my hand has sowed love everywhere, giving unto all that will receive. blessings are offered unto all my children, but many times in their blindness they fail to see them. how few there are who gather the gifts which lie in profusion at their feet: how many there are, who, in wilful waywardness, turn their eyes away from them and complain with a wail that they have not that which i have given them; many of them defiantly repudiate not only my gifts, but me also, me, the source of all blessings and the author of their being. krishna.
i tarry awhile from the turmoil and strife of the world. i will beautify and quicken thy life with love and with joy, for the light of the soul is love. where love is, there is contentment and peace, and where there is contentment and peace, there am i, also, in their midst. krishna.
the aim of the sinless one consists in acting without causing sorrow to others, although he could attain to great power by ignoring their feelings.
the aim of the sinless one lies in not doing evil unto those who have done evil unto him.
if a man causes suffering even to those who hate him without any reason, he will ultimately have grief not to be overcome.
the punishment of evil doers consists in making them feel ashamed of themselves by doing them a great kindness.
of what use is superior knowledge in the one, if he does not endeavour to relieve his neighbour's want as much as his own?
if, in the morning, a man wishes to do evil unto another, in the evening the evil will return to him.
the hindu kural.
thus it went on everywhere. the recognition that love represents the highest morality was nowhere denied or contradicted, but this truth was so interwoven everywhere with all kinds of falsehoods which distorted it, that finally nothing of it remained but words. it was taught that this highest morality was only applicable to private life—for home use, as it were—but that in public life all forms of violence—such as imprisonment, executions, and wars—might be used for the protection of the majority against a minority of evildoers, though such means were diametrically opposed to any vestige of love. and though common sense indicated that if some men claim to decide who is to be subjected to violence of all kinds for the benefit of others, these men to whom violence is applied may, in turn, arrive at a similar conclusion with regard to those who have employed violence to them, and though the great religious teachers of brahmanism, buddhism, and above all of christianity, foreseeing such a perversion of the law of love, have constantly drawn attention to the one invariable condition of love (namely, the enduring of injuries, insults, and violence of all kinds without resisting evil by evil) people continued—regardless of all that leads man forward—to try to unite the incompatibles: the virtue of love, and what is opposed to love, namely, the restraining of evil by violence. and such a teaching, despite its inner contradiction, was so firmly established that the very people who recognize love as a virtue accept as lawful at the same time an order of life based on violence and allowing men not merely to torture but even to kill one another.
for a long time people lived in this obvious contradiction without noticing it. but a time arrived when this contradiction became more and more evident to thinkers of various nations. and the old and simple truth that it is natural for men to help and to love one another, but not to torture and to kill one another, became ever clearer, so that fewer and fewer people were able to believe the sophistries by which the distortion of the truth had been made so plausible.
in former times the chief method of justifying the use of violence and thereby infringing the law of love was by claiming a divine right for the rulers: the tsars, sultans, rajahs, shahs, and other heads of states. but the longer humanity lived the weaker grew the belief in this peculiar, god—given right of the ruler. that belief withered in the same way and almost simultaneously in the christian and the brahman world, as well as in buddhist and confucian spheres, and in recent times it has so faded away as to prevail no longer against man's reasonable understanding and the true religious feeling. people saw more and more clearly, and now the majority see quite clearly, the senselessness and immorality of subordinating their wills to those of other people just like themselves, when they are bidden to do what is contrary not only to their interests but also to their moral sense. and so one might suppose that having lost confidence in any religious authority for a belief in the divinity of potentates of various kinds, people would try to free themselves from subjection to it. but unfortunately not only were the rulers, who were considered supernatural beings, benefited by having the peoples in subjection, but as a result of the belief in, and during the rule of, these pseudodivine beings, ever larger and larger circles of people grouped and established themselves around them, and under an appearance of governing took advantage of the people. and when the old deception of a supernatural and god-appointed authority had dwindled away these men were only concerned to devise a new one which like its predecessor should make it possible to hold the people in bondage to a limited number of rulers.
