How is it easier to live: carrying the stones of offense on the back or tempering justice with mercy?
Recently, one of the Nazi criminals, the 93-year-old Oscar Gröning stood before the court trial in Germany. He was accused of being charged with being the accomplice of the killing of 300 thousand people. Although Gröning was working at the Auschwitz concentration camp as an accountant, he pleaded guilty during the trial and apologized.
The court declared him guilty. But the matter in this case is not he, but the former prisoner of Auschwitz, Eva Mozes Kor, who approached the offender, shook his hand and said, “I forgive you.” The court cannot forgive, it can say whether this person is guilty or not. Because the court is operating on behalf of the state, in this case, the “German people”. Only a person can forgive, it is his right of choice. Eva Kor’s deed deserved the criticism by the people sharing the same lot – how can one forgive the unforgivable? But Eva was doing it not for the sake of the offender, against whom she, in fact, had testified at the court, but purely for herself. “I have suffered all my life, she said, at first from the Nazis and then from the hatred against the Nazis, and I decided to just forgive them.” She has decided, in other words, to temper justice with mercy.
Indeed, it is very possible that people are neither cold nor warm of your forgiveness. Those who are “forgiven” would very likely continue thinking that they are right, and they could not do otherwise and that it was a self-defense by them and so on. But because of your being malice, bearing a grudge against somebody and developing plans for revenge, the object of your hatred quite likely will not be affected. “Steaming inside,” holding and carrying the stones of revengefulness, you do not harm anyone but you. By tempering justice with mercy, you make yourself and not anyone else ease. Therefore, “correcting” someone by forgiving is a project with no prospects, forgiving is exclusively necessary to us. The matter, I repeat, is about personal rather than public and the government decision. It is natural that, for example, the abuser should encounter resistance and do everything for him to be punished by the state. It’s another matter whether it is necessary to pollute the spirit with revengefulness or not.
Read also
The advice of forgiveness, indeed, is the integral part of our, the Christian culture. The Bible says that we should forgive not 7 but 70 times and 7 times. And this, I think, is purely a practical advice to achieve success in life. The goal of the forgiveness is to be liberated from the unnecessary emotional burden, which will help us to live in peace and create more effectively.
Indeed, the best and wisest decision is generally not to be upset and offended, in other words, avoid appearing in a situation in which you will have to forgive. Finally, being upset and offending is also useless, it is easier to accept people as they are, by taking necessary decisions on them without being offended and accusing. In that case, there will be nothing to forgive.
…Two Buddhist monks, a young and an old, were traveling together. On the bank of the river, they see a young woman who asks to take her to the other bank. The young man, according to his vow of chastity, turns away his face and does not speak with the woman. The old man hugs the woman and crosses the river. The monks continue their way. A couple of hours passed but the young man is angrily silent, but then he could not stand anymore and began rebuking the old man saying that he should not have broken the vow of chastity. The old man smiles and answers, “I left the woman a long time ago at the bank, however, you seem to be carrying her still.”
Aram ABRAHAMYAN,
«Aravot” daily
