Does Krishna sometimes violate the other three legs of dharma but never violate mercy?
Other legs of dharma may be sometimes violated, but the principle of mercy is never violated.
See, the word violated is not appropriate. It is one principle may be subordinated to another principle. So, violation means something is rejected.
Subordinated means one is put down for something else. So, not necessarily compromised. It is just that in that particular situation another principle may be more important.
So, for example, we see that in the Mahabharata war, Krishna, I mean the Mahabharata itself, Krishna gives a permanent opportunity to Duryodhana. He himself goes to Shantidutta. Shantidutta, as I am going to say, he very eloquently and fervently tries to petition for peace.
But eventually when it doesn't work out and the war takes place, at that time, finally on the 18th day Duryodhana is killed. At that time Duryodhana starts shouting at Krishna. He says, I saw what you did.
You know, you signalled to Bhima and Bhima, that's why Bhima hit me below the waist. So, you have one unfairly. So, at that time Krishna is quite harsh.
He is not at all apologetic. He says, you did so much wrong. You deserve this.
I gave you so many chances. And you did not accept any of those chances. So, you have got simply what you deserve.
And now we are going to die in this horrible death. So, if we hear that voice of Krishna, it can seem very unmerciful at that point. But, you know, he was so incorrigible at that time.
He was so utterly unreformable. He had no desire to reform Duryodhana. So, then Krishna punished him.
So, Krishna's, what we can say is, Krishna is always our well-wisher. But as a well-wisher, how he will act, sometimes he will act in a way that of course makes the principle of satya as primary. Sometimes he may act in such a way that principle of shuchi may be primary.
Sometimes it may be in such a way that the principle of daya may be primary, masi may be primary. But at other times, some of these principles may be subordinated for some other purpose. So, Krishna is omnibenevolent.
Omnibenevolent means he always does the good of everyone. But while doing good of others, sometimes truthfulness may have to be subordinated. Sometimes in mercifulness, it may seem to be subordinated.
So, there is the external action that may seem to be not merciful. But the intention is always benevolent. Intention is always merciful.
So, if we say that the principle of mercy is never subordinated, then Krishna is killing the demons. We can say at ultimate level that is mercy because the demons get liberated. But at immediate level, he is not forgiving them.
He is punishing them. He is killing them. So, a challenge in life is that when we understand certain principles, we may make one principle as the all important principle.
But life is subtle. And sometimes one principle may have to be subordinated to another principle. So, in terms of intention, Krishna's mercifulness is never violated.
Krishna is always, but rather than using the word mercy, when we use the word mercy specifically, mercy is contrasted with justice. Justice means you get what you deserve. Sometimes you get what you don't deserve.
So, Krishna always does good to others. Sometimes he does good by giving mercy. Sometimes he does good by giving justice.
So, when he punishes the demons, that is justice. That is not mercy in the literal sense when it is contrasted with justice. Are you understanding this difference between the two? Mercy means when a person is not punished for what they are doing, they are forgiven.
Justice means they are punished. Whether Krishna gives justice or Krishna gives mercy, in both situations he does good to others. So, in that sense he is always omnibenevolent.
But his benevolence may not always manifest as mercy as opposed to justice. Sometimes it may manifest as mercy and sometimes it may manifest as justice. Is the answer your question? Yes.