How is forgiveness related to the modes of material nature?

Answer Podcast

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
So how is forgiveness related to the modes of maternal nature? Forgiveness is basically the means by which we don’t let the past come in the way of the present. In the past people have hurt us. And that hurt is still there.
But we don’t let the past come in the way of the present. So broadly, when somebody has hurt us, there are three broad alternatives. One is that if that person who has hurt us, they apologize.
And that’s just a one-off event. They just did something under the spur of the moment or whatever. Then we forgive and just move on at the end of the chapter.
But this is in the mode of goodness where we recognize that life has to move on. I have to move on in my doing of dharma, in my practicing of bhakti. So I just close the chapter.
Now sometimes, we may, in the mode of passion, basically, we may think that I have to get even. So in the mode of goodness, we are ready to put the past behind and move on. In the mode of passion, we just keep a track of all the wrongs that they have done.
We are looking for opportunity. When can I get back at this person? So when we are doing that, basically we are still letting that person dominate our life. And what are we doing? We are just holding the negativity within us so that we can pour it out on that person sometime in the future.
But even if we do it or we don’t do it, that negativity is going to hurt us more. So, that is in the mode of passion where we want to get even. So we are basically thinking, how can I get back at this person? But in the mode of ignorance, we simply feel powerless.
We simply feel helpless. We get consumed by self-pity. We conceive of ourselves as victims.
There is this whole phenomenon of self-martyrdom. Oh, the world is so bad. People are so bad.
They are all hurting me. I am so miserable. So, one simply wallows in self-pity.
So, if the hurts of life simply make us passively, lethargically just feel sorry for ourselves, that is in the mode of ignorance. But if the hurts of life make us want to vengefully get back at the other person, that is in the mode of passion. If the hurts of life we close that chapter and we move on in our life, then that is in the mode of goodness.
Now, in the mode of goodness also, we have to be cautious. Not every situation, not every wrongdoing is simply going to end by forgiveness. As I said, if it is a one-off event, person once did something wrong, they have apologized, and then we rectify them, so then we move on.
But sometimes that person has done something wrong, and they do it once, they do it twice. What is that saying? No, no. What is that? Yeah, you know.
Fool me, if you fool me once, shame on you. You fool me twice, then shame on me. It’s basically, what it means is that, if a person keeps continuously fooling us, cheating us, hurting us, and if we keep letting them do that, then we are simply being foolish.
So then, then, that person is repeating that pattern. Then we have to differentiate between forgiving and trusting. Forgiving is for the past.
Trusting is for the future. Forgiveness can be given, but trust has to be earned. So, okay, this person did something wrong, and I am not going to obsess on it.
Let’s say somebody has stolen some money from us. And then, it troubles us. Okay, the person says, sorry, I did this.
We forgive them. But then, if after that we entrust our whole treasury to them, and then they steal it away. That’s our stupidity.
So, we may forgive them, but we need not trust them. We have to see how they conduct themselves. We keep some safe distance, and then let them show by their actions whether they are really repentant, and whether they are really poor.
So, we withhold trust. And then if they act properly, gradually we give the trust. So, first is we forgive, and just end the chapter.
Move on in our life. Because it is a one-off incident. The other option is we forgive, and then we observe.
Withhold trust. And if that person really rectifies themselves, then we can come back again to the level of trusting. The relationship can become normal.
But sometimes, the person may just not even be what to speak of being willing to rectify. Sometimes the people don’t even know that they have done wrong. They don’t even acknowledge that they have done something wrong.
Then at that time, we just have to take some assertive action. We cut off the relationship. Or depending on the gravity of the crime, we may have to take some wrongdoing.
We may have to take some assertive action. Some, as they say, restorative justice. And even in that, we can have forgiveness as an emotion.
That means, I am not going to hold the hurt against you. But, if you are not corrected for this, then you will repeat this. You will hurt other people.
You will hurt me, you will hurt other people, and ultimately, if you consider the law of karma, you are going to hurt yourself. So, we may pursue legal or corrective action against that person, but we can do it without a vengeful attitude. We can do it for the purpose of Dharma.
For the purpose of protecting others, protecting the community, eventually protecting ourselves, and ultimately protecting that person. In the same Bhagavad Gita in the 11th chapter, where Krishna tells Arjuna, now arise and kill your enemies. In 11.33, he says, arise and conquer your enemies.
The same chapter, 22 verses later, in 11.55, Krishna says, Krishna says, that act without animosity towards anyone. So, Krishna is telling, those enemies, kill them. But then the same Krishna is telling, act without animosity towards anyone.
That means what? You are not killing them simply because they are your enemies. You are killing them because they are destroying Dharma. So, do it as a duty.
There is no personal vendetta against them. But rather, it is our duty to establish the rule of Dharma, and so we do it. So, we can have forgiveness as an emotion, even in the third case.
That means we don’t hold the resentment, we don’t hold the grudge. We say, okay, I forgive you for what wrong we have done. But, there is a pattern over here.
And unless some corrective action is done, then we’ll keep repeating it. See, punishment has ultimately many purposes. One of the purposes of punishment is that society should see that wrongdoers, they just cannot have a license to do wrong.
So, they have to be seen that wrongdoers are punished. Similarly, though society also has the important principle that order has to be maintained. So, I may not be, I may forgive at a personal level.
Prabhupada writes in the 2nd Canto Paraphora that non-violence can be, especially for Kshatriya rulers, it can be a strategic policy. But it is not necessarily a principle. Kshatriyas have to fight.
So, at individual level and one-to-one relationship, we may forgive. But if somebody is in an official position in a government, then they have to maintain the rule of law. And sometimes they may have to punish.
So, even that punishment can be in the mode of goodness if it is done for the service of Dharma rather than for a theological attitude. Does it answer the question?