| |
and perfect experience of love. The negative expression of non-violence has been used only to remove the feeling of relationship in love. In that negativeness there is no denial of love; there is denial only of love being a relation. Love is not a relation; it is a state. The word non-violence has been used to emphasize this truth. But those who start considering it as absence of love, make a big mistake. It is not the absence of love; it is the absence of only those elements which do not allow love to become perfect and pure. That is, no doubt, an absence of those elements which do not allow it to rise from the state of relationship to the nature of the self. That is the absence of love and hatred, attachment and non-attachment. Rising above these bonds, love becomes devoid of attachment.
I call love-without-attachment as 'non-violence'.
Non-violence is love and, therefore, it is not negative.
The word non-violence, is negative, but non-violence itself is not negative. That state of feeling is very positive. Nothing can be more positive than that. What can be more living and positive than love?
Violence in which there is absence of love is negative; because that is against nature. I do not want the lack of love or violence towards myself; nobody else wants it. Everyone is thirsty for love. Why no one has the thirst for the opposite of love?
I feel that we love, and can love, only our own selves; and if we can understand our own desire, then in that desire we can find hidden pointers to our own hidden self.
I want love; that is to say my own self is love.
I want bliss; that means my own self is bliss.
I want immortality; that means my own self is immortal.
I want godliness; that means my own self is God.
And it has to be remembered that I want, all others want. How similar are our wants! Then do not our similar wants pronounce the similarity of ourselves?
What is sitting inside the self and the non-self is not different. The ambition of this unseparable consciousness is not the opposite of love or non-violence. Therefore, I said that violence is negative, because that is opposed to nature;
|
|
|