necessary.
Even law allows you to use violence .for protection of life and property. But violence must not be excessive and this should be only minimum necessary on the occasion. That is why the police also are instructed to use minimum force while dispersing a mob- first warning, then tear gas, then lathi charge and firing only if absolutely necessary and that too in air or at legs and not head.
Friends in legends and epics we have read that God has told us, if wrong doers cross their limit, finish them off. Sin can be explained and excussed to a certain limit and not after that. God and Goddesses have themselves fought war against the demons and the wrong doers. Sometimes it becomes necessary.
